Try out the new BibleStudyTools.com. Click here!

Thomas Cartwright

Thomas Cartwright, B. D.—This most celebrated person was born in Hertfordshire, about the year 1535, and educated in St. John's college, Cambridge. He possessed excellent natural parts, applied to his studies with uncommon assiduity, and made amazing progress in the various branches of useful literature. He allowed himself only five hours' sleep in the night, to which custom he closely adhered to the end of his days. Having been about three years at the university, upon the death of King Edward,

• Baker's MS. Colicc. Toi. il. p. 544.

+ MS. Remarks, p. 535. t Plen for the Innocent, p. 8I.

^ Neal't Puritans, vol. i. p. 423.

and the return of popery, he quitted that seat of learning, and became clerk to a counsellor at law. This employment, however, did not prevent the prosecution of his former pursuits. The study of divinity, and those branches of knowledge most calculated for usefulness to a divine, were his chief delight; and to which he still directed the closest application. In this situation he remained till the accession of Queen Elizabeth, when he returned to St. John's college, and in the year 1560, was made fellow of the house. In about three years, he was removed to Trinity college, where, on account of his great learning and worth, he was chosen one of the eight senior fellows.

In the year 1564, when Queen Elizabeth visited the university of Cambridge, uncommon preparations were made for her entertainment, and the most learned men were selected for the public disputations. Among these was Mr. Cartwright, whose performance on this occasion discovered such extraordinary abilities, as gave the greatest satisfaction, both to the queen and the other auditors.* But many writers have asserted, that he received neither reward nor commendation ; and that he was presumptuous of his own good learning, but deficient in a comely grace and behaviour. Indeed, it is added, that he was so vexed by her majesty's neglect of him, that he immediately began to wade into divers opinions relative to the new discipline, and to kick at the government of the established church;

becoming a great contemner of those who differed from him.f That this is a most notorious slander, appears partly from the account already given; but especially from the words of another learned historian. From the relation of the queen's reception at Cambridge, says he, there appears no clear ground for any such discontent, as that which is charged against Mr. Cartwright; for, as this relation informs us, the queen approved of them all.%

In the year 1570, Mr. Cartwright was chosen Lady Margaret's professor of divinity. It is particularly mentioned, that he delivered lectures upon the first and second chapters of the Acts of the Apostles; which he performed with such acuteness of wit, and such solidity of judgment, that they excited the admiration of those who attended. He was also become so celebrated a preacher, that when it

* Clark's Lives annexed to bis Martyrologie, p. 16, I7.
t Paule's Life of Whitgift, p. 9,10.
t Strype's Annals, vol. i. p. 403.

was his turn to preach at St. Mary's, the sexton, on account of the multitudes who flocked to hear him, was obliged, for their accommodation, to take down the windows of the church.*

Mr. Cartwright took occasion, in his lectures, to deliver his sentiments concerning church discipline; and because they were unfavourable to the hierarchy, public accusations were soon exhibited against him.t Archbishop Grindal wrote a letter, dated J une 24, 1570, to Sir William Cecil, chancellor of the university, urging him to take some course with Mr. Cartwright; alleging, that in his lectures he constantly spoke against the external policy, and the various offices of the church; in consequence of which, the young men of the university, who attended his lectures in great numbers, were in danger of being poisoned by his doctrines. He, therefore, recommended to the chancellor to silence Cartwright and his adherents, and to reduce them to conformity, or expel them from the college, or from the university, as the cause should require. He also urged that Mr. Cartwright might not be allowed to take his degree of doctor in divinity, at the approaching commencement, for which he had made application.} Dr. Whitgift also zealously opposed Mr. Cartwright, and wrote at the same time to the chancellor, communicating not only what Mr. Cnrtwright had openly taught, but also what he had spoken to him in private conversation.^

Mr. Cartwright vindicated his conduct in a letter to Sir William Cecil; in which he declared his extreme aversion to every thing that was seditious or contentious; and affirmed, that he had taught nothing but what naturally flowed from his text. He observed, that he had cautiously

• Clark's Lives, p. 17.

+ It is said, with a design to reproach Mr. Cartwright, that he and his adherents having delivered three sermons in the college chapel, on one Lord's day, they spoke so vehemently against the ceremonies and the use of the surplice, that, at evening prayer, all the collegians, except three, cast off their surplices, and appeared in the chapel w ithout them !—Paule't Life of IVhitgift, p. 12.—Fuller a Hist, of Cambridge, p. 140.

t Slrype's Grindal, p. 162.

<j It is observed, that what Mr. Cartwright delivered in his sermons on one Lord's day, Whitgift, in the same place, always refuted the Lord's day following, to his great commendation and applause. How far this was to bis commendation or applause, we do not determine; but how to reconcile Whitgift's practice, in this, case, with his own conduct after, wards, when in the most cruel manner he censured the excellent Mr. Walter Travers for the very same thing, will be found, we think, extremelv diflirult.—Slrype's Whitgift, p. 10, 11.—Paule't fThitgift, p. 13.—See Art. Travtrs.

avoided speaking against the habits; but acknowledged his having taught, that the ministry of the church of England had declined, in some points, from the ministry of the apostolic church, and that he wished it to I)e restored to greater purity. But these sentiments, he said, he had delivered with .ill imaginable caution, and in such a manner as could give offence to none, excepting the ignorant, the malignant, or those who wished to catch at something to calumniate him; of which things, nearly all the university, if they might be allowed, would bear witness. He, therefore, entreated the chancellor to hear and judge the cause himself.* Mr. Cartwright had, indeed, numerous friends, ornaments to the university, by whom he was exceedingly admired, and who now stuck close to him. They came forwards at this juncture; and declared in their testimonial sent to the chancellor, " That he never touched upon the controversy of the habits; and though he had advanced some propositions respecting the ministry, according to wiiich he wished things might be regulated, he did it with all possible caution and modesty." This was signed by fifteen hands; and other letters of commendation were written in his favour, signed by many names, some of whom afterwards became bishops;+ but all was to no purpose. It was too obvious, that his adversaries were resolved to make him a public example.

Chancellor Cecil was, indeed, inclined to treat Mr. Cartwright with candour and moderation;{ but his opponents were determined to prosecute him with the utmost rigour and severity. He was cited before the vice-chancellor, Dr. May, and other doctors, and examined upon sundry articles, which he was said to have delivered. The points alleged against him, they affirmed to be contrary to the religion established by public authority; and, therefore, demanded whether he would revoke his opinions, or abide by them. Mr. Cartwright desiring to be permitted to commit his sentiments upon these points to writing, was allowed the favour. He then drew up his opinions in six propositions, and presented them to the vice-chancellor, who admonished him to revoke them ; and, upon his refusal, deprived him of his stipend, but allowed him to continue his lecture.^

During this year, Dr. Whitgifl was chosen vice-chan

* Strype's Annals, vol. ii. p. 3. + Ibid. p. 2—4. Appen. p. 1—1. t Ibid. vol. i. p. 586, 587.

