style him cousin Hildersham; therefore, by her majesty's favour, he was released from the above ecclesiastical

censure.

Mr. Hildersham being a divine of great celebrity, was called, in the year 1596, to preach the assize sermon before judge Anderson, at Leicester. Though it is said to have been a godly and learned sermon,' the judge could not conceal his displeasure, even while he was in the church. Anderson was no sooner seated upon the bench, than he required the jury to bring an indictment against the preacher, but they refused;" and it would have been difficult," adds our author, "to have found a jury in Leicestershire, that would not have been ashamed of doing it." The angry judge was so mortified and offended, that he brought Mr. Hildersham afterwards into some other troubles; from which, however, the Lord mercifully delivered him. In the year 1598 an attachment was issued from the high commission to apprehend him; but whether he was taken into custody, or he concealed himself till the storm subsided, we have not been able to learn.t

On the accession of King James, numerous petitions were presented to his majesty and the parliament, for a further reformation of the church. Mr. Hildersham, being a leading person among the puritans, and universally beloved by all the enemies of superstition and oppression, was appointed, with several of his brethren, to present these petitions, and, if required, to defend them by disputation. Among these was the millenary petition, subscribed by upwards of 'a thousand ministers, "desiring reformation of certain ceremonies and abuses of the church." At the Hampton-court conference, our worthy divine, together with Mr. Stephen Egerton of London, and Mr. Edward Fleetwood of Lancashire, presented a number of requests to his majesty, earnestly desiring a further reformation in ecclesiastical

matters.

It was impossible for Mr. Hildersham to act in this public capacity without being particularly noticed. The eyes of the jealous prelates were fixed upon him. Therefore, in the year 1605, he was silenced by the Bishop of Lincoln for nonconformity. Afterwards, he obtained some favour from the Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, who allowed him to preach occasionally in his diocese, particu

MS. Chronology, vol. iii. A. D. 1631. p. 4.

+Clark's Lives annexed to Martyrologie, p. 114-116. Fuller's Church Hist. b. x. p. 21-23.

larly at the two famous associations at Repton in Derbyshire, and Burton-upon-Trent in Staffordshire. These associations were designed for private conference among the ministers, and the public ministry of the word. They were the means of doing unspeakable good to both ministers and people; and Mr. Hildersham was a chief promoter of them for many years. His fame, indeed, was so great in those parts, that for many years after, when any one became remarkable for true piety, he was sure to be stigmatized as one of Hildersham's old puritans. Mr. Hildersham remained under the above ecclesiastical censure upwards of three years. Towards the close of the year 1608, by the favour of Dr. Barlow, the new bishop of Lincoln, he was again restored to his ministry, and allowed to preach among his beloved flock at Ashby. It was after his restoration at this time that he entered upon his "Lectures on John iv.," which he continued every Tuesday for upwards of two years.

These lectures were afterwards published, in 1628, and dedicated to Henry earl of Huntingdon, who attended them, when preached in Ashby church, and whose uncle and grandfather had been the author's worthy patrons. The celebrated Mr. John Cotton, in his epistle to the reader prefixed to the second edition of this work, says, " In reading most of the best books extant, the studious reader is wont to select and transcribe the pith of such notes as stand like lights, &c. in the body of the discourse, and in the spirit of the writer. But in this book, I find such variety of choice matter, running throughout every vein of each discourse, and carried along with such strength of sound and deep judgment, and with such life and power of an heavenly spirit; and expressed in such pithy and pregnant words of wisdom, that I knew not what to select, and what to omit, unless I should have transcribed the whole book.” Dr. Williams says, "that these lectures discover the author to be a sound divine, an admirable textuary, a profoundly experienced christian, and an excellent teacher."+

He did not, however, enjoy his liberty quite three years. For in November, 1611, he was again silenced, by Neile, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry. The occasion of his lordship's censure was his supposed connexion with Mr. Edward Whiteman of Burton-upon-Trent, denominated a notorious heretic, for which he was afterwards burnt at

MS. Chronology, vol. iii. A. D. 1631. p. 10.

+ Christian Preacher, p. 435.

Lichfield. Though, upon Mr. Hildersham's examination before the bishop and many others, his innocence was made perfectly manifest in open court, he continued under the episcopal censure a long time; and, to the unspeakable grief of many, the two exercises at Repton and Burton-uponTrent were put down. In addition to this, December 8, 1612, letters missive were issued from the high commission, requiring his appearance before the ecclesiastical judges. Upon his appearance at the time and place appointed, he was judicially admonished, then prohibited from ever preaching, catechizing, or attending upon any part of the ministerial function, either in public or private, until he should be lawfully restored. What a pity was it, that so excellent and peaceable a divine should have been struck dumb, even after his innocence had been proved and acknowledged by the bishop in a court of justice! This, indeed, savoured too much of the tyrannical oppression of antichrist.

When Mr. Hildersham was restored from the above unchristian sentence, we have not been able to learn. But in the year 1615, he was again prosecuted in the high commission; and, for refusing the oath ex officio, was committed first to the Fleet, then to the King's-bench, where he continued a long time. During his tedious and painful confinement, a certain nobleman made application to Archbishop Abbot for his release; when the angry archbishop protested, "that unless he would submit to what the commissioners required, he should die and rot in prison."+ Abbot, it is said, was a prelate of great learning and piety; but he was esteemed a puritan in doctrine; and in discipline, too remiss for one placed at the head of the church. But, surely, this did not appear, at least on the present occasion. Mr. Hildersham, upon giving bond to appear when called, was at length released from confinement.

