Though it does not appear how long he continued under the above suspension, he was afterwards restored to his ministry, and was preacher at Rochester. In the year 1581, he was one of the learned divines who were deemed most proper to dispute with the papists, and was nominated for that purpose. However, the peaceable exercise of his ministry was not of long continuance. The extended arms of the high commissioners soon again laid hold of him. He was again suspended, and continued under suspension at least five years. Towards the close of life, he preached statedly at Battersea, near London, where, by a fall, he broke his leg, and was for some time disabled from attending to the public duties of his ministry; but had the assistance of Mr. Richard Sedgwick, another puritan divine. He was a learned and pious divine, a zealous enemy to popery, a constant advocate for a further reformation, and a firm and peaceable nonconformist. He died about the year 1606, at an advanced age. He seldom or never wore the hood and surplice for the space of forty years.]] NICHOLAS BOUND, D. D.-This learned and religious divine was educated at Cambridge, where he took his degrees, and was afterwards beneficed at Norton in the county of Suffolk. A divine of the same name was rector of Wickford in Essex; but whether the same person, we cannot fully ascertain. In the year 1583, when subscription to Whitgift's three articles was rigorously imposed upon the clergy, about sixty worthy ministers in Suffolk refused to subscribe, and were, therefore, suspended from the exercise of their ministry. Dr. Bound was one of those who received this ecclesiastical censure.** That which rendered him most famous, was the publication of his book, entitled "Sabathum veteris et novi Testamenti; or, the true Doctrine of the Sabbath," about the year 1595. In this book, he maintained that the seventh part of our time ought to be devoted to the service of God; that christians are bound to rest on the Lord's day, as much as the Jews were on the Mosaical sabbath, the commandment about rest being moral and + MS. Register, p. 585. Strype's Parker, Appen, p. 116. Clark's Lives annexed to Martyrologie, p. 158. ** MS. Register, p. 436, 437. perpetual; and that it was not lawful for persons to follow their studies or worldly business on that day, nor to use such pleasures and recreations as were lawful on other days. The book soon obtained an extensive circulation, and produced a most pleasing reformation in many parts of the kingdom. The Lord's day, formerly profaned by interludes, may-games, morrice-dances, and other sports and recreations, now began to be observed with greater exactness, especially in corporations. "This doctrine," says Dr. Heylin," carrying such a fair shew of piety, at least in the opinion of the common people, and such as did not examine the true grounds of it, induced many to embrace and defend it; and, in a very little time, it became the most bewitching error, and the most popular infatuation, that ever was embraced by the people of England!"+ In this, the zealous historian at once discovers what manner of spirit he was of. Dr. Bound's book had not been long published before it excited the enmity of persons of a contrary opinion, especially among the ruling clergy. They exclaimed against it, as putting a restraint upon christian liberty, as putting too great a lustre upon the Lord's day, and as tending to eclipse the authority of the church in appointing festivals. This was a shorter and an easier method of contending with an author, than by publishing an impartial answer to his work. And, indeed, though there was so great an outcry against the book, no one even attempted to publish any sort of a reply for several years. The first who took up his pen against it, was Mr. Thomas Rogers, in his "Exposition of the thirty-nine Articles." the preface he declared, "It is a comfort to my soul, and will be to my dying hour, that I have been the man and the means of bringing the sabbatarian errors and impieties to the light and knowledge of the state." But, surely, it would have looked as well in a clergyman, and would have afforded him an equal degree of comfort on a dying bed, if, instead of opposing an exact regard to the sabbath, he had spent his zeal in recommending a religious and holy observance of that day!§ In * Fuller's Church Hist. b. ix. p. 227. + Heylin's Hist. of Pres. p. 340. Fuller's Church Hist. b. ix. p. 228. Mr. Rogers was beneficed at Horningsheath in Suffolk, and once a professed puritan, when he discovered his zeal for nonconformity. In 1583, he was suspended for refusing subscription to Whitgift's three articles; but afterwards he altered his mind, and became a zealous conformist.—MS. Register, p. 437.—Wood's Athena Oren, vol. i. p. 341. Dr. Bound might carry his doctrine too high by advancing the Lord's day in all respects to a perfect level with the Jewish sabbath. But it was certainly unworthy the character of divines, to encourage men in shooting, fencing, bowling, and other diversions on the Lord's day, especially as they were sufficiently forward in such practices without the countenance and example of their spiritual guides. Nevertheless, in the year 1599, Archbishop Whitgift called in Dr. Bound's book, and commanded that it should not be reprinted; and the year following, the Lord Chief Justice Popham did the same. These, indeed, were good remedies, says Dr. Heylin, had they been soon enough applied yet not so good as those which were formerly applied to Copping and Thacker, who were hanged at Bury, for spreading Brown's books against the church. Did Dr. Bound then deserve to share the same fate, for writing in defence of the sabbath? This, however, was the shortest way of refuting his arguments. They both declared, that the doctrine of the sabbath agreed neither with the doctrine of the church of England, nor with the laws and orders of this kingdom; and that it disturbed the peace of the church and commonwealth, and tended to promote schism in the one, and sedition in the other.