fleet preached before parliament there was no standing room.
Though now clearly in favour with the court, Stillingfleet remained on good terms with the nonconformists. He was a friend of Matthew Henry, attended the funeral of Fairclough (Wood, Life and Times, ed. A. Clark, iii. 23), and was requested by Charles II, as a moderate man, to argue with William Penn (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1668–9, p. 146). While he was still rector of Sutton he had given a home to one of the ejected ministers, and taken a large house, which he turned into a school, for another.
His literary and controversial activity was prodigious, and his books against the Socinians and Romanists were extremely popular. On 4 May 1677 he was made archdeacon of London, and on 16 Jan. 1678 dean of St. Paul's. He was also prolocutor of the lower house of the convocation of Canterbury. He was no less prolific as an antiquary than as a theologian. His treatise on the jurisdiction of the bishops in capital cases, published on the occasion of Danby's trial, was considered, says Burnet, to ‘put an end to the controversy in the opinion of all impartial men’ (Hist. of his own Time, 1753, ii. 93). Still more important was his elaborate work the ‘Origines Britannicæ,’ 1685, which was an acute historical investigation of the sources of British church history. His ‘Discourse of the True Antiquity of London’ (published after his death) shows him also an antiquary of wide learning. He was a great book collector, and formed a very large library of manuscripts and rare works.
At the time of the popish plot ‘a manuscript against’ him was examined by the committee of investigation (Hist. MSS. Comm. 11th Rep. App. ii. 68), and it was said that there was an attempt to entrap and murder him. ‘Thereupon on Sunday about forty persons for a guard waited on the doctor to church and home’ (ib. 14th Rep. App. iv. 108).
During the reign of James II he was in less prominence. Letters show that he was required at different times to attend on the king's ecclesiastical commissioners in the chapter-house of St. Paul's (Stillingfleet MSS.) He prepared an elaborate argument against the legality of the commission, which was published in 1689, as the second part of his ‘Ecclesiastical Cases,’ and reasons against the repeal of the Test Act (20 April 1689, Stillingfleet MSS.) At the Revolution he was at once taken into favour. Burnet recommended him to William of Orange as ‘the learnedst man of the age in all respects’ (Sidney, Diary). A letter from Hickes, dean of Worcester, announcing the death of William Thomas (1613–1689) [q. v.], the bishop, shows that it was already known that he would have the next preferment (26 June 1689, Stillingfleet MSS.) On 12 Oct. 1689 his election was confirmed in Bow Church (Wood, Life and Times, ed. A. Clark, iii. 312), and next day he was consecrated bishop of Worcester at Fulham. The temporalities were restored to him on 21 Oct. (Le Neve, Fasti, iii. 68; Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1689, p. 297). He was at once put on the commission to consider the revision of the prayer-book and the possibility of comprehension.
Stillingfleet was an active and energetic bishop. His charges (1690, 1693, and 1696) were elaborate investigations of the duties and rights of the parochial clergy, and were published in the first part of his ‘Ecclesiastical Cases,’ 1695. He was a frequent speaker in the House of Lords. He continued his literary labours, his collection of books, and his correspondence with learned men. An interesting letter from Sir William Trumbull [q. v.] shows him keenly interested in the ‘wretched state of the Grecian and Armenian churches’ (10 June 1688, Stillingfleet MSS.) On the death of Tillotson the queen strongly urged his appointment to the archbishopric; but he was already in bad health, and does not appear to have been offered the primacy. It is said that when Tenison, the new archbishop, called upon him he wittily alluded to this by remaining seated, and saying ‘I am too old to rise.’ He became, however, the constant adviser of Tenison, and, when he was no longer able to attend parliament, was consulted by the bishops on all points of importance (many letters in Stillingfleet MSS.)
Despite his infirmity he engaged in a controversy with Locke on the doctrine of the Trinity, which he believed was impugned by some passages in the ‘Essay on the Human Understanding.’ He published three pamphlets on the subject (1696–7), each of which was answered by Locke. He drew up also an elaborate paper of advice to the bishops in case the king should demand new measures for the suppression of the papists, showing that the existing laws were sufficient (Stillingfleet MSS., undated). The last years of his life were occupied in the revision and publication of sermons, and in the revision of the ‘Origines Sacræ,’ which he did not live to complete. He also reformed the procedure of his consistory court, and took an active part himself in its work. His second wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Nicholas Pedley, died early in 1697 (letter from the
