against Knott, was written by special order from the King, who had, in giving the order, some view of recovering Chillingworth himself from the errors into which he had fallen. Next to the dedication were inserted the formal approbation of the three Divines who had examined it; and who had made so severe a scrutiny of it, as to induce the author to say, that it had " passed a fiery trial."

The book was received with general applause, and though a controversial work of considerable bulk, it passed through two editions within less than five months. Its success called forth the renewed exertions of Knott, who finding his former imputation of Socinianism had not been able to counteract the favourable reception of the work, now attempted to shew that the principles of Chillingworth tended to overthrow the Christian religion, arguing, as he had in his former pamphlet, that "the infallible authority of the Church of Rome being denied, no one can be assured that any parcel of Scripture was written by divine inspiration;" and that "none can deny that infallible authority, but he must abandon all infused faith and true religion if he do but understand himself;" which, as Chillingworth observes, amounts to this, that "all Christians besides the Papists are open fools or concealed atheists." Knott also dedicated his reply to the King, which was an act of no light presumption, when the King's zeal for the Church of England was well known, as well as his admiration of the work of Chillingworth.

Another pamphlet against him was also printed at St. Omer, in the same year (1638,) with this title "The Church Conquerant over human Wit, or the Church's Authority demonstrated by Mr. William Chillingworth (the Proctor for Wit against her) his perpetual Contradictions, in his book entitled 'The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation.'' The author was a Jesuit, named John Floyd, known also under the name of Daniel a Jesu. In this treatise, Chillingworth was reviled as a "defier and challenger of the Church of God." The same writer, in the following year, published an appendix to his treatise, which appeared under the title of "The total sum, or no danger of damnation unto Roman Catholics for any errors in Faith; nor any hope of Salvation for any Sectary whatever that doth knowingly oppose the doctrine of the Roman Church.” He was attacked also by another Jesuit, William Lacy, in a pamphlet published the same year, entitled "The Judgment of an University-Man concerning Mr. William Chillingworth his late pamphlet, in answer to Charity maintained." This writer attempted to confute Chillingworth by ridicule and mere abusive declamation.

These were all the answers which appeared immediately on the publication of Chillingworth's book, and by their intemperate and sophistical character, they all bore testimony to the impregnable strength of the Protestant cause.

The Archbishop, and probably also the King, having read his book, it was considered but a proper reward for the services of the author, that some preferment should be bestowed on him. An opportunity was offered in the elevation of Dr. Brian Duppa, Chancellor of Salisbury, to the bishopric of that see; upon which the vacant Chancellorship was bestowed on Chillingworth, with the Prebend of Brixworth, in

Northamptonshire, annexed to it. He had now overcome the scruples, which three years before he had entertained with regard to subscribing the 39 articles. Indeed, in the course of his book, he had professed himself as now willing to subscribe. Accordingly, in order to his admission to the benefice, he complied with the usual requisition of subscription, as appears from the subscription-book of the church of Salisbury.

About the same time, he was appointed Master of Wygstan's Hospital, in Leicester.

In the year 1640, he was deputed by the Chapter of Salisbury, as their Proctor to the Convocation, which met with the Parliament, and was opened on the 14th of April. The Parliament being dissolved on the 5th of May, it was expected that the Convocation would also be dissolved; but they only adjourned for some days, and the King having granted them a new commission, dated May 12th, they continued their session until the 29th of the same month: during which time they despatched their remaining business. They granted the King a subsidy of four shillings in the pound for six years, under the name of a benevolence or contribution, to be levied upon the Clergy under the penalty of ecclesiastical censures; and enacted several constitutions and canons, which, being confirmed by the King under the Great Seal of England, were immediately printed.

These irregular proceedings of the Convocation were in the next Parliament declared, by the votes of both Houses, to be against the right of Parliament and the liberty of the subject. The Commons, indeed, passed a Bill for punishing and fining the members of the Convocation, amongst whom the Proctor for the Chapter of Salisbury was fined a thousand pounds; but this Bill was thrown out in the House of Lords.

Chillingworth, was again deputed to the next Convocation, which met on the 4th of November. But there was no commission granted, and therefore no business proposed; and in consequence of the imprisonment of Archbishop Laud, the regular sessions were broken off, the Bishops discontinued their meeting, and the Lower House by degrees dwindled away.