S Clark's Lives, p. 17 Slrype's Whilgift, Appen. p. 11.

cellor, when Mr. Cartwright was presently convened before him. Upon his appearance, Whitgift required him to revoke those opinions contained in his six propositions, to which he had subscribed; and upon Mr. Carlwright's refusal, he pronounced upon him the following definitive sentence:—" That seeing no admonition would help, but that he still persisted in the same mind, he did therefore pronounce him, the said Mr. Cartwright, to be removed from his said lecture; and by his final decree or sentence, did then and there remove him, and declare the said lecture void; and that he minded, according to the foundation thereof, to proceed to the election of a new reader. And further, he did then and there, by virtue of his office, inhibit the said Mr. Cartwright from preaching within the said university, and the jurisdiction of the same."*

The six propositions which Mr. Cartwright delivered under his own hand to the vice-chancellor, and which were said to be both dangerous and untrue, were the following:—

1. That the names and functions of archbishops and archdeacons ought to be abolished.

2. That the oifices of the lawful ministers of the church, viz. bishops and deacons, ought to be reduced to their apostolical institution: bishops to preach the word of God and pray, and deacons to be employed in taking care of the poor.

3. That the government of the church ought not to be entrusted to bishops' chancellors, or the officials of archdeacons ; but every church ought to be governed by its own minister and presbyters.

4. That ministers ought not to be at large, but every one should have the charge of a particular congregation.

5. That no man ought to solicit, or to stand as a candidate for the ministry.

6. That ministers ought not to be created by the sole authority of the bishop, but to be openly and fairly chosen by the people.t

In addition to these heterodoxies and misrepresentations, as the learned historian is pleased to call them,t other articles were collected from Mr. Cartwright's lectures; and, as they were accounted both dangerous and seditious, it will

• Clark's Lives, p. 17.—Strype's Whilgifi, Appen. p. 11.

t Ibid. t ColUer's Eccl. Hist. vol. ii. p. 525.

be proper to give the substance of them, which was as follows:

1. That in reforming the church, it is necessary to reduce all things to the apostolic institution.

2. That no man ought to be admitted into the ministry, who is not capable of preaching.

3. That popish ordinations are not valid. And only canonical scripture ought to be publicly read in the church.

4. That equal reverence is due to all canonical scripture, and to all the names of God; there is, therefore, no reason why the people should stand at the reading of the gospel, or bow at the name of Jesus.

5. That it is as lawful to sit at the Lord's table, as to kneel or stand.

6. That the Lord's supper ought not to be administered in private; nor should baptism be administered by women or lay-persons.

7. That the sign of the cross in baptism, is superstitious.

8. That it is reasonable and proper, that the parent should offer his own child in baptism, without being obliged to say / will, I will not, I believe, &c.

9. That it is papistical to forbid marriages at certain times of the year; and to give licenses for them at those times, is intolerable.

10. That the observation of Lent, and fasting on Fridays and Saturdays, is superstitious.

11. That trading or keeping markets on the Lord"s day, is unlawful.

12. That in ordaining ministers, the pronouncing of those words, Receive the Holy Ghost, is both ridiculous and wicked.*

These were the dangerous and seditious doctrines, which Mr. Cartwright occasionally touched upon in bis public lectures, but evidently without the least design of promoting discord. However, those who sought his ruin, having already deprived him of his lecture and professorship, procured his expulsion from the university. This was undoubtedly a short and easy method of refuting his opinions! The pretended occasion of his expulsion was, indeed, looked upon as a crime of no small magnitude. Mr. Cartwright, a senior fellow of the college, was only in deacon's orders. Whitgift was no sooner informed of this,

and that the statute required such to take upon them the order of priesls, than he concluded he was perjured; upon which, without any further admonition, he exerted his interest to the utmost among the masters, to rid the place of a man whose popularity was too great for his ambition, declaring he could not establish order in the university, while a man of his principles was among them.'

The friends of Mr. Cartwright complained of this hard usage. They looked upon it as extreme severity, and savouring too much of antichrist, for a man to be thus censured, without being allowed to have n conference before impartial judges. Whitgift and his friends, therefore, to make their cast; appear plausible, signed the following testimonial, signifying, " That Mr. Cartwright never offered any disputation, only on condition that he might know his opponents and his judges; nor was this kind of disputation denied him, only he was required to obtain a license from the queen or council;"t which his adversaries knew he could never procure. Here it is evident Mr. Cartwright did not stand on equal ground. The reader will easily perceive, that his proposals of a public dispute, even according to the statement of his enemies, were most equitable and just; but theirs were inequitable, and not within his power to observe.

After Mr. Cartwright's expulsion from the university, " Whitgift accused him of going u p and down idly, and doing no good, but living at other mens' tables."f How ungenerous was this! After the doctor had taken away his bread, and stopped his month from preaching, how unkind was it to reproach him with doing no good, and with depending on his friends for a dinner! Mr. Cartwright himself says, " After he had thrust me out of the college, he accused me of going up and down, doing no good, and living at other mens' tables. That I was not idle, 1 suppose, he knoweth too well. Whether well occupied, or no, let it be judged. I lived, indeed, at other mens' tables, having no house, nor wife, of my own : but not without their desire, and with small delight of mine, for fear of evil tongues. And although I were not able to requite it; yet towards some I went about it, instructing their children partly in the principles of religion, partly in other learning."^

Mr. Cartwright being expelled from the university, and

• Strype's Whitgift, p. 47. + Paule'» Whitgift, p. 16—18.

f Strype's Whilgift, p. 64.

S Biog. Britan. vol. iii. p. 88?. Edit. 1778.

out of all employment, went abroad, and settled a correspondence with some of the most celebrated divines in the foreign protcstant universities. During his abode on the continent, he was chosen minister to the English merchants at Antwerp, then at Middleburg, where he continued about two years, the Lord greatly blessing his labours. But by the importunity of his old friends, Messrs. Dccring, Fulke, Wyburn, Lever, and Fox, he was at length prevailed upon to return home.* Several of our historians affirm of him, even before his troubles at Cambridge, " that he might the better feed his humour with conceited novelties, he travelled to Geneva; where he was so enamoured with the new discipline, that he thought nil churches and congregations were to be measured and squared by the practice of Geneva."t For this reproachful insinuation, however, there is no sufficient evidence. It is pretty certain he never went to Geneva till after his expulsion from the university.

