arts. His application during this period was excessive: he allowed himself for several years not more than four hours' sleep in a night, and is said to have declared in later life, that he would gladly part with all the learning acquired by sitting up late at study, could he but recover the health he had lost by it. He studied mathematics and philosophy under Thomas Barlow, then fellow of the college, of which he was afterwards chosen provost when his pupil was vice-chancellor of the University, and subsequently Bishop of Lincoln. Owen is said to have studied music also, for recreation, under Dr. Thomas Wilson, a celebrated performer on the flute, who was for some years in constant attendance upon Charles I., and afterwards made by Owen professor of music in Oxford. In 1637, Laud, as Chancellor of Oxford, had caused a new code of statutes to be drawn up for the University, in which obedience to some superstitious rites was required of all the members on pain of expulsion. Owen was among the number of those who refused to submit; but the resolution appears to have cost him a very severe struggle. About the same period, also, his mind underwent a decided change of feeling and sentiment with regard to religion itself. He became the subject of deep and agitating convictions of a spiritual nature, which, combining with the perplexity of his situation, plunged him into a state of profound melancholy. The distress of mind which he suffered for three months, is stated to have been visible in his deportment: he avoided all social intercourse, and could scarcely be induced to speak. In the absence, however, of any precise account of the immediate cause of this distress, and even of its nature, from Owen himself, there does not seem to us to be sufficient ground to resolve it altogether into mental suffering: it probably partook of the character of bodily disease. The permanent impression which it left on bis spirit, would not on that account be the less salutary. His quitting the University, the only alternative left him on refusing to submit to the impositions of Laud, has drawn down upon him from Anthony Wood the ridiculous charge of perjury. On leaving Oxford, having previously received orders from Bishop Bancroft, he resided for some time in the family of Sir Robert Dormer, of Ascot, as domestic chaplain and tutor to his son. He afterwards became chaplain to Lord Lovelace, of Hurby, in Berkshire; but on the breaking out of the civil war, his patron joined the King's army, while Owen embraced the cause of the Parliament. This step cost him the favour of his uncle, a man of considerable landed property in Wales, who had intended to make him his heir; but it was not the first sacrifice he had made to his principles: in embracing them, he had counted the cost. He now came up to London, and took lodgings in Charterhouse yard, where he employed himself in composing

his "Display of Arminianism," which appeared in 1642, dedicated to the Committee of Religion. In consequence of this his first publication, he was presented to the living of Fordham in Essex, vacant in consequence of the suspension of the incumbent, by the Committee for purging the church of scandalous ministers. This presentation, however, remained in force only during the life of the sequestered incumbent: at his death, the living reverted to the patron, and Owen was superseded. He was immediately presented by the good Earl of Warwick' with the neighbouring living of Coggeshall, at the request of the congregation.

For some time after he came up to London, Owen continued to suffer much from religious dejection and perplexity. Nearly five years elapsed, from the time in which he first became the subject of this painful conflict of feeling, before he recovered his peace of mind. It is more than probable that his unhappiness arose from imperfect views of the doctrines of the Gospel; from some misunderstanding, perhaps, as Mr. Orme suggests, of the subjects which the Arminian controversy embraces; and this might lead him to the train of investigation contained in his first work. He is said to have been indebted for the solution of his difficulties and the removal of his dejection, to a sermon from those words: "Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith?" preached at St. Michael's, Wood-street, by a minister from the country, whose name he could never learn.

On his obtaining the living of Fordham, Owen immediately entered on the diligent discharge of his parochial duties. He found the parish itself and the surrounding country in a very deplorable state, and, among other means of remedying the effects of his predecessor's neglect, he resolved to adopt the method of catechising from house to house. In prosecution of this plan, be published, in 1645, "The Principles of the Doctrine of "Christ unfolded in two short Catechisms; wherein those prin"ciples of religion are explained, the knowledge whereof is re"quired by the late ordinance of Parliament before any be ad"mitted to the Lord's Supper." (12mo. pp. 60.) He had previously published a tract in quarto, entitled, "The Duty of "Pastors and People distinguished," in which it was his object to steer a middle course between those who ascribed too much power to ministers and those who gave too much to 'the people. The moderation of his principles relative to church government, and his tolerant spirit, are strikingly evinced in this production. He avows himself a Presbyterian in opposition to Prelacy on the one hand, and what is commonly 'called the Independent' scheme on the other. But his Presbyterianism was not that of the times; and when, after he had been led to embrace Independency, he took a review of what he had

asserted in this tract, he says that he found his principles, as stated there, were more suited to what is the judgement and practice of the Congregational men, than those of the Presbyterian.' In proof of this, it needs only be mentioned, that he shews from Acts viii. 1-4. that all the faithful members of the church, being thus dispersed, went every where preaching the word, having no warrant but the general engagement of all Christians to further the propagation of Christ's kingdom.' On the 29th of April, 1646, being the day of the monthly fast, Owen was for the first time appointed to preach before the Parliament. His sermon, which was published by command of the House, is chiefly remarkable as containing an earnest expostulation relative to the destitute state of Wales and some other parts of the country in respect of the means of grace. He annexed to it a "Country Essay for the practice of Church Government;" drawn up, as it should seem, as an apology for his refusing to subscribe certain petitions to Parliament from the ministers of the county of Essex, respecting church-government, by which he had given great offence. In this Essay he explicitly declares, that he knew no church-government in the world, already established, of the truth and necessity of which he was in all particulars convinced;' he exposes the folly of contention about conformity, and protests against bestowing on any persons odious appellations on account of their religious sentiments; he complains that their little differences' were to be met with at every stall and in too many pulpits, swelled by 'unbefitting expressions to a formidable bulk ;" and he contends for an extensive toleration. On this last point, he has the following expressions:

Toleration is the alms of authority, yet men who beg for it think so much at least their due. I never knew one contend earnestly for a toleration of dissenters, who was not one himself; nor any for their suppression, who were not themselves of the persuasion which prevaileth.'.......... I know the usual pretences for persecution,— "Such a thing is blasphemy:" but search the Scriptures, look at the definitions of divines, and you will find heresy, in what head soever of religion it be, and blasphemy very different. "To spread such errors will be destructive to souls." So are many things which yet are not punishable with death; let him that thinks so, go kill Pagans and Mahometans. "Such a heresy is a canker." But it is a spiritual one; let it be prevented by spiritual means: cutting off men's heads is no proper remedy for it. If state physicians think otherwise, I say no more, but that I am not of the college.'

Speaking of the iniquity of putting men to death for heresy, he declares that he had almost said, it would be for the interest of morality to consent generally to the persecution of a man 'maintaining such a destructive opinion.' Let it be remem

bered to Owen's honour, that at the time of his avowing sentiments so directly opposed to the intolerant spirit of Presbyterianism, he was not a Dissenter, but was in close connexion both with the prevailing persuasion' and the ruling Powers in the State. The same praise is due to Milton and Vane, with this difference only in enhancement of Owen's singular merit, that he was a minister, while the Latin secretary and his illustrious friend ranked among the laity.

At the time that Owen was engaged in the prosecution of those investigations which led to his change of sentiment on the subject of church-government, he was unacquainted, as he states, with any individual, whether minister or layman, of the Congregational way' all his connexions lay among the Presbyterian party. After perusing several works on either side, he set himself to examine and confute, for his own satisfaction, Cotton's book, " Of the Keys."

In the pursuit and management of this work, quite beside and contrary to my expectation, at a time wherein I could expect nothing on that account but ruin in this world, without the knowledge or advice of, or conference with any one person of that judgement, I was prevailed on to receive those principles to which I had thought to set myself in opposition. And indeed this way of impartially examining all things by the word, comparing causes with causes, and things with things, laying aside all prejudiced respects to persons or present traditions, is a course that I would admonish all to beware of, who would avoid the danger of being made Independents.'

The consequence of his change of sentiment was, his forming a church at Coggeshall on congregational principles, which has been kept up to the present time. The little treatise entitled, "Eshcol: or Rules of Direction for the walking of the Saints "in fellowship," was drawn up soon after its formation. During the siege of Colchester, General Lord Fairfax had his head-quarters at Coggeshall, which led to an acquaintance with Owen, who was accordingly appointed to preach to the army at Colchester on a day of thanksgiving, and again at Rumford, to the Parliament's Committee; both which sermons he afterwards published. They contain a strong remonstrance against human interference with religion. In one of them occurs a passage which has been made the ground of an idle charge, brought against him by L'Estrange and the Commentator on Hudibras, of believing that success is an evidence of the goodness of a cause. Mr. Orme produces Owen's own reply to the calumny. On the 31st of January, 1649, Owen was again fixed upon to preach before Parliament; the most trying occasion,' as his Biographer remarks, on which he ever appeared before that assembly:' it was the day after the decapitation of the King. On the subject of that transaction, he observed a profound and

6

studied silence. The author of the memoir prefixed to the folio edition of his Sermons and Tracts, states, that his discourse was so modest and inoffensive, that his friends could make no 'just exception, nor his enemies take advantage of his words another day.' The two detached passages by which Anthony Wood, and, after him, Grey, attempt to justify their base assertion, that Owen applauded the regicides,' and declared the death of that most admirable King to be just and righteous,' are the following:

6

"As the flaming sword turns every way, so God can turn it into every thing. To those that cry, Give me a king, God can give him in his anger, and from those that cry, Take him away, He can take him away in his wrath."- "When kings turn seducers, they seldom want good store of followers. Now if the blind lead the blind, they shall both fall into the ditch. When kings command unrighteous things, and the people suit them with willing compliance, none doubts but the destruction of them both is just and righteous.'

With regard to the former of these passages, the only fair construction that can be put upon the Preacher's language, is, that the death of the King might possibly have been permitted by Divine Providence in anger rather than in mercy, as God gave the Israelites a King in his wrath. It seems to speak his fears as to the result of that transaction; and, when compared with the text chosen for the occasion, Jer. xv. 19, 20, partakes far more of solemn admonition than of congratulation. The general truth contained in the latter passage, bears at least as hard, Mr. Orme remarks, on the people as on the ill-fated King. He tells the Parliament, that much of the evil which had come · upon the country, had originated within their own walls.' The title of the sermon is the most suspicious part of it: "Righteous "zeal encouraged by Divine protection;" but in the absence of any proof derived from the sermon itself, it would be most unwarrantable to conclude that the title was designed to characterize the proceedings of the army and the other parties concerned in the death of the King. Had he approved of those proceedings, it is altogether incredible that he should have abstained from expressing that opinion on such an occasion where it must have been most acceptable. Instead of this, while he speaks of the destruction of both King and people as in certain cases a righteous visitation on the part of God, the terms he employs are wholly inapplicable to any case within the province of human legislation, and include no sanction of the part assigned by Providence to human agency. Annexed to this sermon, appeared his Essay on Toleration, in which he maintained doctrines which bear assuredly no affinity to fanaticism.

On the 19th of April following, Owen preached again before the Parliament and the chief officers of the army; and it was