Johnson made a remark this evening which
struck me a good deal. 'I never (said he) knew a non-juror who could
reason[884].' Surely he did not mean to deny that faculty to many of
their writers; to Hickes, Brett[885], and other eminent divines of that
persuasion; and did not recollect that the seven Bishops, so justly
celebrated for their magnanimous resistance of arbitrary power, were yet
Nonjurors to the new Government[886]. The nonjuring clergy of Scotland,
indeed, who, excepting a few, have lately, by a sudden stroke, cut off
all ties of allegiance to the house of Stuart, and resolved to pray for
our present lawful Sovereign by name, may be thought to have confirmed
this remark; as it may be said, that the divine indefeasible hereditary
right which they professed to believe, if ever true, must be equally
true still. Many of my readers will be surprized when I mention, that
Johnson assured me he had never in his life been in a nonjuring
meeting-house[887].
Next morning at breakfast, he pointed out a passage in Savage's
_Wanderer_, saying, 'These are fine verses.' 'If (said he) I had written
with hostility of Warburton in my _Shakspeare_, I should have quoted
this couplet:--
"Here Learning, blinded first and then beguil'd,
Looks dark as Ignorance, as Fancy wild[888].
Pages:
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370