About the time of Mr. Cartwright's return to England, was published, " An Admonition to the Parliament, tor the Reformation of Church Discipline;" to which were annexed Bcza's Letter to the Earl of Leicester, and Gaultcr's to Bishop Parkhurst. Mr. Cartwright was not the author, as many writers have asserted ; but Mr. John Field, assisted by Mr. Thomas Wilcocks, for which they were both committed to Newgate, where they continued a long time,t Upon the imprisonment of these two excellent divines, Mr. Cartwright was induced to publish a " Second Admonition, with an humble Petition to both Houses of Parliament, for relief against Subscription." The first Admonition was answered by Dr. Whitgift. Mr. Cartwright then published a Reply to VVhitgift's Answer; which he is said to Lave done so admirably well, that his very adversaries commended him for his performance^ In 1573, Whitgift published his Defence against Mr. Cartwright's Reply. And in 1575, Mr. Cartwright published a Second Reply to Whitgift's Defence, in two parts. But the second part did not come out till 1577. Fuller is, therefore, mistaken, when he says, that Whitgift kept the field, and received no refutation; for it is certain Mr. Cartwright had the last word.n

• Clark's Lira, p. 18.

+ Paule'i Whitgift, p. 11.—Heylin's Hist, of Trn. p. 86?.

J See Art*. Field and Wilcocks. \ Clark's Lives, p. 18.

H Strype's Whitgift, p. 50—69.—Church Hist. b. ix. p. 103.

It was impossible for these divines to settle the controversy ; because they were not agreed about the standard or rule of judgment. Mr. Cartwright maintained, that the holy scriptures were the only standard of discipline and government, as well as of doctrine; and that the church of Christ in all ages ought to be regulated by them. He would, therefore, consult the Bible only, and reduce all things, as near as possible, to the apostolic standard. The less our religion was incumbered with the inventions of men, in his opinion, the more it would resemble the simplicity that is in Christ. " We mean not," said he, " to take away the authority of the civil magistrate, to whom we wish all blessedness, and for the increase of whose godliness we daily pray: but that Christ, being restored to his kingdom, may rule in the same by the sceptre of his word.* Whitgift, on the other hand, maintained, that though the holy scriptures were a perfect rule of faith, they were not designed as the standard of church discipline; but that this is changeable, and may be accommodated to the government under which we live. Therefore, instead of reducing the external policy of the church to the simplicity of scripture, the doctor took in the opinions and customs of the fathers, in the four first centuries, t

These points were disputed, as might be expected, with some degree of sharpness. While Mr. Cartwright thought he had reason to complain of the hardships which he and his brethren suffered ; Whitgift, having the government on his side, thought he stood on higher ground, and might assume a superior air. When Mr. Cartwright and his friends pleaded for indulgence, because they were brethren; Whitgift replied, " What signifies their being brethren: anabaptists, arians, and other heretics, would be accounted brethren. Their haughty spirits will not suffer them to see their error. They deserve as great punishment as the papists; because they conspire against the church. If they be shut up in Newgate, it is a meet reward for their disorderly doings; for ignorance may not excuse libels

* Bishop Maddox warmlv censures Mr. Cartwright for maintaining, that the supreme magistrate is only the head of the commonwealth, not of the church; and that the church may be established without him.— Vindication of the Church, p. 871.

t The words of Ballard, a popish priest, before Sir Francis Knollys, concerning Whitgift's writings, arc remarkable. " I would desire no ** better books,** said he,11 to prove my doctrine of popery, than Whitgift*! " against Cartwright, and his injunctions set forth in her majesty's name." —Strypc't IVhitgift, p. 265.

against a private man, much less when they slander the whole church."* How would the doctor ham liked this language in the mouth of a papist sixteen years before? It has too often been the method of warm disputants, when they could not untie the knots with their fingers, to cut them with the sword of the civil power.

In this controversy, the two parties complained of each other. Whitgift thus observes to Cartwright: " If you should have written against the veriest papist in the world, the vilest person, the ignorantist dolt, you could not have used a more spiteful and malicious, more slanderous and reproachful, more contemptuous and disdainful kind of writing, than you use throughout your whole book." On l he other hand, Cartwright says to Whitgift, " If peace had been so precious to you, as you pretend, you would not have brought so many hard words, bitter reproaches, enemy-like speeches, (as it were sticks and coals,) to double and treble the heat of contention." Mr. Strype, speaking of Cartwright's reply, says, " Great was the opinion, both of the man and of his book, at this time in London, as well as at Cambridge: many of the aldermen of London openly countenanced him. He was secretly harboured in the city, and had a great many admirers and visitors there, and wanted not for presents and gratuities."t Whether, therefore, Mr. Cartwright got the better of his adversary, or not, in sound learning and strength of argument, Whitgift assuredly got most by it: for he was soon after made Archbishop of Canterbury, while Cartwright was persecuted from place to place, as if he were not fit to live.

The chief of the puritans, being now deprived of the liberty of preaching and publishing, wished to obtain a public disputation with their adversaries. Though this privilege had been allowed the protestants in the days of Queen Mary, and the papists at the accession of Elizabeth, the queen and council took a shorter method, and summoned the disputants to appear before the ecclesiastical rulers, to answer such articles as should then be exhibited against them. Mr. Cartwright was summoned by a special order from the high commission, addressed, " To all mayors, sheriffs, bailiffs, constables, headboroughs, and to all the

• Whitgift acknowledged, that, by the word of God, the office of bishops and priests were the same; yet, io bis controversy with Cartwright, be made it heresy to believe and teach this doctrine.—Xmf» Puritans, •ol. i. p. 260.—Huntley t Prelate' Uturpations, p. 184.

