Abstract
Sheldon’s place of imprisonment was “James Chesterman’s House over against Cross Inn.”1 Hammond was lodged in another residence close by. Both were constantly guarded by New Model soldiers. However their imprisonment was alleviated by permission to have visitors — a permission which was freely granted — and very soon such a stream of scholars and students began to seek them out to ask their advice about university and church affaires that their jailers grew nervous. The extent of their influence, the depth of their opinions, the strength of their leadership — all of these gave the new Presbyterian university officials pause. Was it desirable to keep such influential royalists imprisoned so close to Oxford? They decided not, and on May 30, a month and a half after their arrest, the “Committee of Lords and Commons for the Reformation of the University of Oxon” met at Westminster and moved to correct what was becoming a difficult situation. “Taking into consideration that his confinement there [at Oxford] may be of dangerous consequences, in regard of the great respect of persons to him,” they ordered that Dr. Sheldon, “be conveyed to Wallingford Castle, there to be kept in safe custody by the governor of the said castle” until the committee decided what further to do with him.2 Subsequently, Hammond was included in the order.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Burrows, Worthies, p. 184.
Wood Mss. f. 35. Order dated May 30, 1648.
Fell, Life of Hammond, p. xliv.
Burrows, Parliamentary Visitors, p. 187.
Wood Mss. f. 35.
Ibid.
Ibid. Burrows in his Worthies of All Souls, p. 197, has Sheldon taking houses which belong to the college. He is a bit at a loss to explain how houses could be seized by soldiers and returned to the college bursar.
Theologian and Ecclesiastic, VI, 77.
Ibid., VI, 4.
Parker, p. 52.
Ibid.
A phrase used in a letter from Edward Hyde to his wife in 1651. HMCR, Bath II, 88.
Hammond’s biography, DNB.
J. Thoroton, A History of Nottinghamshire (London, 1839), p. 151.
Sheldon looked upon the Okeover and Shirley families as his own. Their births and deaths are recorded in his personal bible, he performed many services for both families after the Restoration, and he was godfather to Sir Robert Shirley’s grandchildren who were born in the 1660’s. See Ms. Bib. Eng., 1648, d. 3, Bodleian library.
Theologian and Ecclesiastic, XII, 166.
Ibid., XI, 89. Cosin’s only son was a Catholic convert at this time; Cosin disinherited him and would have no more to do with him.
Sheldon himself retained the rich benefice of Ickford until 1653 with all of its income and even held services there regularly in the early 1650’s. Ibid., XIII, 328.
See a series of letters from Payne to Sheldon, Ibid., Vols. VI through X.
Ibid., VII, 124.
For letters from “Belleau” to Sheldon, see Ibid., X, 328; X, 329; XII, 166; XII, 167. “Belleau” was probably William Lloyd, later a bishop but in the early 1650’s he was living in exile in Paris.
Numbers of letters from these people are reproduced in Theologian and Ecclesiastic. Mansell returned to Oxford in 1651, but Taylor was a regular correspondent of Sheldon’s in the years after that. There is much evidence of Henchman’s correspondence, and his biographer (see DNB) states that he was in touch with Anglican and royalist leaders during this period.
See later this chapter, where Duppa and others are in constant correspondence with Sheldon and Hammond. They even extended their net to include Bishop Wren, imprisoned in the Tower of London.
Theologian and Ecclesiastic, IX, 290–298, gives the text of several letters from Wren to Hammond and the reverse.
Sheldon invented a completely new alphabet which he proposed that the net use. Hammond wrote one letter in it, found it too cumbersome, and went back to the system of oblique references.
See Ibid., VI. 167, where Payne apologized profusely to Sheldon for losing a copy of a letter. He promised never to retain a copy of any message in the future.
Much of the two divines’ extant correspondence has been published in Theologian and Ecclesiastic. Unfortunately, what has come down to us covers only the first five years, 1649–1654. of the Interregnum period. All these letters are taken from Harleian Mss., 6942, The British Museum, and were edited by W. N. Clarke in the mid-nineteenth century. This is the best single source on the Church during the Interregnum period.
Ibid., XII, 168.
W. G. Simon, The Restoration Episcopate (New York, 1965), p. 101.
See Allestree’s biography, DNB, and Barwick, appendix, where Allestree is at the court and is dispatched into England with messages for the Anglican leaders.
Ibid., appendix, contains a long series of letters from Edward Hyde to Barwick and vice-versa.