Then began the encroachments of the Parliament upon the Royal prerogative-first in the Triennial Act-then in the Act which put it in the power of Parliament to be adjourned, prorogued or dissolved only by Act of Parliament.

The King soon felt the sad consequences of having thus suffered the landmarks of his sovereignty to be removed. He was obliged to retire to York, and the two Houses began to treat with him as a neighbouring discontented Prince. The result was, that the Parliament raised an army under the command of the Earl of Essex, and the King was compelled to erect his standard, at Nottingham, against his tyrantsubjects.

In 1642, Chillingworth was put on the roll, with some others, by the King, to be created Doctor of Divinity; but he did not go up to Oxford to take that degree, nor was he created by diploma.

Amongst the soldier-preachers who at this period distinguished them

selves by their active hostility against their Sovereign, was Francis Cheynell, a Fellow of Merton College. He was attached principally to the army of the Earl of Essex. He was a frequent preacher also before the Lords and Commons, as well as a writer of some pamphlets, in which he displayed his zeal for the Parliament no less than in the field. A tract which he published in 1643, entitled "The Rise, Growth, and Danger of Socinianism," &c., and which was printed by order of the Committee of the House of Commons, directly criminated Archbishop Laud, Dr. Potter, Hales, and Chillingworth, as favourers of Arminianism, Socinianism, and Popery *, and endeavoured to prove the accusation from their books. He was not wrong, however, when he imputed to Chillingworth, amongst his other charges, a zeal for episcopacy and the interests of the King.

Bristol having been reduced by the Royal forces under Prince Rupert, July 25th, 1643, it was resolved afterwards to prosecute the siege of Gloucester. Chillingworth was present with the King's army before Gloucester, and observing that materials were wanted for carrying on the siege, he suggested the construction of engines, after the manner of the Roman testudines cum pluteis, for storming the place. These engines were accordingly constructed by his direction. They were made, as Rushworth describes them, to " run upon cart wheels, with a blind of planks, musket-proof, and holes for four musketeers to play out of, placed upon the axle-tree, to defend the musketeers and those that thrust it forwards, and carrying a bridge before it; the wheels were to fall into the ditch, and the end of the bridge to rest upon the town's breastworks, so making several complete bridges to enter the city." Before, however, these machines could be brought into execution, the Earl of Essex advanced to the relief of the town, and compelled the Royal forces to raise the siege.

The next month, the King being at Oxford, Chillingworth preached before him at the public fast, a sermon which was afterwards published by his Majesty's command. He took for his text these words, 2 Tim. iii. 1-5-"This know also, that in the last day perilous times shall come: for men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemous, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God. Having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof." "This sermon," says his biographer," is not only remarkable for that strength of reason which seems to have been our author's peculiar talent; but also for the eloquent addresses, pathetic and affectionate exhortations, whereby he endeavours to enforce the practice of virtue and piety. And what is esteemed the perfection of such performances, the Christian orator appears every where expressing the inward suggestions of his heart,

* It is curious to observe how these three charges are linked together, whilst it is now so current a practice with the Roman Catholics to impute Socinianism to the Church of England.

and sensibly touched with the excellency and the necessity of the great truths and duties he recommends."

The Scottish forces having now advanced to the aid of the Parliament, and published several declarations by which they sought to justify their conduct, Chillingworth judged it might promote the interests of the King if these declarations were answered. He therefore extracted several passages out of them, and made observations upon them. He examined also the question of resistance to princes, and maintained the unlawfulness of it even in extreme cases.

Whilst he was thus asserting the royal cause, he received a letter from a friend, who endeavoured to dissuade him from the attempt. To this he returned a spirited answer; in which, having excused himself from the charge of being pragmatical, on the plea that it was better for any man to do as he had done, than that it should be left undone, he adds-" All are equally bound to discharge their duty to God. All have equally a part in their Prince's and country's welfare. And if I have been stout and courageous, when others have been cold and cowardly, I think their faintness should rather commend than condemn my forwardness; quod ausus sim bonus esse in malis temporibus." We find from this letter also, that he had been lately chosen Philosophy Reader in his college, and that he was quite burthened with the business which now devolved on him.