t Biog. Brltan. vol. iii. p. 884. Edit. 1778. VoL. II. L

queen's majesty's officers, unto whom it may come or appertain." The order itself, dated London, December 11, 1573, was as follows:—" We do require you, and " therewith straitly command you, and every of you, " in the queen's majesty's name, that you be aiding and " assisting to the bearer and bearers hereof, with all the best " means you can devise, for the apprehension of one " Thomas Cartwright, student in divinity, wheresoever he " be, within the liberties or without, within this realm. " And you having possession of his body by your good " travail and diligence in this business, we do likewise " charge you, (for so is her majesty's pleasure,) that he be " brought up by you to London, with a sufficient number " for his safe appearance before us, and other her majesty's " commissioners in causes ecclesiastical, for his unlawful " dealings and demeanours in matters touching religion, and " the state of this realm. And fail you not so to do, every one " of you, with all diligence, as you will answer to the M contrary upon your utmost peril." This order was signed by the Bishop of London, and eleven others of the high commission.* increasing to so great a degree that his life was thought to be in danger, he wrote to the lords of the council, the Earl of Leicester, and the Lord Treasurer Burleigh, for permission to come home. These two noblemen made honourable men" tion of him in Parliament. They also interceded with the queen, but could not procure her favour and consent. Nevertheless, he ventured to return once more to his native country. But it was no sooner known that he was landed, than he was apprehended by Bishop Aylmer, and cast into prison.* When he appeared before Whitgift, now made Archbishop, he behaved with so much modesty and respect, as greatly softened the heart of his adversary; who, upon the promise of his quiet and peaceable behaviour, suffered him, after some time, to go at large. For this favour, both the Earl of Leicester and Mr. Cartwright thanked the archbishop ; but all the endeavours they used could not obtain him a license to preach.+ The earl did every thing for him in his power, and made him master of the hospital at Warwick; where, for some time, he preached without a license, being exempt from the jurisdiction of tbe prelates.f This noble earl, and his brother, the Earl of Warwick, were his constant friends and patrons as long as they livedo

Mr. Cartwright, however, wisely concealed himself, till he found an opportunity of leaving the kingdom. And God, who provides for the young ravens when they cry, provided for his persecuted servant in this gloomy season. For at this critical juncture, he was unexpectedly invited, together with Mr. Snape, to assist the ministers in the islands of Jersey and Guernsey, in framing the requisite discipline for their churches. This was a favourable dis

Eensation to Mr. Cartwright; who, being forced to abandon is native country, found there a refuge from the storm. These two islands were the only places within the British dominions, where the out-stretched arms of the high commissioners could not reach him. During Mr. Cartwright's abode here, besides attending to the special object of his mission, he laboured in his public ministry, particularly at Castle-Cornet in Guernsey. It appears that he afterwards went again to Antwerp, and a second time became preacher to the English merchants, t

Mr. Cartwright continued at Antwerp several years, but his health having greatly declined, the physicians recommended him, as the most likely means of Iiis restoration, to try his native air. His complaint at length

Mr. Cartwright was so celebrated, that King James of Scotland offered him a professorship in the university of St. Andrews; but he modestly declined it. Afterwards, Mr. Cartwright, in.the dedication of bis " Commentary on Ecclesiastcs" to that king, made thankful acknowledgment of the royal favour. The Archbishop of Dublin invited him into Ireland, offering him considerable preferment; and it is said he went into Ireland, but soon returned to England. || Indeed, such was his distinguished reputation, that the most celebrated divines, both at

• The bishop, to rait the reproach of this from himself, proceeded against Mr. Cartwright, not in ht* onn name, but in the name of the qoeeo | with which her majesty no sooner became acquainted, than ihe wai greatly incenied against him. Aylmer, pour mun I to make up the breach, wrote to the treasurer, entreating him to use his almost endeavours to appease Ihe queen's Indignation.—StryptU tVhtlglft, p. i'ib.—Strypt'i A)lm$r,p, I I7.

+ Strype's Annals, Voi. III. p. 340, iMI.-Btrype's YVhllgift, p.m. 22«.

t Clark's Lives, p. 19.

S The Karl of Warwick, who died of an amputation of his leg, was a person of great sweetness of temper, and of uneiceplionable character. He was affectionate to bis relations, kind to bis domestics, and gralrfal to his friends. He was called by the people, long before and after bis death. The Good Earl or Warwick.Bieg. Britm. vol. v. p. US, 444,. Mil. 1718.

| Kingdom's MS. roller. Pref. p, 33.

home and abroad, frequently sought his advice in the most weighty matters.*

In the year 1.583, Mr. Cartwright was earnestly pressed by many learned persons, to publish a refutation of the " Rhcmist Translation of the New Testament." That translation being looked upon by all true protestants, as a work of a very dangerous tendency, designed to promote the errors and superstitions of popery, most persons wished it to be answered by the ablest pen that could be found. And no man was thought so suitable to undertake the laborious work as Mr. Cartwright. Indeed, the queen applied to the learned Beza of Geneva, soliciting him to undertake the answer; but he modestly declined, saying, she had a person in her own kingdom fur better qualified to perform the work than himself; and declared that this was Mr. Thomas Cartwright.t Sir Francis Walsingham, who in this affair, as well as many others, was accounted the mouth and hand of the queen, wrote to Mr. Cartwright, earnestly entreating him to undertake the work, sending, at the same time, one hundred pounds towards the expense, with assurance of such further assistance as he might afterwards deem necessary. The ministers of London and Suffolk, in like manner, urged him to undertake it. He was also warmly solicited by some of the most learned and celebrated divines of Cambridge.* In their letter to him, they express themselves in the following manner:—" We " are earnest with you, most reverend Cartwright, that you " would set yourself against the unhallowed endeavours of " these mischievous men, cither by refuting the whole •"book, or some part thereof. It is not for every one " rashly to be thrust forth into the Lord's battles ; but such " captains as arc to be chosen from amongst David's " worthies, one of which, wc acknowledge you to be, by " the former battles undergone for the walls of our city, " the church. Wc doubt not, if you will enter this war, " but that you, fighting for your conscience and country, " will be able to tread under foot the forces of the Jebusites, ." which set themselves to assault the tower of David.—You •" sec to what an honourable fight we invite you. Christ's

• Clark's Lives, p. 19.

t During Mr. Cartwright's exile, travelling to Geneva, he became 'particularly intimate with Beza; who, at that time, writing to his friend in England, gave him the following character : " Here is now with us your " countryman, Thomas Cartwright, than whom, I think, the sun doth not. M see a more learned man.**—Ibid. p. 18,19.

t Fuller's Church Hist. b. ii. p. 111.—Strype's Whitgift.p. 253,254.

" business shall be undertaken against Satan's champions. " We stir you up to fight the battles of the Lord, where " the victory is certain, and which the triumph and applause " of angels will ensue. Our prayers shall never be wanting u to yon. Christ, without doubt, whose cause you defend.

