Brooks - BX9338 .B7 1813 v3

452 LIVES OF THE PURITANS. educated at Westminster school, then in Trinity college, Cambridge ; where he took his degrees, was chosen Greek lecturer, and fellow of the college. In the year .1627 he became vicar of Ware, in his native county, and afterwards minister at Marston-Lawrence in Northamptonshire.* At each of these places his labours were made a blessing to many souls ; " for the hand of the Lord was with him, and a great numberbelieved and turned unto theLord." Upon the publication of the Book of Sports, under the direction of Laud, Mr. Chauncey, was prohibited preaching on the. Lord's day afternoon, that the people might have the better opportunity for *their profane sports. He then catechized all, both old and young, who would come to him. 44 This," said the bishop, "seas as bad as preaching !!"+ Most of the puritan divines were now treated with the utmost cruelty. Bishop Laud was determined to bring them to an exact conformity, or stop their mouths, or cast them into prison, or drive them out of the land. Mr. Chauncey did not escape the vengeance of this tyrannical prelate. In January, 1629, he was questioned in the high commission court for having used the following expressions in his sermon :-" That idolatry was admitted into the church ; that not only the prophets of Baal, but Baal himself, was received, and houses multiplied for their en- tertainment; and that the preachingof the gospel would be suppressed. That there wanted men of courage to remind their superiors of their neglect, and that there was agreat increase of atheism, heresy, popery, and arminianismt in the church." To the charges founded upon these ex- pressions, Mr. Chauncey gave his answer upon oath in the high commission, in the month of April following. The next day, the cause, by order of the court, was referred to the decision of Bishop Laud. This was on condition, that, if Mr. Chauncey did net submit to observe what the bishop should appoint, his lordship might, if he pleased, refer him back to be censured in the high commission. But he is said to have made his submission to the bishop.t This, however, was not the end of his troubles. For in 1635 he was again prosecuted in the high commission for opp9sing the railing in of the communion table at Ware ; when he was suspended, cast into prison, condemned in costs, And obliged to make the following, degrading recantation: Neweourt's Repert. Encl.vol. i. p. 904.-Prynne'sCant. Doome, p, t Mather's Hist. of New Eng. b. iii. p. 134, 135. Prynne's Cant. Dome, p. 362.-Rushworth's Collee. vol. H. p. 34.

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=