Proc. Hampshire Field Club Archaeol. Soc. 65, 2010, 191-201 (Hampshire Studies 2010) PATRONAGE AND SINECURE: EXAMPLES OF THE PRACTICE OF BISHOP HOADLY AT WINCHESTER (1734-61) By JOHN DEARNLEY ABSTRACT had to rely on informal networks supported by family and social relationships. As this dis- This paper explores the ways in which an 18th-century cussion of the patronage of Bishop Benjamin Bishop of Winchester, Benjamin Hoadly (b. 1676), Hoadly (1734-61) will demonstrate, helping distributed some of the favours at his command. It one's family was a natural course to take, and describes how Hoadly provided his son with a series of helping someone else to maintain another set livings and then agreed with Mr Folkes, President of of family ties was a more obvious thing to do the Royal Society, to transfer one of them to a relative then than now. of the former Archbishop of Canterbury, one William While reading on a separate matter in the Wake. When Wake proved unqualified for that par- library of the Royal Society, I came across ticular living, it was passed to another relative by correspondence between Hoadly, Dr Martin marriage of the Archbishop, and William was given a Folkes President of the Royal Society, and two different living. Questions are raised about why Hoadly men whom they set out to favour. The letters worked to secure plural livings for two relatives of a display the complete acceptance of a system in man with whom he had been on bad terms, especially which the powerful looked after kindred and when one beneficiary appeared to be deeply incompetent friends - and friends of friends -without regard and untruthful. Additionally, Hoadly seems to have to their merits or the merits of more suitable been supplied by Folkes with false information about candidates for office. Perhaps not surprisingly the terms of Wake's zuill. These events, recorded in an such letters, dealing in a detailed way with the unparalleled cache of letters uncovered by the author distribution of patronage at the beginning of in the library of the Royal Society, shed light on the the 18th century, are very rare and it is even gap between principle and practice in the granting of more extraordinary to catch a glimpse of livings in the Augustan Church. They also reveal the Hoadly's private correspondence. Covering the strength of the network of private relationships which bishop's time at Winchester, W R Ward records sustained public business in the 18th century. in Parish and Parson in 18th-Century Hampshire that ' ... no proper records had been kept [by bishops] since the death of Bishop Morley in INTRODUCTION 1684' (1995, 211). Thus the correspondence, discussed in detail below, offers a fascinating As priests in the Church of England today insight into the ways in which the social system struggle to cope with a plurality of churches, it is worked in early 18th-century England. But first, interesting to reflect on a time when pluralism some background on Hoadly and his beliefs spelt out profit without pain for a lucky few. In must be set out. the 18th century, access to influential people could make the difference between penury and Benjamin Hoadly (1676-1761) Latitudinarian prosperity. In the absence of competitive inter- views, systematic patterns of record keeping, and Benjamin Hoadly (b. 1676) was perhaps the a modern network of communications, people most controversial bishop of the Church of 191 192 HAMPSHIRE FIELD CLUB AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY England in the 18th century. He disagreed than tyrannical ones. Politically, then, Latitudi- deeply with the High Church men, successors narians were strong Whigs. Hoadly himself was in spirit to Charles I's authoritarian Arch- a prolific essayist, for many years writing for the bishop, William Laud. A Latitudinarian and a Whig party on church and political matters in Low Church man, Hoadly was tolerant of the pamphlets, sermons and newspapers, so that right of Dissenters to worship as they chose, he became anathema to the Tories, the High even though he thought them misguided. Yet Church men and the Non-jurors (those who he and his sort feared what was called 'Enthu- considered they were bound to the 'true' con- siasm', a major characteristic of the Puritans tinuing Anglican Church of James II and his of the seventeenth century. A key to under- descendants because of the oaths of allegiance standing Latitudinarians was the distinction they had taken). they made between 'the visible church', rep- The hostility between the factions in the resented, for example, by the establishment Church of England in the early-mid 18th of the Church of England, and 'the invisible century was passionate and deeply painful. It church', the body of true believers, known only was at this period that a gulf developed between to God, and members of a kingdom that