" increase your courage and strength, and keep you very " long in safety for his church's good."* From all these solicitations, Mr. Cartwright was at length induced to undertake the laudable and arduous work; and having once entered upon it, he spared no pains to carry it on to perfection. But, marvellous as it will appear to all posterity, Archbishop Whitgift, by his own sovereign authority, lbrbade him to proceed.f Mr. Cartwright meekly obeyed the tyrannical prohibition. The book was left unfinished, to the unshakable regret of the learned world, but to the lasting reproach of f he archbishop, and was not published till the year 1618. Fuller says, Mr. Cartwright perfected the work to the seventeenth chapter of Revelation. But the excellent performance being laid aside many years, became in part mouse eaten; and was not published till the above year. Notwithstanding these defects, says he, it is so complete a refutation, that the Rhemists durst never answer it.f

Mr. Cartwright was severely persecuted on account of his nonconformity. Although his hospital at Warwick was exempt from the jurisdiction of the prelates, their outstretched and tyrannical power would not suffer him to enjoy peace. He was accused to Bishop Freke of Worcester, a zealous advocate for the church,and summoned to appear in the consistory at Worcester, to answer such charges as were alleged against him. Upon his appearance before his lordship and others, he was addressed as follows: —" Mr. Cartwright, you are here accused of disturbing the peace and quietness of the church, by innovations, and obtruding fancies and devices of your own or others. You have brought over with you the dregs of Geneva, whereby you would instil into the minds of the queen's subjects, that your doctrine is the only truth to be embraced and

* This letter was subscribed by Roger Goad, William Whitaker, Thomas Crook, John Ireton, William Fulke, John Field, Nicholas Crane, Giles Saintler, Richard Gardiner, William Charke, nnd others, celebrated for their learning and piety.—Clark's Lives, p. 20.—Letter prefixed to Cartwright'3 Refutation.

+ Strype's Whitcift, p.253,25». J Church Hist. b. ix. p. 171,172

^ Wood'h Athene Oxnn. vol. i. p> 732.

present with you.

much entertained. You had best take heed, that you run not upon the same rock, which the papists themselves split upon, and draw upon yourself the same penalty ordained for those who alienate the hearts of the subjects both from their prince and religion." To these accusations and foul aspersions, Mr. Cartwright, with becoming christian meekness, only said, " I have the word of God for my warrant, and the example of the reformed churches for my guide, in what I have done." Dr. Longworth, on this occasion, boldly challenged him to a public disputation, but Mr. Cartwright wisely declined. He was, therefore, dismissed without receiving any ecclesiastical censure.*

Mr. Cartwright was undoubtedly concerned for the reformation of the church ; and he laboured, in the most peaceable manner, to promote it to the utmost of his power. For the accomplishment of this great object, he joined with his brethren in their associations, and united with them in perfecting and subscribing the " Book of Discipline.d He was one of the heads in these assemblies, and was sometimes chosen moderator. Though, upon his release from prison, he could not obtain his liberty to preach, but still continued under suspension, he constantly attended to his ministerial exercise in his hospital, and preached occasionally at other places, particularly at Banbury. His endeavours to carry on the English reformation towards perfection, were considered as a violation of established customs, and disobedience to the ecclesiastical laws; therefore, in the year 1590, he was summoned to appear before the high commission. Previous to bis appearance before this terrible tribunal, he wrote the following excellent and generous letter, addressed " To the right worshipful Mr. Puckering, one of her majesty's Serjeants at law:"{

" Having received Mr. Puckcring's letter on Wednesday, I came no sooner with it: the cause hath been in part a strain of one of my legs, and in part the importunity of my friends, begging me to stay until I had gotten some ability of my leg, to travel with more commodity. And now that I am come to the town, I bring not the letter myself. The cause is, that being sent for by a pursuivant, I was loath to be attached before I had made my appearance without attachment, and that I might as it were be mine own

• Baker's MS. Collec. Voi. xxviii. p. 443, 444.

t Neal'i Purimoj, Voi. i. p. 423.

t Baker's MS. Collec. To1, Zt. p. 105,106.

pursuivant t and partly also because I was loath that your favour toward me should any way appear to any manner of hurt of yours, and no good of mine.

u And now, good sir, confessing myself greatly beholden unto you in my behalf and the behalf of my wife, my humble desire is, that I may yet further be beholden unto you in the behalf of the poor church at Warwick, that likely enough may be deprived of all manner of tolerable ministry, both for the good of your own family, which is great, and in regard of other poor souls there: that if the times will not bear us who are there now; yet there may be some such provided, as, differing in judgment from us, may notwithstanding, both in some good skill and care, proceed in the edification of the church, without bitterness of spirit against other poor men who are otherwise minded. This I am bolder to crave at your worship's hand, as I understand, and was glad of, that the town hath chosen you to the recordership, which may be a singular means of doing much good unto the town, and amongst others, that good which it pleased you to talk with me of. This I was bold to write in fear of being severed from doing any more service there, and yet not known to myself of any breach of law, whereby I may be touched. Only I fear to be committed for refusing the oath ex officio mero. Thus I humbly commend you to the gracious keeping and blessing of God in Jesus Christ. May 20, 1590. " Yours to command in the Lord,

" Thomas Cartwright."

Thus our divine prepared for the approaching storm. He was immediately convened before the high commission, and cast into prison; and, September 1st, in this year, thirty-one articles were exhibited against hiin, the substance of which is the following:

1. That Mr. Cartwright, being lawfully made deacon according to the church of England, hath forsaken and renounced the same.

2. That, to shew his contempt of this calling, he hath obtained a new ordination in foreign parts, not according to the laws ecclesiastical of this realm.

3. That, by virtue of this vocation, he hath established at Antwerp and Middleburg, a certain presbytery and eldership ecclesiastical.

4. That, by the said eldership, certain persons, being Englishmen, were ordained to be ministers, not according to the laws ecclesiastical of this realm.

5. That this eldership, so established, hath used ecclesiastical censures.

6'. That the said Thomas Cartwrigkt, in his public ministry there, hath not used the Book of Common Prayer, but conformed to some of the foreign churches.

7. That since his return from beyond seas, he hath promised, to the utmost of his power, to promote the peace of the church.

8. That be, having no ministry in this church, and without any license, hath taken upon him to preach at Warwick and other places.

9. That at sundry times, he hath shewed his dislike of the government of this church, and various parts of the liturgy; and hath persuaded others to do the same.

10. That he hath traduced and spoken against the bishops, and other governors of this church.

11. That he hath such hatred against them, he hath prayed publicly to this effect: " Because they who ought to be pillars in the church, do bend themselves against Christ, and his truth, O Lord, give us grace, and power, all as one man, to set ourselves against them."

12. That at sundry times and places he hath spoken against the laws, government, orders, prayers, and ceremonies of the church.

13. That preaching at the baptism of one of Job Throgmonton's children, he spoke much in justification of government by the eldership in every congregation.

