Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 06.djvu/195

 1604) in Stapenhill Church. Although he drew no emolument from his public work, the hospitality of his patron was liberally extended to him. Soon after his marriage he settled at Stanton Ward, in Stapenhill parish, and his wife made something by needlework and by teaching a few children. Bradshaw one of a little knot of puritan divines who met periodically at Ashby-de-la-Zouch, Repton, Burton-on-Trent, and Stapenhill. Neither in form nor in aim waa this association a presbyterian classis. Whether Bradshaw ever held Cartwright's views of ecclesiastical jurisdiction is not clear; it is plain that he did not adhere to them. Neal places both him and his neighbour Hildersham, of Ashby, among the beneficed clergy who in 1588 declared their approbation of Cartwright's 'Book of Discipline'; but the chronology in both cases is manifestly wrong. Even Cartwright and his immediate coadjutors declared in April 1592 that they never had exercised any ecclesiastical jurisdiction, or so much as proposed to do so, till authorised by law. The exercises of the association with which Bradshaw was connected were limited to a public sermon and a private conference. In these discussions Bradshaw's balanced judgment gave him a superiority over his brethren, who called him 'the weighing divine.' He was strongly averse to ceremonies, both as unlawful in themselves and imposed by the undue authority of prelates. Bradshaw was London, probably on a publishing errand, in 1606; he had been chosen lecturer at Christ Church, Newgate; but the would not authorise him. He had already published against ceremonies, and although his tracts were anonymous, their paternity was well understood. He now put forth his most important piece, 'English Puritanisme,' 1606, 4to, which professed to embody the views of the most rigid section of the party. His views of doctrine would have satisfied [q. v.]; he was at one with Ainsworth as regards the independence of congregations, differing only as to the machinery of their internal government; he was separatist, but he wanted to see the church purified. Moreover, he entertained a much stronger feeling than Ainsworth of the duty of submission to the civil authority. Let the king be a 'very infidel ' and persecutor of the truth, or openly defy every law of God, he held that he still retained, as 'archbishop and general overseer of all the churches within his dominions,' the right to rule all churches within his realm, and must not be resisted in the name of conscience; those who cannot obey must passively take what punishment he allots. The key to Bradshaw's own scheme of church polity is the complete autonomy of individual congregations. He would have them disciplined inwardly on the presbyterian plan, the worshippers delegating their spiritual government to an oligarchy of pastors and elders, power of excommunication being reserved to 'the whole congregation itself.' But he would subject no congregation to any ecclesiastical jurisdiction save 'that which is within itself.' To prevent as far as possible the action of the state from being warped by ecclesiastical control, he would enact that no clergyman should hold any office of civil authority. Liberty of conscience is a principle which his view of the royal supremacy precludes him from directly stating; but he very carefully guards against the possible abuse of church censures, and holds it a sin for any church officers to exercise authority over the body, goods, lives, liberty of any man. In spite of the safeguard provided by the autocratic control which he proposed to vest in the civil power, the system of which Bradshaw was the spokesman was not unnaturally viewed as abandoning every recognised security for maintenance of protestant uniformity. That on his principle congregations might set up the mass was doubtless what was most feared; 'puritan-papist' is the significant title given in 1605 to a writer on Bradshaw's side, who would 'persuade the permission of the promiscuous use and profession of all sorts of heresies.' But before very long the appearance of anabaptist enthusiasts such as Wightman confirmed the impression that the scheme of Bradshaw and his friends would never do. Bradshaw's exposition of puritanism bore no name, but its authorship was never any secret. It was not enough to answer him by the pen of the Bishop of London's Welsh chaplain: his London lodgings were searched by two pursuivants, deputed to seize him and his pamphlets. His wife had sent him out of the way, and, not half an hour before the domiciliary visit, had succeeded in cleverly hiding the books behind the fireplace, They carried this spirited lady before the high commission, but could extract nothing from her under examination, so they bound her to appear again when summoned, and let her go. Ames's Latin version of the 'English Puritanisme' carried Bradshaw's views far and wide (see, 1576-1633), and ''Hist. of Congregationalism in Norf. and Suff.'': 1877, p,66 seq.) His Derbyshire retreat was Bradshaw's safe sanctuary; thither he returned from many a journey in the cause he loved; his friends there were influential; and there was much in his personal address which, when his surface austerity yielded to the natural play of a bright and companionable