In the midst, too, of his exertions in behalf of the King, he was no less active in supporting the Church of England. He wrote a small tract to show that "Episcopacy is not repugnant to the government settled in the Church for perpetuity by the Apostles." This was not published separately at first, but was affixed to a treatise on the subject of Episcopacy by Bishop Morton, to which also a treatise by Archbishop Usher had been annexed, and the three were published in one volume under the sanction of that Primate.

But he was not long exempt from a share of that misfortune which followed in the train of the persecuted monarch. The Lord Hopton, General of the royal forces in the West, having gained possession of Arundel Castle in Sussex, the forces of the parliament, under Sir William Waller, immediately marched to its recovery. Chillingworth was at this time with Lord Hopton in Arundel Castle, having accompanied him out of kindness and respect, and was accordingly amongst the number of the besieged. The want of proper management as to their stores, and the factious spirit of the garrison, conspired to render the defence of the place impracticable, though it was sufficiently provided to have held out much longer than it did against the besieging army; and it was thus surrendered to Waller on the 6th of January, the garrison becoming prisoners of war. Chillingworth had suffered much from the previous march and the inclemency of the season, and in consequence of the illness under which he laboured, preferred remaining in the garrison until the weather should become more favourable for his removal.

But his illness increased to such a degree, that not being able to go to London with the garrison, he was conveyed to Chichester, this indulgence being obtained for him through the request of his great antagonist, Cheynell, who accidentally met him in Arundel Castle. Cheynell

was a rigid, zealous Presbyterian, with whom the opinions of his own party were the exclusive standard of orthodoxy, as sincere at the same time, and charitable in his feelings, as his bigoted and fanatical creed would permit him to be, consistently with its paramount influence over his heart. His charity prompted him to interfere in behalf of his political and religious opponent on the present occasion, and to extend to him such relief as the triumph of his party had placed in his power.

It naturally appeared to such a religionist the first duty of charity, to avail himself of the present opportunity to redeem a lost brother from the fancied error of his ways. The care of Cheynell, accordingly, was directed more to the mind than to the body of the prisoner. He ministered to the latter, only that he might have the means of plying the former with those spiritual remedies, of which it seemed to his eye of religious frenzy to stand so greatly in need.

With this proselyting view, he paid frequent visits to Chillingworth during his illness at Chichester; and as a testimony of his zeal, he has recorded the conferences which passed in this, his illustrious opponent's last struggle both of nature and reason, (for his sickness terminated in death,) in a singular work entitled "Chillingworthi Novissima; or the Sickness, Heresy, Death, and Burial of William Chillingworth, (in his own phrase) Clerk of Oxford, and in the conceit of his Fellow-souldiers, the Queen's Arch-engineer and Grand Intelligencer. Set forth in a letter to his eminent and learned friends, a relation of his apprehension at Arundel, a discovery of his errors in a brief catechism, and a short oration at the burial of his heretical book. By Francis Cheynell, late Fellow of Merton College. Published by authority." A title which, connected with the recital itself which follows, sufficiently indicates to us, how the stern fanaticism of the controversial zealot can cramp and mutilate every kindly feeling of the heart.

Cheynell's meeting with Chillingworth in Arundel Castle, as was before mentioned, was accidental. According to his own account of himself, he had been driven from his house by force of arms, on account of his having been nominated a member of the Assembly, upon which he had left London for Sussex, a part of the country which appeared to him particularly to need his ministerial labour. Through his representation, Sir William Waller had been induced to commend Chillingworth to the care of his Chaplain, who kindly laid him upon his own bed, and supplied him with all necessaries which the place afforded. On his being conveyed to Chichester he was lodged in the Bishop's palace, where he had every accommodation which his sickness required, and instead of being committed to the Marshall, was placed in the more honourable custody of Lieutenant Golledge. These alleviations of his suffering were also obtained for him through Cheynell's interest with the Governor.

There he was visited by Sir William Waller's Physician. Cheynell would have us suppose that party-jealousy prevented his placing any confidence in his medical attendant, and that this prevented his recovery; but that at length discovering and confessing his error, he admitted the Physician's visits, and was then in a hopeful way of recovery.