14. That he could not endure those who defended the laws, government, and orders of the church.

15. That in his sermons at Warwick and elsewhere, he hath often delivered many frivolous and indiscreet positions.

16. That by his persuasions, sundry persons refused to give thanks after child-birth, according to the order prescribed.

17. That at sundry times, when he communicated at the Lord's supper, he sate, or stood upon his feet, and persuaded others to do the same.

18. That before the bishop he spoke in justification of these things; and declared the Book of Common Prayer was not established by law.

19. That in contempt of the ecclesiastical authority, he hath preached since he was under the sentence of suspension.

20. That his man-servant having a bastard child fathered upon him, he caused him to perform penance, taking upon him the authority of the ordinary.

21. That he and some others have kept divers public fasts, and have invited more to join them, without the authority of the queen.

22. Tbat since be came to Warwick, he hath caused much faction, by distinguishing the people into godly and profane.

23. That he doth know who were the writers, printers, or dispersers of the writings under the name of Martin MarPrelate.

21. That being asked his opinion of these books, he insinuated, that as the bishops would not amend by grave writings, it was meet they should be dealt with to their great shame and reproach.

25. That he penned or procured to be penned, all or some part of the book, entitled Disciplina Ecclesice sacra verbo Dei descripla ; and he recommended the same to the judgment and censure of others.

26. That the said Thomas Carlwright and sundry others have met in assemblies, termed synods, in London, Oxford, Cambridge, Warwickshire, Northamptonshire, &c. '

27. That at such synods, it hath been concluded, that all ministers should subscribe the said " Book of Discipline," and be governed by it.

28. That at such synods, a moderator was by him and them chosen, according to the order of the said book.

29. That at such assemblies, he did, with others, dispute upon certain articles, and set down their determinations.

30. That he, with others, in an assembly at Cambridge, did conclude upon certain decrees, which were afterwards considered and allowed at Warwick.

31. That all the proceedings of such meetings have been set down, from time to time, by the said Thomas Cartwright and others.*

These articles are presented to the reader as a curious specimen of the charges alleged against the puritans, that he may judge of their evil nature and dangerous tendency. We may suppose this long list of crimes contains all the evil things that even his enemies could bring against him. They were exhibited against Mr. Cartwright by Bishop Aylmer and other commissioners, who required him to take the oath ex officio. He, indeed, offered to clear himself of

• Fuller's Church Hill. b. ix. p. 198—202.

some of the charges upon his oath; but because he thought it wrong to accuse himself, or to bring his friends into trouble, he refused to answer the rest: and if this would not give satisfaction to his spiritual judges, he was resolved to submit to whatever punishment they might be disposed to inflict upon him. He was, accordingly, sent to the Fleet; but by the advice of the treasurer, the archbishop, his old adversary, was not present at his commitment. During the following month, Mr. Cartwright appeared twice before the high commission; when the above oath was again required of him, but he still refused to take it, because, in his opinion, it was contrary both to the laws of God and the realm. Yet, he was still willing to answer part of the charges upon his oath, and would give them reasons for

was sent back to prison, where he continued a long time. Mr. Cartwright was not alone in these sufferings. 1 he rest of his brethren were at the same time called before the same tribunal; and refusing the oath, for the same reasons, were committed to various prisons, where they remained several years.

May 13, 1591, Mr. Cartwright and his brethren were brought before the star-chamber, where they were treated with much abuse, for refusing the above oath. And when Counsellor Fuller stood up to plead in behalf of the prisoners, he was commanded to be silent; and told, that far less crimes than theirs had been punished with the gallies or perpetual banishment, the latter of which, the attorneygeneral thought proper for them, provided it was to some remote place from whence they might not return.t From the star-chamber, they were sent back to the high commission, where Bancroft and others had a long and warm dispute with Mr. Cartwright about the oath.f Bishop Aylmer, on this occasion, threw out several reproaches against Mr. Cartwright, still requiring him to take the oath.% The attorney-general did the same; and declared how dangerous a thing it was, that men, upon the conceit of

• Strype's Whilgift, p. 337, 338. + Ibid, p, 360,381.

% Ibid. p. 362—366.—Slrype's Aylmer, p. 310—319.

^ One of the reproaches which Aylmer cast upon Cartwright, was, that be had deceived the privy council, by informing them that he was afflicted with the gout and sciatica, when that was not the case. Cartwright, however, proved by a written testimonial from his physician, that this accusation was false: but the Archbishop of Canterbury afterwards took this testimonial from Mrs. Cartwright, and refused to restore il again.—Biog. Britan. vol. iii. p. 286. Edit. 1778.

refusing the rest.* But his judges

inflexible, he their own heads, but under pretence of conscience, should refuse to receive those things which had been so long a time established by law. Mr. Cartwright then assigned various reasons for his refusal, desiring permission to vindicate himself against the reflections of the bishop and the attorney. And though be reminded the bishop, that he had promised him the liberty of answering for himself, his lordship refused, saying, " that he had no leisure to hear his answer."* This oppressive prelate had found time to accuse and reproach Mr. Cartwright, but, contrary to his own promise, could find no time to near his vindication!

From the high commission, Mr. Cartwright and his friends were again sent to the star-chamber, when a bill was exhibited against them, containing thirty-four articles, chiefly relating to their associations and discipline, and, in substance, the same as those already mentioned.t They underwent many examinations. On one occasion, the following articles of inquiry were administered :f " Where are the assemblies held ?—When, and how often ?—Who attended the said assemblies ?—What matters were treated of in them ?—Who made, set forth, or corrected the Book of Discipline ?—Who subscribed, or submitted to the said book ?—Is the king to be accounted among the governors ofthe church, or among those which are to be governed by pastors, doctors, or such like ?—Is it lawful for the sovereign prince to appoint orders and ceremonies to the church ?— Is the ecclesiastical government established by her majesty's authority within the church of England, lawful and allowed by the word of God ?—Are the sacraments, as ministered according to the Book of Common Prayer, godly and rightly ministered ?" On another occasion, eighteen articles of inquiry were administered, relating to Messrs, Thomas Cartwright, Humphrey Fenn, Edward Lord, Edmund Snape, Andrew King, Daniel Wight, William Proudlove, Melancthon Jewel, and John Payne; when their brethren, Messrs. Henry Alvy, Thomas Edmunds, William Perkins, Edmund Littleton, John Johnson, Thomas Barber, Hercules Cleavely, Anthony Nutter, and Thomas Stone, considered it their duty to take the oath, by which they discovered many things relative to their associations.^

• Strype't Aylmer, p. 319.

t Baker's MS. Collec. vol. xt. p. 67—69,

1 Slrype's A) hner, p. 321,322.

( Strype's Whltf ift, Appeo. p. 157—164.