There is a lengthy letter to John Barwick, undated and unsigned, which is reproduced in Barwick, pp. 537–47. It was written in answer to a query from Barwick about church discipline, and how, and if, it should be imposed. This letter can now be definitely ascribed to Sheldon and dated from internal evidence: 1) The author is having difficulty with his eyes — they are constantly filling with rheum, making it difficult for him to read or write. Between 1651 and 1653, on several occasions, Sheldon suffered from this same disability, but particularly in the spring of 1653, when this matter of church discipline came to a head. See Theologian and Ecclesiastic, VI, 170 and X, 329, for letters from both Morley and Hammond commiserating with Sheldon about his eyes. 2) This letter is written in Sheldon’s inimitable style. He writes in a straightforward, almost modern fashion — especially when he is strongly moved — as though the ideas are mounting steps, one imposed upon the other. This imparts to his writing a peculiar strength. Nor can one mistake this style when he meets it again. Also in the series of letters between Barwick and Clarendon, reproduced in Life of Barwick, appendix, Sheldon is mentioned in almost every exchange. However, in every case, the editor of the Life of Barwick mis-identifies him, via footnotes, as William Juxon. The primary reason for this mistake lies in the frequent use of the initials “B. L.” (Bishop of London) for Sheldon. This led the editor of the work to settle on Juxon as the best identification he could make of “B. L.”. However, “B. L.” can now be identified as Sheldon for the following reasons: 1) Clarendon and Barwick were discussing the new bishops to be made, and the list of nominees for the vacant sees had just been sent to Barwick when the series of letters opens. Sheldon’s name was at the top of the list, and he was scheduled to be made the bishop of London when Juxon became archbishop. This is the position he received immediately after the Restoration, and of course this is the reason Barwick and Clarendon call him “B. L.”. 2) Clarendon is extremely worried about B. L., “our sick friend,” as he calls him. Sheldon almost died in 1659 from a plague that broke out in England in 1658–59. It took him over a year to recover. 3) Clarendon anxiously inquires about him in every letter and laments the fact when he is needed so at that moment to supervise the Church and help get the bishops made, he is not available. Sheldon was the leader who, all through the Interregnum was pushing for the creation of new bishops. (See later this chapter.) Juxon was very lukewarm in the matter. 4) In talking of “our sick friend,” Clarendon expresses the hope in one letter (p. 398) that “the time is [now] drawing on that we may [again] enjoy one another” — meaning that we may again enjoy one another’s company. Clarendon was never a close friend of Juxon’s. He was for years on the most intimate terms with Sheldon who was noted for his great wit and humor. 5) Clarendon assures Barwick, as the Restoration draws on, that the king has promised only one church preferment to anyone, and that one is the deanship of Worcester, which he has agreed to give to Morley. And, he said, you can check with “our sick friend” who will assure you that Morley is in every way qualified for it. He knows him well. Sheldon and Morley were life-long friends; Juxon and Morley were never close. For all these reasons, Sheldon can now be positively connected with Barwick. He was working closely with him and was transmitting information on the Church and upon loyalist projects to the court through Barwick and Allestree.
The “Charitable Uses Fund” is mentioned by name only once in the whole Sheldon-Hammond correspondence (see Theologian and Ecclesiastic, XII, 170), but there are innumerable references to money-raising projects. Periodic contributors to the fund, besides Hammond and Sheldon, were Sir John Pakington, Sir Robert Shirley, Sir Orlando Bridgman, Sir Philip Warwick, Lady Coventry, Lady Savile, Lord Scudamore, and “Mr. Chichley.” There were others also who assisted from time to time. See comments by W. H. Clarke, Ibid., XII, 173; also the following Hammond-Sheldon letters: Ibid., VII, 54; VII, 127; XII, 373; as well as almost any letter chosen at random in the series for some discussion of money projects.
E. S. de Beer (ed.), The Diary of John Evelyn (London, 1959), p. 389.
Parker, p. 53, and Anthony Wood, Athenae Oxoniensis (London, 1820), IV, 853.
See comment by John Fell, quoted in Hammond’s life, DNB.
Quotation from Hammond’s life, ibid. The fund was still functioning effectively up to the Restoration. Hyde makes reference to it in November, 1659, in a letter to Barwick. See Barwick, p. 466.
Ibid., XIII, 329.
Ibid., XIII, 330.
Ibid., X, 328.
Ibid., VI, 300.
Ibid., XII, 376. Hammond in this letter, written Dec. 28, 1652, points out the great danger to the Church if no chaplain was provided for the king, without “bringing charge to him.” John Earle subsequently became the chief Anglican chaplain at the royal court, and he was supported from the “Charitable Uses Fund.”
Ibid., XIII, 246.
Ibid., XV, 179.
Ibid., VII, 55.
Ibid.,Vn,51.
On Charles Steward see Ibid., XII, 372; XII, 171, where Hammond discusses using “Grey of Wellingbourough,” a lawyer, to attempt to arrange a composition on behalf of Steward’s young son. Once that was arranged with the government, the young boy would then inherit some of his father’s property and have money of his own. Until that time, however, Sheldon and Hammond looked after him and supported him.
Theologian and Ecclesiastic, XIII, 244.
Ibid., XII, 170.
Ibid., VII, 59, 119,123.
I bid., VII, 61.
Ibid., XIII, 240,241,244.
Barwick, Life of Barwick, p. 95.
See ibid., p. 128, where Lady Savile transmitted £ 1000 to Charles II in 1651.