Christ those who held views formed in the religious had said 'was not of this world ... ' (John 18. controversies of the 17th century- High 36). Tolerance for the views of others and a Church men on one side and Dissenters on mistrust of all forms of authoritarianism caused the other - and a new group whose thoughts Latitudinarians to seek a broad-based church on religion were formed by Enlightenment that could accommodate most protestant dis- thinking. Preserved Smith in his The Enlighten- senters. Because of the dangers that religious ment 1687-1776 writes: excess could cause, they considered that the 'visible church' should be under the control of 'After the Great Renewal came the Enlight- the civil state. enment; after the Age of Science the Age of The faith of the Latitudinarians was bible- Reason. Doubtless the growing confidence based, with a rejection of Tradition that the in the powers of the human understanding High Church men claimed as the source of , the enthronement of reason on the seat much of their authority'. They were sceptical once held by authority and tradition, the about the validity of the Apostolic Succession conquest by science of politics, philosophy, because it had no biblical support. Instead they and theology, the triumph of reason over believed that bishops gained their authority superstition, intolerance, and despotism, the as the Church's 'senior management' rather education of the masses in the new world- than by inheriting the authority that Christ view, and the final decline of rationalism had given the apostles along with the power to before the assault of neglected emotions absolve sin or deny forgiveness. Similarly, Lati- and under the solvent of self-critical analysis tudinarians dismissed the claims of James II and subjectivism—doubtless all this is the and his descendants that they had been divinely supremely important revolution of the 18th appointed, and approved of the 'Glorious century' (1962,21). Revolution' of William III in 1688, and after- wards the Hanoverian succession. Together This is a good description of the mindset of with the majority of High Church men (who Hoadly, and one which fitted most Latitu- had once believed in the divine right of kings dinarians. Naturally such views created the and a consequent duty of non-resistance and deepest suspicion among the conservatives. passive obedience to them), Latitudinarians Surely people such as Hoadly must be Socians understood Isaiah 49.23, 'And kings shall be (doubters of the divinity of Christ), Deists thy nursing fathers and queens thy nursing (believers in a Supreme Being that could mothers', as a requirement on monarchs to act be understood by reason alone) - or worse, as benevolent parents to their subjects rather Atheists! (followers of Hobbes). DEARNLEY: PATRONAGE, SINECURE AND BISHOP HOADLY AT WINCHESTER (1734-61) 1 9 3 Hoadly and the 'Bangorian Controversy' that appointment but Hoadly was too important a figure to be entirely sidelined. He certainly In 1717 the Bangorian Controversy (so called did not gain Winchester because of the regard because at that time Hoadly was Bishop of of King George II. Sedgwick editor of Lord Bangor), almost certainly carefully orches- Hervey's Memoirs notes the King's comments to trated, burst like a bombshell. In a sermon Hervey about Hoadly in 1735: preached before the king, 'My kingdom is not of this world' (John, 18.36), Hoadly had chal- '"A pretty fellow for a friend!" said the lenged the authority of the clergy of the Church King ... "Pray what is it that charms you in of England to interfere with the consciences of him? His pretty limping gait" (and here he men. In effect, he argued that Dissenters should acted the bishop's lameness), "or his nasty not be forced to worship as the hierarchy of stinking breath? -plaugh!- or his silly laugh, the Church of England decided, or punished when he grins in your face for nothing, and if they refused to conform, because earthly shows his nasty rotten teeth? Or is it his great authority could not be exercised over the honesty that charms your Lordship? ... I citizens of Christ's kingdom. Hoadly's sermon, cannot help saying ... you have a great puppy and the ensuing reaction, occupied so much and a very dull fellow and a great rascal for of the public attention that for a few days in your friend ... But he isjust the same thing in London trading was almost brought to a halt. the Church that he is in the government, and The debate was passionate because after the as ready to receive the best pay for preaching accession of George I and the uprising of 1714, the Bible, though he does not believe a word it acted as a surrogate for an issue that could not of it, as he is to take favours from the Crown, openly be debated: the legitimacy of the Hano- though, by his republican spirit and doctrine, verian succession.