The above prisoners, in answer to the charges brought against them, maintained, " That their associations were very useful, and not forbidden by any law of the realm:— That they exercised no jurisdiction, nor moved any sedition, nor transacted any affairs, inconsistent with their duty to their prince, and the peace of the church:—That they had agreed upon some regulations to render their ministry more profitable, but ull was voluntary, and in breach of no law:— And as to the oath, they refused it, not in contempt of the court, but as contrary to the laws of God and nature."* But their answers proving unsatisfactory, they were sent back to prison, where they continued two years without any further process, or being admitted to bail.

During their confinement in prison, King James of Scotland, afterwards the inveterate enemy to the puritans, in a letter to Queen Elizabeth, dated June 12, 1591, warmly interceded for them. In this letter, the king most.earnestly requested her majesty to shew favour to Mr. Cartwright ana his brethren, on account of their great learning and faithful travels in the gospel.t Mr. Cartwright himself, being exceedingly afflicted with the gout and sciatica, which were much increased by lying in a cold prison, petitioned for his. liberty. He wrote a most humble and pious letter to Lady Russel, and another to Treasurer Burleigh, beseeching them to intercede with the queen for his enlargement, though it were upon bond. He expressed, on this occasion, his very great concern, that her majesty should be so highly offended at him, seeing he had printed no books for the last thirteen years, that could give the least uneasiness; and having already declared his dislike of Martin Mar-Prelate, and that he never had a hand in any of the books under his name, nor in any other satirical pamphlets; and that in the course of his ministry at Warwick, during the last five years, he had avoided all controversy.t Dr. Goad, Dr. Whitaker, and other celebrated persons, wrote an excellent letter to the treasurer, in favour of the prisoners, earnestly beseeching that they might not be more hardly dealt with than papists.^ After waiting six months longer, they presented a petition to the lords of the council, dated December

1591, to be enlarged upon bail. They wrote, at the same time, to the treasurer, with their request that he would

• Baker's MS. Collcc. vol. xv. p. 142—152.
t Fuller'. Church Mil. b. ix. p. 203,204.
X Strype't Antral', vol. iv. p. 48—53.
S Slrype'i Whitgift, Appcu. p. 155, 156,

forward it, assuring him of their loyalty to the queen, and their peaceable behaviour in the church. " We doubt not," " say they, " but your lordship is sensible, that a year's " imprisonment and more, must strike deeper into our " healths, considering our manner of life, than a number of " years to men of a different occupation. Your lordship k4 knows, that many papists, who deny the queen's supre" macy, have been enlarged; whereas we have all sworn to ** it; and if the government so require, are ready to take "the oath again.' This petition was subscribed by the following ministers, all prisoners for the truth of Christ:

Thomas Cartwright, Edward Lord,
Humphrey Fenn, Edmund Snape,

Andrew King, William Proudlove,

Daniel Wight, Melanchton Jewel.*

John Payne,

The prisoners also applied to the archbishop, who refused to consent to their enlargement, unless they would, under their own hands, declare the church of England to be a true church; that the whole order of public prayers and ceremonies might be lawfully observed ; and renounce in future all their assemblies, classis, and synods, as unlawful and seditious; which they utterly declined.t These applications proving ineffectual, they resolved at length to address the queen herself; for which purpose they drew up a declaration, dated April, 1592, containing an impartial statement of their case, and a full answer to the several charges brought against them.J: Notwithstanding all these endeavours, Mr. Cartwright did not obtain his release for some time. But at length, by the favour of the archbishop, who it was said, " feared the success of so tough a conflict;"^ he was released upon promise of his quiet and peaceable behaviour, and restored to his hospital at Warwick, where he made his promise good,|| and continued without further molestation the rest of his days. His fellow-prisoners were released most probably about the same time; but of this we have obtained no certain information. It is, indeed, observed of Mr. Cartwright and his brethren," That it pleased God so to order it, that those very witnesses who were brought to accuse them, did so clear them, that they were

* Strype's Annuli, vol. I v. p. I2, 19.

t Strype's Whltilft, p. 3101 Appen. p. 133— IM.

i Strype's Annalu, vol. Ir. p. 83—91.

t Fuller'! Church Hlit. b. is. p. 204.

U Pnule's Whltgift, p. 19..

dismissed and sent home, much more honoured and beloved than before."*

The pardon and release of Mr. Cartwright and hi» brethren was procured of the queen, as Sir George Paulc asserts, by the intercession of Archbishop Whit gift. He also observes, that when Mr. Cartwright was freed from his troubles, be often repaired to the archbishop, who used him kindly, and for several years tolerated his preaching at Warwick, upon his promise not to impugn the laws, orders, and government of the church of England, but promote, both publicly and privately, the estimation and peace of the same. With these terms, it is said, he complied. Notwithstanding, when the queen understood that he preached again, though in a temperate manner, according to his promise, she would not permit him any longer without subscription; and she was not a little displeased with the archbishop for his p;ist connivance.t

Though Mr, Cartwright never groaned any more under the iron rod of persecution, his character was afterwards slanderously aspersed. Many writers of the episcopal party, have reproached him as being concerned with Hacket, Coppingcr, and Arthington, in their mad conspiracy and other singularities. This reproach was, however, made abundantly manifest, to the great honour of Mr. Cartwright and his brethren, and the shame of their enemies. He published an " Apology" of himself, against the slanders of Dr. Sutcliff; and, says my author, " I have Mr. Cartwright's own answer to Dr. Sutcliff, in manuscript, which doth so fully confute the shameful story of his confederacy with these men, as will shame the slanderer to any impartial reader.''f Fuller himself acquits Mr. Cartwright and his brethren in these words: " True it is," says he, " they as cordially detested Hacket's blasphemies, as any of the episcopal party; and such of them as loved Hacket the nonconformist, abhorred Hacket the heretic, after he had mounted to so high a pitch of impiety."\

Mr. Cartwright, in his old age, was much afflicted with the stone and gout, by lying in cold prisons; yet he did not relinquish his public labours; but continued to preach when, with the utmost difficulty, he could scarcely creep into the pulpit. The Lord's day before his death, he preached hi* last sermon, from Eccl. xii. 7.—Then shall the dust return to the earth, and the spirit shall return to God who gave it.

• Clark's Iirei, p. 18. t Paule'» Whitgift, p. 70—78.

