FRANCIS, was the son of Dr Lewis Atterbt7y, rector of Milton, in Buckingham shire, and was born there in 1662. He was educated at Westminster school, and in 16S0 became a student in Christ-church College, Oxford, where, in 1684, he took the degree of Bachelor, and in 1687 that of Master of Arts. In 1690 he married a lady of the name of Osborn, and about the same time entered into holy He went to London in 1693, where he was elected preacher at Bridewell, and lec turer at St Bride's Church. Soon after this he was appointed one of the chaplains in ordinary to King William and Queen Mary, and in 1700 he was in stalled archdeacon of Totness. Upon the accession of Queen Anne, in 1702, he became one of her jesty's chaplain's in ordinary ; in 170• he was advan ced to the deanery of Carlisle ; in 1707 he was ap pointed one of the canons residentiary at Exeter ; and in 1709 he was made preacher at Roll's chapel. In 1710 he was chosen prolocutor of the lower house of convocation ; in 1712 he was 'made dean of Christ church ; • and in 1713, at the recommendation of the Earl of Oxford, he was to the bishopric of Rochester, and deanery of Westminster.
This rapid succession of promotions seems only to have kindled Atterbury's ambition for still higher exaltation. It is said that he aspired to the primacy of all England, and that he had taken such measures as would in all probability have secured it upon a vacancy, had not the queen's death, in 1714, pre vented all his plans, and put an end to his prosperity. He soon found that lie was not held in the same es timation by her successor George the First, and he himself soon began to manifest his disaffection to the reigning family. At a time when every man who }held such a station as Bishop Atterbury, and who was not hostile to government, would naturally have felt himself called upon to express his decided disap probation of the plans of the house of Stuart, he re fused to sign a declaration which the bishops had published against the proceedings of the pretender ; and he strengthened all the unfavourable impressions of this refusal, by keenly opposing the measures of the court. At length, in 1722, he was appre hended upon a suspicion of being engaged in a con spiracy to restore the Stuart family. His papers were and he was committed to the Tower. A bill was soon after brought into the House of Commons, " for inflicting certain pains and penalties on Francis, Lord Bishop of Rochester ;" but he re served his defence till it should be argued in the House of Lords. There the bill met with much. opposition, and engaged the attention of the House for more than a week. The bishop spoke in his own defence with great ability and eloquence, and concluded with a solemn protestation of his inno. cence. But the bill was at length passed, by a ma jority bf 83 to 43, and Atterbury was condemned to perpetual exile. The king, it is said, when he con firmed the bill, expressed his regret that there should be just cause for inflicting such a punishment upon a bishop of the Church of England, and a man of such eminent abilities and attainments. His daughter, Mrs Morrice, was permitted to accompany him ; and, by the king's sign manual, his son-in-law, Mr Mor= rice, had leave to correspond with him. He left England in June 1723, and landed at Calais, whence he went to Brussels, and thence to Paris. There he resided, for the most part, until his death, which took place on February 15, 1731, and which war, supposed to be hastened by the loss of his daughter, two years before. His body Was brought over to England, and interred in Westminster Abbey.
The literary productions of Bishop Atterbury were not very voluminous, but were considerable in point of number and variety. While a student at Oxford, he was distinguished for his taste in polite literature. During that period, he wrote a version, in Latin verse, of Dryden's Absalom and Ahitophel, an Epi gram on a Lady's Fan, and a Translation of two Odes of Horace. His translations from Horace are considered as the best that have been made from that poet into the English language ; and though their merit has perhaps been rated rather high, yet they certainly possess much of the lively spirit and grace ful expression which characterise the original. From these, indications of a poetical talent, which he gave' in the part of his life, many have concluded, that he was peculiarly qualified for that species of writing, and have lamented that he did not continue to cultivate his powers as a poet.* His next pro duction was of a very different complexion, and, iq stead of trifling with the muses, he appears defending Luther and the reformation with great acuten8s and learning. He referred to this publication at his trial, as an evidence that he had no secret inclination to Popery ; and, on account of this performance, Bishop Burnet ranks him among the most eminent defenders of the protestant cause. He is supposed to have assisted the Honourable Mr Boyle, (after wards Earl of Orrery,) who was under his tuition at Oxford, in the celebrated controversy which that no bleman carried on with Bentley, respecting the au thenticity of the epistles of Phalaris. But the most extensive literary contest in which he engaged was with Dr Wake, (afterwards archbishop of Canter bury,) concerning the rights of convocations. Dr ' Wake supported the following' positions : 1st, That the right of calling the clergy together in sy nods is vested solely in the prince ; 2dly, That the clergy, so assembled, have no right to debate or de termine any point of doctrine or discipline without his permission ; 3dly, That the prince may annul, al ter, or suspend, the execution of any of their consti tutions or decrees ; and lastly, that no synod can dis solve itself without consent of the prince." Atter bury opposed these principles, and asserted the right of the clergy to meet and deliberate without ally li cence or qualification. Several pamphlets were writ ten on both sides by different persons ; but Bishop A tterbitry was the most active and able advocate of the high church principles and party. In this, as in all his controversial writings, he expressed himself in very intemperate language, frequently (if we may believe Bishop Burnet) with no very strict ad herence to truth.* He received, however, the thanks of the lower house of convocation, for his zeal in as serting the rights of the clergy, and was compliment ed by the university of Oxroi'd with the degree of doctor in divinity. He had been appointed by the convocation one of the committee for comparing Mr Whiston's doctrines with those of the Church of England ; and, in consequence of this appointment, lie was principally concerned in drawing up " a re presentation of the present state of religion." In