In September, 1616, the commissioners sat at Ashby, to examine certain witnesses against Mr. Hildersham and his two friends, Mr. Thomas Dighton and Mr. John Holt.§

* Clark's Lives, p. 117, 118.

+ MS. Chronology, vol. iii. A. D. 1631. p. 14.

Granger's Biog. Hist. vol. i. p. 341.

The nonconformists, both ministers and private christians, were now barbarously prosecuted in the ecclesiastical courts; among whom were these gentlemen, both natives of Ashby. One of them was imprisoned in the Gatehouse, the other in the Fleet; and having endured confinement for some time, they were brought forth, November 21, 1616, under the care of their keepers, when they received the following sentence in the bigh com

The witnesses against Mr. Hildersham affirmed upon their oaths, what all the parish knew to be notoriously false, and even declared by what motives he was actuated in what was charged against him. But upon this most glaring false witness, the court proceeded to censure him as follows:He was pronounced refractory and disobedient to the orders, rites and ceremonies of the church of England; and a schismatic and schismatical person, and well worthy of severe punishment. Also, because he was deemed the ringleader of all schismatical persons in that part of the country, he was fined two thousand pounds, excommunicated, degraded from the ministry, ordered to be taken and cast into prison, commanded to make a public recantation in such form as the court should appoint, and, to finish the business, he was condemned in costs of suit. If any impartial judge were to form an opinion of Mr. Hildersham's crime from this heavy sentence, he would conclude the single sin of nonconformity, at least in the opinion of the ecclesiastical judges, to have been much greater than open drunkenness, swearing, adultery, or any such atrocious acts of immorality, which, though very common among the clergy of those times, were scarcely ever noticed. What a happy circumstance is it that we live in better days! in which it is generally acknowledged, that, in religious matters, every man ought to act according to the persuasion

same.

mission court:—“ It appeared to the court, that the said Dighton and Holt, being laymen, had, in opposition to the state ecclesiastical, kept sundry conventicles or exercises of religion in private houses, within the parish of Ashby-de-la-Zouch; and held public disputations against the orders, rites and ceremonies of the church, and dissuaded others from conformity to the And because Mr. Hacket their minister, (meaning the person appointed to the place,) was conformable, they have refused to come to church to hear him preach, or read divine service, or to bring their children to be baptized, or their wives to be churched; but, leaving their own parishes, went to other parishes to bear unconformable ministers, and carried many of the parish of Ashby after them, to the great encouragement of schismatical and refractory persons; and, being often admonished in this court, they refused, and do still refuse, to join with the christian congregation in receiving the holy communion kneeling: and having made common purses, and sundry collections, for maintaining, abetting, and encouraging such schismatical persons in their obstinacy and disobedience to his majesty's laws ecclesiastical; they are, therefore, pronounced schismatics and schismatical persons, and worthy to be severely punished, and were accordingly fined a thousand pounds a piece, pronounced excommunicate, ordered to be publicly denounced, to make their submission in three several places, condemned in costs of suit, and sent back to prison; but how long they continued," says our author, "I am not able to learn.” This is one instance of the persecution of laymen for their nonconformity.MS. Remarks, p. 652.

* Clark's Lives, p. 118, 119.

of his own mind. "If we dissent from one another in these things," says Mr. Hildersham," it must be without bitterness, and in brotherly love. The odious names of puritans, formalists, schismatics, or time-servers, ought not to be heard among brethren."

Mr. Hildersham, having heard of the above cruel sentence, wisely, and for a long time, concealed himself. At length, however, he wrote to Lady Fielding, desiring her to use her influence to get his fine taken off; or, if that could not be done, to obtain a mitigation of it so far as to be allowed to pay a certain sum annually, being all that he was able to spare. He sent a petition to the same effect to the Earl of Suffolk, and another to the high commission.+ Several processes were in the mean time issued from the exchequer, to inquire into his estates, but none could be found. He therefore compounded the matter with his prosecutors, by paying a great sum of money, and was released from the heavy fine.

This, indeed, was not the end of his troubles. For in the year 1618, a pursuivant from the Bishop of London violently broke into his study, and carried away many of his valuable books. The good man petitioned his lordship for them to be restored; but whether they ever were, my author adds, "I have not been able to learn." By a license, dated June 20, 1625, from the archbishop, he obtained liberty to preach within the dioceses of London, Lincoln, and Coventry and Lichfield; and soon after entered once more upon his public charge at Ashby. In the month of September this year, he commenced his course of lectures on Psalm li., afterwards published with this title, "CLII. Lectures upon Psalm LI. preached at Ashby-de-laZouch in Leicestershire," 1635. This work" is a rich mine of experimental and practical divinity;" but not quite so concise and finished as those on John iv.§

Notwithstanding the above numerous interruptions and oppressions, Mr. Hildersham had once more to pass through the fire of persecution. March 25, 1630, for refusing to read the public service in the hood and surplice, he was again silenced by the tyrannizing ecclesiastics. This suspension, however, did not continue very long; for, August 2, 1631, he was restored to his beloved ministry, and so * Hildersham's Lectures on John, p. 301. Edit. 1632. + MS. Chronology, vol. iii. A. D. 1631. p. 16.