was a great annoyance to the living, when there was fo much of the fteam of dead bodies rising about them; he was likewife much offended at the rudenefs, which the crouding the dead bodies in a small parcel of ground occafioned; for the bodies already laid there, and not yet quite rotten, were often raifed and mangled; fo that he nade a canon in his fynod against burying in churches: And as he often wished that burying places were removed out of all towns, fo he chofe the most remote and leaft frequented place of the church-yard of Kilmore for his wife, and by his will he ordered that he fhould be laid next her with this bare inscription,

Depofitum Gulielmi quondam Epifcopi Kilmorenfis.

Depofitum cannot bear an English translation, it fignifying fomewhat given to another in truft, fo he confidered his burial as a truft left in the earth till the time that it fhall be called on to give up its dead.

This account is chiefly taken from bifhop Burnet, who affures us that thofe who knew Bifhop Bedell well, believed, that his real character exceeded these memorials, communicated by his zealous and worthy friend, and that his memory will outlive all the perifhing trophies in brafs or marble. Annexed to the above volume, are feveral letters written by our Bifhop and bishop Hall to and concerning Mr. Wadsworth, who had been perverted to popery: They are very excellent in their kind, and contain a folid and mafterly refutation of the errors in the Romish communion.

JOHN DAVENANT, D. D.

BISHOP OF SALISBURY.

HIS very learned Prelate, was the son of an eminent

Tmerchant, and born in Watling-street, London, about

the year 1570, but originally defcended from the antient family of the Davenants of Sible-Heningham in Effex, and of Davenants-lands in that parish; where his father was born, and his ancestors (fays Mr. Fuller) continued in aworthipful degree from Sir John Davenant, who lived

What fchool he was edu-
But he was admitted of

in the time of K. Henry III. cated in, we cannot find. Queen's-college in Cambridge in 1587, where he took his degrees in arts regularly; after having given in his juvenile exercises fuch an earneft of his future maturity, that Dr. Whitaker, hearing him difpute, faid, That he would in time prove the honor of the univerfity;' a prediction (as Fuller obferves) that proved not untrue.

A fellowship was offered him about 1594, but his father would not fuffer him to accept it, on account of his plentiful fortune; however, after his father's decease, he accepted of one, and was admitted into it in September 1597. Being thus fettled in the college, he diftinguished himself, (as he had already done before) by his learning and other excellent qualifications; and in the year 1601 took his degree of bachelor of divinity. In 1609 he proceeded doctor; and the fame year was elected lady Margaret's profeffor of divinity.

In the year 1614 he was chofen master of his college; and became fo confiderable, that he was one of those eminent English divines, fent by K. James I. to the synod of Dort in the year 1618*. He returned to England in May 1619, after having visited the most eminent cities and other remarkable places in the Low-countries. Upon the death of his brother-in-law Dr. Robert Townson, he was advanced to the fee of Salisbury, and continued in favor during the remainder of K. James's reign; but in Lent 1630-1, he incurred the court's difpleasure, for meddling (in a formon preached before the king at Whitehall) with the predeftinarian controverfy; all ⚫ curious search into which' his majefty K. Charles had

* The others were, George Carleton, D. D. then bishop of Landaff, and afterwards bishop of Chicbefter; Jofeph Hall, D. D. then dean of Worcester, and afterwards bishop of Exeter and Norwich; and Samuel Ward, D. D. master of Sidney-college, Cambridge, and archdeacon of Taunton. [But the air not agreeing with Dr. Hall, he obtained leave to return to England about Christmas, and Thomas Goade, D.D. was fent in his room.] They embarked October the seventeenth, landed at Middleburgh the twentieth; came to the Hague the twenty-feventh of the fame month; and thence removed to Dort where the fynod was opened November the third, O. S. and ended April the twenty-ninth. They came back to England May the feventh. During their stay in Holland, these four divines had ten pounds a day allowed them by the ftates; and a prefent of two hundred pounds, at their departure, for their charges; befides a golden medal, to each of them, on which was represented the fynod fitting.

ftrictly enjoined, in his declaration prefixed to the thirtynine articles in 1628, to be laid afide.'

As foon as his fermon was ended, it was fignified to him, That his majefty was difpleafed, he had ftirred this question which his majefty had forbidden to be meddled withall, one way or the other: The Bishop's answer was, That he had delivered nothing, but the received doctrine of our church established in her feventeenth article, and that he was ready to juftify the truth of what he had then taught. He was told, The doctrine was not gainfaid, but his majefty had given command, thefe queftions fhould not be debated, and therefore he took it more offenfively that any fhould be fo bold, as in his own hearing to break his royal commands. To which he replied, That he never understood his majefty had forbid the handling of any doctrine comprifed in the articles of our church, but only raifing of new questions, or adding of new fenfe thereunto, which he had not done, nor ever fhould do.

Two days after, when he appeared before the privy council, Dr. Samuel Harfnet, archbishop of York, made a fpeech near half an hour long, aggravating the boldnefs of bifhop Davenant's offence, and fhewing many inconveniencies that it was likely to draw after it. When the archbishop had finished his fpeech, the Bishop defired, That fince he was called thither as an offender, he might not be put to answer a long fpeech upon the fudden, but that his grace would be pleafed to charge him point by point, and fo to receive his anfwer; for he did not yet underftand wherein he had broken any commandment of his majefty's, which was taken for granted.

After fome paufe, the archbishop told him, He knew well enough the point which was urged against him, namely the breach of the king's declaration. Then he ftood upon this defence, That the doctrine of predeftination, which he taught, was not forbidden by the declaration: Firft, Because in the declaration all the articles are established, amongst which the article of predeftination is one. Secondly, Because all minifters are urged to fubfcribe unto the truth of the article, and all fubjects to continue in the profeffion of that as well as of the rest. Upon these and fuch like grounds, he gathered, it could not be esteemed amongft forbidden, curious, or needless doctrines; and here he defired that out of any clause in the declaration it might be fhewed him, that keeping himself within the bounds of the article, he had tranf

greffed