+ Nothing, surely, could appear more absurd, or more contrary to truth. Notwithstanding all this care and labour to suppress the book, it was read and circulated in private more than ever. Many persons who never heard of it when printed, inquired for it when prohibited. The archbishop's head had not long been laid in the dust, when Dr. Bound prepared his book for another impression; and in 1606, he published a second edition with large additions. And, indeed, such was its reputation, that scarcely any comment or catechism was published by the stricter divines, for many years, in which the morality of the sabbath was not strongly recommended and enforced.t But to counteract the influence of this sabbatarian doctrine, about twelve years after the above period, came forth the Declaration for Sports upon the Lord's day. This, having the sanction of public authority, opened a flood-gate to all manner of licentiousness. His WORKS.-1. The Holy Exercise of Fasting, in certain Homilies or Sermons, 1604.-2. A Storehouse of Comfort for the Afflicted in Spirit, in Twenty-one Sermons, 1604.-3. The Unbelief of St. Thomas the Apostle laid open for Believers, 1608. Heylin's Tracts, p. 491. + Fuller's Church Hist. b. ix. p. 229. + Strype's Whitgift, p. 531. EZECHIAS MORLEY was minister at Walsham in the Willows in Suffolk, and afterwards at several other places. He was a zealous and laborious preacher, but suffered numerous oppressions on account of his nonconformity. Mr. Morley has left a circumstantial account of the troubles he underwent, which it may not be improper to lay before the reader. "For three years," says he, "I have been so molested by the commissary, that I could not remain to do the work of God, for any long time in any one place. They first arrested me by a warrant from the bishop, when they said, I must be bound to appear before him at Norwich by ten o'clock next morning, or go to prison. The time appointed being so very short, I yielded my body to the prison. This was in the year 1582. "Having obtained my liberty, I became minister of Denton; then the commissary caused an act of excommunication to be entered against me, of which I had no knowledge till about a week after. I then resorted to Dr. Day, and desired he would not proceed against me, seeing he had already done me so much injury. Therefore, after much entreaty, he promised that he would not hinder me in my ministry, and so gave me his word to stay the excommunication. Notwithstanding this, in six weeks after my removal to Denton, he published an excommunication against me, and fixed it upon the door of the church at Walsham, being unknown to me, and fifteen miles from the place of my abode. Afterwards, I was arrested on the Lord's day in the church-yard, when the Lord's supper was about to have been administered. When the warrant was read, I told the officer, that I would remain in a bond of twenty pounds to appear the next day, which he utterly refused. When a friend offered his bond of twenty pounds, he refused this also. And when my friends proposed to enter a bond of three hundred pounds for my appearance the next day, this in like manner was refused. As I prepared to go with him, he would have taken bond; but I, being ignorant of the law, refused his offer, and, therefore, went with him to the high sheriff to Bury. Here nothing was objected against me, only I was bound over to the assizes. "At the assizes, I was indicted for having deviated from the order of baptism, in baptizing a child a long time before I left Walsham. In this indictment, I was charged with having said, do you forsake the devil?' instead of will you saying, dost thou forsake the devil?' and have this child baptized in this faith?' for wilt thou be baptized in this faith?' Upon the reading of the indictment, the judge asked me what I had to say why sentence should not be executed against me. I answered, that I had endured punishment already from the commissary. And when the judge inquired whether I had been so punished, the commissary said I had; but he did not know whether it was for this offence or some other. I was, therefore, committed to prison."* In the year 1584, Mr. Morley made the following record: The first day of June was two years, I was committed to the Clink, by the Archbishop and the Bishop of London. I was there confined seven weeks, and to this hour, I know not for what cause. I was fetched by the pursuivant upwards of forty miles, which was attended with great expense, as well as hinderance of my usefulness. I have never received any recompence for false and unjust imprisonment; neither can I obtain liberty to use my ministry with a good conscience. So that I am now ready to go a begging; yet, if allowed, I might, through the blessing of God, do some good to myself and the afflicted church of Christ, of which I am a poor member. "EZECHIAS MORLEY."+ It appears from the above, that Mr. Morley was for a long time suspended from the exercise of his ministry. Afterwards, being driven out of Norfolk, he preached at Ridgwell in Essex. And during the above year, warrants were issued by Archbishop Whitgift, the Bishop of London, and other ecclesiastical commissioners, requiring certain laymen to appear before them at St. Paul's, to prove several charges against Mr. Morley. Upon their appearance before their lordships, they were required to answer the following articles of inquiry: 1. "Do you, and all of you, know Ezechias Morley, preacher; and how long have you known him? 2. "It is objected against you, that you have been at divers preachings and lectures of the said Morley, in the church of Ridgwell in Essex, since Easter. 3. "That you have often, or some times, been, within these two years, at the said Morley's lectures, preachings MS. Register, p. 420-422. + Ibid. |