by the turbulence of the Independents, whose opinions then prevailed among the foldiers, and were very induftriously propagated by the difcourfes of William Earbury, a preacher of great reputation among them, who one day gathering a confiderable number of his most zealous followers, went to the house appointed for the resolution of scruples, on a day which was set apart for the difquifition of the dignity and office of a minifter, and began to dispute with great vehemence against the Prefbyterians, whom he denied to have any true ministers among them, and whofe affemblies he affirmed not to be the true church. He was oppofed with equal heat by the Prefbyterians, and at length they agreed to examine the point another day, in a regular difputation. Accordingly they appointed the twelfth of November for an enquiry, "whe"ther, in the Christian church, the office of minister "is committed to any particular perfons ?"

On the day fixed, the antagonists appeared each attended by great numbers; but when the question was propofed, they began to wrangle, not about the doctrine which they had engaged to examine, but about the terms of the propofition, which the Independents alleged to be changed fince their agreement; and at length the foldiers infifted that the question fhould be, "Whether those who call them"felves ministers have more right or power to preach "the gospel, than any other man that is a Chris"tian?" This question was debated for fome time with great vehemence and confufion, but without any prospect of a conclufion. At length, one of the foldiers, who thought they had an equal right with the reft to engage in the controverfy, demanded of the

Prefby

Prefbyterians, whence they themselves received their orders, whether from bishops or any other perfons? This unexpected interrogatory put them to great difficulties; for it happened that they were all ordained by the bishops, which they durft not acknowledge, for fear of expofing themselves to a general cenfure, and being convicted from their own declarations, in which they had frequently condemned Epifcopacy as contrary to Christianity; nor durft they deny it, because they might have been confuted, and must at once have funk into contempt. The foldiers, seeing their perplexity, infulted them; and went away boafting of their victory: nor did the Presbyterians, for some time, recover spirit enough to renew their meetings, or to proceed in the work of eafing confciences.

Earbury, exulting at the victory, which, not his own abilities, but the subtilty of the foldier had procured him, began to vent his notions of every kind. without fcruple, and at length afferted, that "the "Saints had an equal measure of the divine nature "with our Saviour, though not equally manifeft." At the fame time he took upon him the dignity of a prophet, and began to utter predictions relating to the affairs of England and Ireland.

His prophecies were not much regarded, but his doctrine was cenfured by the Prefbyterians in their pulpits; and Mr. Cheynel challenged him to a difputation, to which he agreed, and at his first appearance in St. Mary's church addreffed his audience in the following manner :

"Chriftian friends, kind fellow-foldiers, and worthy ftudents, I, the humble fervant of all mankind,

am this day drawn, against my will, out of my cell "into this publick affembly, by the double chain of "accufation and a challenge from the pulpit. I have "been charged with herefy; I have been challenged "to come hither in a letter written by Mr. Francis "Cheynel. Here then I ftand in defence of myself " and my doctrine, which I fhall introduce with only "this declaration, that I claim not the office of a "minifter on account of any outward call, though I

formerly received ordination, nor do I boast of il“lumination, or the knowledge of our Saviour, "though I have been held in esteem by others, and " formerly by myself. For I now declare, that I "know nothing, and am nothing, nor would I be thought of otherwise than as an enquirer and "feeker."

"

He then advanced his former position in ftronger terms, and with additions equally deteftable, which Cheynel attacked with the vehemence which, in so warm a temper, fuch horrid affertions might naturally excite. The difpute, frequently interrupted by the clamours of the audience, and tumults raised to difconcert Cheynel, who was very unpopular, continued about four hours, and then both the controvertists grew weary, and retired. The Prefbyterians afterwards thought they should more speedily put an end to the herefies of Earbury by power than by argument; and, by foliciting General Fairfax, pro

cured his removal.

Mr. Cheynel published an account of this difpute under the title of " Faith triumphing over Error and "Herefy in a Revelation," &c. nor can it be doubted

but

but he had the victory, where his cause gave him so great fuperiority.

Somewhat before this, his captious and petulant difpofition engaged him in a controverfy, from which he could not expect to gain equal reputation. Dr. Hammond had not long before published his Practical Catechifm, in which Mr. Cheynel, according to his custom, found many errors implied, if not afferted; and therefore, as it was much read, thought it convenient to cenfure it in the pulpit. Of this Dr. Hammond being informed, defired him in a letter to communicate his objections; to which Mr. Cheynel returned an answer, written with his ufual temper, and therefore fomewhat perverfe. The controversy was drawn out to a confiderable length; and the pers on both fides were afterwards made publick by

Dr. Hammond.

pa

In 1647, it was determined by parliament, that the reformation of Oxford fhould be more vigorously carried on; and Mr. Cheynel was nominated one of the vifitors. The general process of the vifitation, the firmness and fidelity of the students, the address by which the enquiry was delayed, and the steadiness with which it was oppofed, which are very particularly related by Wood, and after him by Walker, it is not neceffary to mention here, as they relate not more to Dr. Cheynel's life than to thofe of his affociates.

There is indeed fome reason to believe that he was more active and virulent than the reft, because he appears to have been charged in a particular manner with some of their most unjustifiable measures. He was accused of propofing that the members of the

Univerfity

University should be denied the affiftance of counsel, and was lampooned by name, as a madman, in a fatire written on the vifitation.

One action, which fhews the violence of his temper, and his difregard both of humanity and decency, when they came in competition with his paffions, must not be forgotten. The vifitors being offended at the obstinacy of Dr. Fell, Dean of Christ-church, and Vice-chancellor of the Univerfity, having first deprived him of his vice-chancellorship, determined. afterwards to difpoffefs him of his deanery; and, in the course of their proceedings, thought it proper to feize upon his chambers in the college. This was an act which most men would willingly have referred to the officers to whom the law affigned it; but Cheynel's fury prompted him to a different conduct. He, and three more of the vifitors, went and demanded admiffion; which, being steadily refufed them, they obtained by the affistance of a file of foldiers, who forced the doors with pick-axes. Then entering, they faw Mrs. Fell in the lodgings, Dr. Fell being in prifon at London, and ordered her to quit them; but found her not more obfequious than her husband. They repeated their orders with menaces, but were not able to prevail upon her to remove. They then retired, and left her exposed to the brutality of the foldiers, whom they commanded to keep poffeffion; which Mrs. Fell however did not leave. About nine days afterwards the received another vifit of the fame kind from the new chancellor, the earl of Pembroke; who having, like the others, ordered her to depart without effect, treated her with reproachful language, and at last commanded the foldiers to take

her