this performance, which Bishop Burnet calls " a vi rulent declamation," he contrives to throw the blame of the national wickedness upon those who had late ly been in power, and even seeks occasion to accuse all the administrations since the Revolution. Before his death, he published a vindication of himself, Bishop Smallridge, and Dr Aldrich, from a charge of having altered and interpolated Lord Clarendon's History of the Rebellion. While lie resided in France, lie corresponded with many literary charac ters, and particularly with a M. Thiriot, who has. published several of the bishop's letters, which consist chiefly of criticisms on several French authors. His letters to Mr Pope also are preserved, along with the letters of that poet ; and it is in this correspondence that his character appeared in the most engaging point of view. The letters of Atterbury are ac counted superior to those of Pope, in ease and ele gance of expression ; but the sentiments expressed in them are very irreconcileable with that restless am bition by which lie seems to have been actuated in almost every peribd of his life. The Sermons of Bishop Atterbury may be considered as his principal work, and as having laid the foundation of his cha racter as a writer. They are now extant in four volumes octavo ; of which the two first volumes were published by himself, and the two last by his chaplain Dr Moore. The sermons, however, which Dr Moore has published, were marked by the bishop's own hand as the only ones lit to be printed ; and all the rest which lie had written were committed to the flames, partly by himself, and partly by his execu tors. Several of his sermons were severely attacked by Mr Hoadly ; and he bad a dispute with the same writer on the subject of passive obedience. In the course of that controversy, Hoadly clearly spewed, that, Atterbury contradicted the sentiments which he himself had advaneed when supporting the rights of convocation. In the sermons also, which Hoadly censured, there are several very unguarded positions and unscriptttral tenets. Notwithstanding these de fects, his appearance in the pulpit seem to have gain ed him many admirers, and have even been consider ed as the pnnciparcause of his preferments. Though there is much reason to doubt this, yet it is unde niable, that they are among the best pulpit composi tions of that age, and they still maintain a very respec table character in the opiniod of all candid and judi cious persons.-1- They scarcely, however, deserve the high praise which has been given them, foi clear and convincing argument ; but; like all the writings of Attcrbury, they are more remarkable for correctness and case than for strength and elegance of language ; for clear and concise illustration, than for forcible reasoning and animated eloquence. • Upon examining the literarycompositions of Bishop Atterbuiy, there appears, at one glance, the most abundant reason to acknowledge his great abilities, taste, and learning ; but, upon a review of the histo ry of his life, it is not easy to find equally striking indications of an upright moral and political charac ter. While contemplating him in this view, it is no r doubt necessary to keep in mind the turbulence of the times in which lie lived, and the political conten tions in which he had so great a share. It may ea sily be conceived, that, in such a scene, his activity and zeal, in whatever cause he espoused, would draw from his friends more frequent and pointed eulogies than he really deserved, as well as excite in his op ponents stronger prejudices, and keener reproaches, than strict justice authorised. But, after making all reasonable allowances for the partialities of party, and following th; fairest judgmedt, it is not easy to form a very favourable estimate. It is known, that, in open defiance of all propriety and principle as a clerical character, he was accustomed to swear upon any strong provocation ; that he was even amongst the foremost and keenest in every po litical contest which occurred in his time ; that, in the different stages through which he passed in the course of his church preferments, he was involved in quarrels ; and that Dr Smalridge, who succeeded him in two of the stations which he had filled, complain ed of his hard fate, in being obliged " to carry wa ter after him, to extinguish the flame which his li tigiousness had every where occasioned." Froin merely attending, then, to the acknowledged tenor and transactions of Bishop Atterbury's life, it ap pears too evident, that he was a man of a hot temper, and haughty spirit ; ambitious of preferment, and jea lous of his rights ; violent in his public proceedings, and ready for political contention ; cautious and cun ning in general, yet frequently prompted by passion . to expose his own reputation, and to injure his most favourite cause. There is no good ground for sus pecting, that he was either inclined to infidelity,* or even favourable to Popery ; but, besides the evidence advanced on his trial, there are several uncontrovert ed facts, which clearly indicate his attachment to the Stuart family, and which strongly tend to confirm the charge of his having been engaged in treasonable practices for their restoration.t But however much his personal concern in such plots may be doubted, and his disaffection to the reigning family excused, yet there is no adequate apology which can be made for the turbulence of his public proceedings, and no sufficient substitute to be found among all his excel.
lencies and attainments, for that humility and meek. ness, that love of peace and of good order, which be. came him as a Christian bishop, but in which he was so extremely deficient. Even they who approve his principles as a high churchman, or who sympathise with his feelings as a friend of the Pretender, will not be able to vindicate the means which he used, and the spirit which he displayed, in supporting what, perhaps, he sincerely considered as just and right. He may claim our admiration for his natural endow ments and acquired accomplishments : lie may stand high in our opinion as an acute politician and an ac tive partisan : and he may be contemplated with ap probation in his intercourse with his family and friends ; but his title is not so valid to that true great ness which consists in self government, integrity, and candour ; nor can he even be admitted to have pos sessed any great share of that moral worth, which can attach to any man only by supporting consistently that character which he assumes, and by discharging consistently those duties which belong to him in his particular place and station. See Stackhouse's Me moirs of Dr F. Atterbury ; and Biograph. Britan nica. (q)