The Tuesday morning following, after spending two hours upon his knees in private prayer, he signified to Mrs. Cartwright that he had found unutterable joy and comfort, and that God had given him a glimpse of heaven before his departure ; and in a few hours he departed in peace, enjoying the salvation of Jesus Christ. He died December 27,1603, aged sixty-eight years.* His mortal remains were interred in his own hospital at Warwick, when Mr. John Dod preached his funeral sermon. He married the sister of the famous Mr. John Stubbs, whom he left to bemoan her painful loss.

During the whole of his life, Mr. Cartwright was indefatigably laborious. He was a constant preacher when he enjoyed his liberty. During his abode at Warwick, besides taking the most exact care of the hospital, he often preached at both the churches on the Lord's day, and at one of them on the Saturday. This he did without receiving any reward for his services. It docs not, therefore, appear very probable, that before his death he was grown rich, as some of our historians insinuate;+ especially as the income of his hospital was only about one hundred pounds a-year. Indeed, he was not concerned to be rich in this world. For when he was preacher to the merchants at Antwerp, and found by their losses that their estates were decreased, he returned them the salary which they allowed him. And when he was a prisoner in the Fleet, a present of thirty pounds was sent him by one of the nobility, but he took only ten shillings, returning the rest to the donor, with many thankful acknowledgments. Also, when the Earl of Leicester offered him the provostship of Eton college, saying, it was one hundred pounds more than enough, besides the conveniency of the place; Mr. Cartwright replied, " that the hundred pounds more than enough wasenoughfor him."t

Few persons whose names are handed down to posterity have been treated by party historians with greater misrepresentation and abuse. Some of them have ventured to intimate, that before his death he changed his sentiments'about nonconformity; for which, however, there is no certain evidence ; at least, they have produced none. Dugdale calls him the standard-bearer of the puritans, and says, he was the first in the church of England, who began to pray extempore before sermon. Mr. Strype very unjustly denominates

* Clark'i Lives, p. 81.

t Fuller's Church Hist. b. x. p. 8.—Churton's Life of Novell, p. 816. t Clark's Lives, p. 18—81.

him, " the first broacher of puritianism."* Mr. Clark, who treats his memory with great impartiality, says, " he was a hard student, continuing bis assiduity and close application to the end of his days. Although, on account ot excessive pains and bodily infirmities, he was obliged, towards the close of life, to study continually upon his knees, he rose as usual, at three o'clock in the morning; which practice he continued to the last. His humility and meekness were not the least conspicuous features in his character. He was far from courting the applause of men; nor could he endure to hear himself commended, or to hear any titles ascribed to himself, which at all savoured of ambition. Though he was uncommonly popular, he did not seek popularity, but laboured to avoid it as much as possible. With these thoughts of himself, it is added, he could not endure to hear even his adversaries reproached; and if any persons spoke disgracefully of them in his presence, he would sharply reprove them, saying, «It is a christian's duty to pray for his enemies, and not to reproach them.'"t With what degree of truth then does a late writer assert, " that he was highly conceited of his own talents and learning ?"} Indeed, his highest ambition was to debase himself, and to advance the glory and kingdom of Jesus Christ. He was an acute disputant, an admired preacher, and eminently liberal, especially to poor scholars; and, says Fuller, " he was most pious and strict in his conversation, a pure Latinist, an accurate Grecian, an exact Hebrean, and, in short, a most excellent scholar.

Notwithstanding all these excellent qualifications, his piety, his learning, and his good sense are most warmly censured by a modern writer. He charges Mr. Cartwright, in his correspondence with Sir Michael Hickes, with saying, " that prayer was as it were a bunch of keys, whereby we go to all the treasures and storehouses of the Lord; his butteries, his pantries, his cellars, his wardrobe." Mr. Cartwright might use these words in a familiar correspondence; and what does it prove ? This, it is readily admitted, was too much the taste of those times: but our author makes almost every thing that is bad of these few words. For he immediately breaks forth into a strain of most triumphant

• Strype's Whitgift, p. 554.—Fuller's Church Hist. b. X. p. S.—Dugdale's , Antiq. of Warwickshire, vol. i. p. 443. Edit. 1730.—Strype's Parker, Pref. p. 5.

+ Clark's Lives, p. IS—21. J Churton's Life of NoweH^p. 193. I Church Hist. b. x. p. 3.

interrogation, saying, " Does fanaticism extinguish all taste and judgment ? or is it only in minds originally weak, that the infection can fix itself? Which ever way the reader may solve the problem, he will naturally ask, Was this the man that was to improve what had been done by Cranmer and Jtidlcy, by Parker and Nowell, and their coadjutors ? to give us a form of worship more pure and edifying, more dignified and devout ?" But this eloquent calumniator does not stop here. He felt the poetic flame arise; and therefore immediately asks,*

" Is this the region, this the soil, this the clime,

That wc must change Tor heaven ? this mournful gloom

For that celestial light V

Wc do confess, that so much bombast, scurrility, and bare-faced misrepresentation were scarcely ever found within so small a compass. The reader will at the same time easilyperccive, that the whole is designed to extol the church of England, if not above perfection, at least beyond the possibility of amendment; and to blacken the character and disgrace the memory of that man, who was justly esteemed one of the most celebrated divines of the age in which he lived. But whether the treatment which Mr. Cartwright received, was not extremely unjust and cruel; and whether it does not stand as a monument of lasting reproach to those prelates who took an active part in promoting it, is left with every impartial reader to judge. Dr. Thomas Cartwright, bishop of Chester in the reign of James II., and who went the most infamous lengths in support of that monarch's measures, is thought, with some appearance of probability, to have been the grandson of our famous puritan, t

His Works, in addition to those whose titles have been already given.—1. A Brief Apology against all such Slanderous Accusations as it plcaseth Mr. Sutclilf, in his pamphlets, most injuriously to load him with, 159f5.—2. A Body of Divinity, 1616.—3. A Confutation of the Bbcmists Translation, Glosses, and Annotations on the New Testament, 1618.—1. Coiiimcntaria practica in totam Historian! F.vangelicum, ex quatour Evangelistis hamionicc concinnatam, 1630. (An elegant edition of this work was printed at Amsterdam, in 1647, entitled, " Harmonia Evangclica, Commcntario, analytico, metaphrastico, practico, illustrata, &c.")£—5. Conuncntarii succinct! & ■lilucidi in Provcrbia Solomonis, 1038.—6. Metapbrasis & Homiliae in librum Solomonis qui inscribitur Bcclcsiastcs, 1647.—7. Glosses and Annotations.

• Churton's Life of Nowell, p. 895.

t Biog. Britan. vol. iii. p. 887. Edit. 1778. t Ibid. p. M6.