ii ing to those who are investigating the character and pretensions of Romanism; and in the History of the Remonstrants, which is given in the Life of Episcopius, is displayed the persecuting and intolerant temper which seems to be inherent in Calvinism. For the Life of St. Cyprian, the Reader is indebted to the REV. G. A. POOLE. For the other Lives the Compiler is responsible. The Work is still continued in Numbers, as many persons prefer receiving it as a Monthly Periodical, in which shape they can easily peruse the whole work. The object of this Work is to supply the Reader with an Ecclesiastical History, in a form which will admit of easy reference. Although the labour is of a humble character, still it is considerable; and the contribution of Articles, by persons competent to prepare them, will be gratefully received, as the work has become much more extensive than was originally contemplated, and has hitherto been conducted without help. VICARAGE, LEEDS. ECCLESIASTICAL BIOGRAPHY. CHILLINGWORTH, WILLIAM. WILLIAM CHILLINGWORTH was the son of William Chillingworth, citizen, afterwards mayor of Oxford, and was born there in October, 1602. He was baptized on the last of that month, the celebrated William Laud, then fellow of St. John's College, being one of his sponsors. After he had been educated in grammar learning at a private school in Oxford, he was admitted a scholar of Trinity College, in 1618, and was elected fellow in 1628. He studied divinity and geometry, and showed some skill in versification. The conversation and study of the university scholars, in his time, turned chiefly upon the controversies between the churches of England and Rome, occasioned by the liberty allowed the Romish priests by James I. and Charles I.; several of whom lived at, or near, Oxford, and made frequent attempts to pervert the young men. Of these Jesuits, the most famous was John Fisher, alias John Perse; and Chillingworth being accounted a very ingenious man, Fisher earnestly sought his society. Their conversation soon turned upon the points controverted between the two Churches, but particularly on the necessity of an infallible living judge in matters of faith. Chillingworth unable to answer the arguments of the Jesuit on this head, was brought to believe that this judge was to be found only in the Church of Rome, which, there ore, must be the true Church, out of which there could be no salvation. Upon this he forsook the communion of the Church of England, and embraced the Romish religion. In order to secure his conquest, Fisher persuaded Chillingworth to go to the college of the Jesuits at Douay; and he was desired to set down in writing the motives or reasons which had engaged him to embrace the Romish religion. But his godfather, Laud, who was then Bishop of London, hearing of this affair, and being extremely concerned at it, wrote to him; and, Chillingworth's answer expressing much moderation, candour, and impartiality, that prelate continued to correspond with him, and to press him with several arguments against the doctrine and practice of the Romanists. This set Chillingworth upon a new enquiry, which had the desired effect. But the place where he was not being suitable to the state of a free and impartial enquirer, he resolved to come back to England, and left Douay in 1631, after a short stay there. Upon his return into England, he was received with great kindness and affection by Bishop Laud, who approved his design of retiring to Oxford, of which university that prelate was then chancellor, in order to complete the important work he was upon, a free enquiry into religion. At last, after a thorough examination, the protestant principles appearing to him the most agreeable to the holy Scripture and reason, he declared for them; and having fully discovered the sophistry of the arguments, which had induced him to go over to the Church of Rome, he wrote a paper about the year 1634 to confute them, but did not think proper to publish it. This paper is now lost; for though we have a paper of his upon the same subject, which was first published in 1687, among the additional discourses of Chillingworth, yet it seems to have been written on some other occasion, probably at the desire of some of his friends. That Chillingworth's return to the Church of England was owing to Bishop Laud, appears from that prelate's appeal to the letters, which passed between him and Chillingworth; which appeal was made in his speech before the Lords at his trial, in order to vindicate himself from the charge of Popery. "Mr. Chillingworth's learning and ability," says he, "are sufficiently known to all your lordships. He was gone and settled at Douay. My letters brought him back, and he lived and died a defender of the Church of England. And that this is so, your lordships cannot but know; for Mr. Prynne took away my letters, and all the papers which concerned him, and they were examined at the committee." As Chillingworth, in forsaking the Church of England, as well as in returning to it, was solely influenced by a love of truth, so, upon the same principles, even after his return to Protestantism, he thought it incumbent upon him to re-examine the grounds of it. This appears by a letter he wrote to Dr. Sheldon, containing some scruples he had about leaving the Church of Rome, and returning to the Church of England: and these scruples, which he declared ingenuously to his friends, seem to have occasioned a report, but it was a very false and groundless one, that he had turned papist a second time, and then protestant again. His return to the protestant religion making a great deal of noise, he became engaged in several disputes with those of the Romish religion; and particularly with Mr. John Lewgar, Mr. John Floyd a Jesuit, who went under the name of Daniel, or Dan. a Jesu, and Mr. White. Mr. Lewgar, a great zealot for the Church of Rome, and one who had been an intimate friend of our author, as soon as he heard of his return to the Church of England, sent him a very angry and abusive letter; to which Chillingworth returned a mild and affectionate answer, in the course of which he observes, that it seems to him very strange and not far from a prodigy, that this doctrine of the Roman churches being the guide of faith, or having the privilege of infallibility, if it be true doctrine, should not be known to the Evangelists, to the Apostles, and to the primitive Church, : as he shews it was not; and concludes thus: "All these things, says he, and many more are very strange to me, if the infallibility of the Roman Church be indeed and were always by Christians acknowledged the foundation of our faith and therefore I beseech you pardon me, if I choose to build mine upon one that is much firmer and safer, and lies open to none of these objections, which is Scripture and universal Tradition; and if one that is of this faith may have leave to do so; I will subscribe with hand and heart, your very loving and true friend," &c. Lewgar was so far softened by this letter, that he had an interview with his old friend. They had a conference upon religion before Skinner and Sheldon; and we have a paper of Chillingworth printed among the additional discourses above-mentioned, which seems to contain the abstract or summary of their dispute. Besides the pieces already mentioned, he wrote one to demonstrate, that "the doctrine of infallibility is neither evident of itself, nor grounded upon certain and infallible reasons, nor warranted by any passage of Scripture." And in two other papers, he shews that the Church of Rome had formerly erred; first, "by admitting of infants to the Eucharist, and holding, that without it they could not be saved;" and secondly, "by teaching the doctrine of the Millenaries, viz: that before the world's end Christ shall reign upon the earth 1000 years, and that the saints should live under Him in all holiness and happiness;" both which doctrines are condemned as false and heretical by the present Church of Rome. He wrote also a short letter, in answer to some objections by one of his friends, in which he shews, that "neither the fathers nor the councils are infallible witnesses of tradition; and that the infallibility of the Church of Rome must first of all be proved from Scripture." Lastly, he wrote an answer to some passages in the dialogues published under the name of Rushworth. In 1635 he was engaged in a work which gave him a far greater opportunity to confute the principles of the Church of Rome, and to vindicate the religion |