In 1G20 Laud -was at length raised to the episcopate, being made bishop of St. David's, in spite of the strenu- ous opposition of archbishop Abbot, as his friends assert, and tlirough the earnest solicitations of the duke of Buckingham and of the lord -keeper Williams, then bishop of Lincoln, as is commonly alleged. Before his consecration as bishop, Laud, much to his credit, re- signed the presidency of St, John's College, because, though such things were often winked at, he could not hold it without a violation of the statute. In his ])rimary visitation of his diocese, he set things " in or- der" according to his peculiar views of what constituted the essentials of " the Church's" religion. lie also built a chapel for himself, which he proceeded to fit up to his own taste as a model, and consecrated it with sundry extraordinary ceremonies.
In 1(522 Laud"s dispute with the Jesuit Fisher took place, which was, perhaps, the most creditable perform- ance of liis life, evincing extensive learning and no mean ability. Yet, dealing with the controversy from the high Anglican point of view, it fails to cover the whole Protestant position, and is now almost forgotten, biiiig a document of much less breadth and historical interest tlian some still older defences of the English Cliurch, as, for example, Jewell's .!;«;%//.
About this time Laud Ijecame chaplain to the duke of Buckingham, and between them there grew up an in- timate and lasting friendship. While Buckingham was absent with prince Charles in Spain, Laud was in coftc- spondence with him, and seems to^have l)een charged with the care of bis interests at court during his ab- sence; for, observing or suspecting some movements of tliu lord-keeper Williams towards uuik'nnining the duke in the royal favor, he immediately. informed his patron
in Spain of the apprehended danger, who accordingly hastened home to protect himself. Hence arose a de- termined hostility of the duke towards Williams, and Williams accused Laud of ingratitude, while Laud, on the other hand, charged him with duplicity and selfish- ness. Evidently the duke's patronage was judged of more value than the bishop's, and the breacii ripened into a rooted enmity between the two churchmen. Laud chose to consider himself insidted by Abbot and Williams because his name was not inserted in the High Commission. He complained to Buckingham, who forthwith procured his nomination. In 1G2-4 James died, and Laud lamented him with demonstrations of the ut- most sorrow. On the first day of March, the year aft^r the death of James, Laud received his appointment to preach before Charles at Westminster at the opening of the first Parliament; and the king, upon the advice of bishops Laud and Andrews, prohibited, in the Convoca- tion which met at the same time with Parliament, the discussion of the five predestinarian articles of the Synod of Dort, "on account of the number of Calvinists ad- mitted under Abbot's auspices into the Lower House." On the Sunday after the marriage of Charles and Hen- rietta Maria, Lautl again preached before the king and the House of Lords. The king had summoned this Par- liament to procure supplies for the prosecution of his wars; but they chose to look after the righting of their own grievances before attending to the king's wants, and proceeded to cite and condemn a certain Mr. Jlontague for preaching wliat they judged heretical and unconsti- tutional doctrine. Laud immediately flew to Jlonta- gue's protection, and, at his remonstrance, the king re- voked the proceedings of Parliament, and prorogued them to Oxford. Parliament was no more pliant at Oxford than it had been at Westminster, and in a pet Charles suddenly dissolved it.
]\Ieanwhile Laud Avas continually rising in the king's esteem and confidence, while Williams was removed from his office of lord-keeper and banished the court. Laud was indefatigable in his labors in preaching and purging the Church, refusing to ordain any whom he found to be unqualified for the sacred office, according to his view of the proper qualifications. He was ap- pointed by the king to supply the place of the now dis- graced Williams, the dean of Westminster, at the cere- mony of the coronation. He here had ofhcial charge of the regalia, and is accused of having placed a crucifix upon the "altar," and tampered with the coronation oath ; but of this accusation not much was ever made. By the king's appointment Laud again preached the sermon at the opening of Parliament, which assembled immediately after the coronation. This Parliament like- wise proceeded at once to aiijioint a committee on re- ligion. They also impeached the duke of Buckingham, and refused to do any other business until his case v;as disposed of. The king, finding them resolved on the ruin of his minister — and it is to be observed it was the House of Lords and not the House of Commons before which he was to be tried — to save his favorite, was com- pelled to dissolve his second Parliament. Uncjuestion- ably Laud was deeply and anxiously interested in the cause of his |iatron, and ho is charged, on some show of evidence, with having written the speech of Bucking- ham in his own defence, and the speech of the king in Buckingham's behalf.
In 1(526 Laud was translated to the see of Bath and Wells — a richer bishopric than that of St. David's. Both of Charles's Parliaments had refused to vote the subsidies to supply his [)ecuniary wants, and he re- solved to collect tlie money without parliamentary authority. With this view he resorted to the expedi- ent of "tuning the pulpits," and Laud was his instru- ment for this purpose. He was instructed to prepare letters to be issued to the two archbishops and their suf- fragans, through them to the inferior clergy, and by them to tlie people, persuading them to pay cheerfully the taxations necessarily imposed on them. " The in-