On several occasions Morley apologized for his own indebtedness, since he had heard that Sheldon himself was in need because of his financial aid to friends. “I am sorry,” he wrote once, “that one of your large munificence should be straightened in the means of exercising your virtue... but your friends are not to expect more that you are able to give, straightening of yourself to do for them.” Theologian and Ecclesiastic, XIII, 240.
On the problems related to finding tutors, see Ibid., XII, 176, 372, 374, 376; XIII, 329 — all letters from Hammond to Sheldon — and letters from Morley to Sheldon, dealing with the same subject, XII, 373; XIII, 241.
It seems as though almost every significant Anglican clergyman in the post-Restoration period taught school at some time during the Interregnum. Those mentioned in the Hammond-Sheldon correspondence include, Hickes, Heywood, Gunning, Barrow, Sterne and an outstanding teacher named Thomas Triplett who was a member of the Falkland Circle in the 30’s. Others were Geoffrey Palmer, later Charles IPs attorney-general, and a friend of Sheldon’s, always referred to by Robert Payne as “the Conjuror.” For references to various members of this group, see Ibid., XII, 173; VII, 48; VI, 223; VI, 172; XII, 170; and VI, 218; and H. R. Williamson, Jeremy Taylor (London, 1951), p. 42. There were others also.
Richard Steward was assigned by Sheldon to stay at the court as Charles’ chaplain, Theologian and Ecclesiastic, VI, 300, and upon his death, Earle was assigned to replace him and was maintained by the “Charitable Uses Fund.” Ibid., XII, 376.
Sheldon and Hammond were seeking ministers to replace Morley at Antwerp, Ibid., XIII, 244; to assist “Monsieur” at Paris, XIII, 330; and someone to help Cosin at Paris, XIII, 329.
Hammond educated Isaac Barrow and Peter Stanynough, Sheldon paid Richard Waring’s way through the university, and Morley had his brother’s youngest son with him as a servant and secretary on the continent, “whom by that means,” he said, “I shall be able to maintain and breed.” Ibid., XIII, 246.
Hammond proposed at one time that he, Sheldon, and Humphrey Henchman, collect £ 600 per annum to maintain twenty persons to be chosen by Bishop Bramhall as a colony of exiled scholars on the continent where they could safely pursue their studies. Ibid., XV, 183. Nothing came of the venture.
See Life of Brian Walton, I, 290, for Sheldon’s contributions to the Polyglot Bible. The project is discussed on numerous occasions in Sheldon’s correspondence also.
Theologian and Ecclesiastic, XV, 186; XV, 285, for letters from Hammond in June and July, 1654, where he is seeking assistance in his pamphleteering.
Reginald Heber, Works of Jeremy Taylor, p. xlix. Also Theologian and Ecclesiastic, XV, 179.
CSP, Clarendon, III, 385. Sheldon, Hammond, and Bishop Wren were trustees for this fund on behalf of their friend Gunning. The fund was established by Sir Robert Shirley.
Isham, Isham-Duppa Correspondence, p. 175.
Theologian and Ecclesiastic, VII, 127.
See later this chapter.
For reference to one of these works, see Theologian and Ecclesiastic, VI, 50, where Hammond discusses it; the others are mentioned by Sanderson in a letter to Sheldon in 1652. W. Jacobson (ed.), The Works of Robert Sanderson (Oxford, 1854), VI, 376.
Theologian and Ecclesiastic, VI, 50.
This mistake was made by Dr. John Owen, Puritan vice-chancellor of Oxford, when he wrote to Hammond in 1654 wanting to talk with him about composing the differences between the two religious bodies. See Ibid., XV, 186. For a modern assertion of this idea, see Hammond’s biography, DNB. His biographer makes Hammond responsible, single-handedly, for maintaining the Anglican church during the Cromwellian interregnum.
Theologian and Ecclesiastic, XII, 170.
Ibid., VII, 54.
Ibid., VII, 384.
Ibid., VII, 61.
Ibid., VII, 147.
See ibid., XII, 171, where Hammond wrote to Sheldon about whom they could find to aid Steward’s son in his dealings with the government. At that time he said, “I suppose you understand the bottom of it (which I profess not at all to do), and if you apprehend my fears vain in respect of these men, as before you did in respect of Mr. St. [sic] etc., do it in a word, and I subscribe and will punctually follow your directions.”
Ibid., XV, 465.
Barwick, appendix, pp. 537–47. This letter can definitely be ascribed to Sheldon for the reasons I have given in footnote 32, this chapter. It bears the date, “Jan. 10.” I have placed it in 1653 because it was late 1652 before Barwick was released from his solitary imprisonment, and the first meeting was held on this problem in early summer, 1653. The letter is clearly written before any meetings have been held and after Barwick was released. Therefore it has to be January, 1653.
Ibid., pp. 539–540.
When Hammond heard of Sanderson’s writings, he wrote to Sheldon in a rage: “Our dean’s brother-in-law hath from Dr. Sanderson an answer to all reasons against taking the Engagement, and the conclusion is that... he may take it; tell me what you know of this.” Theologian and Ecclesiastic, XV, 465.
See letter to John Barwick, Barwick, p. 538, where he condemns a paper on this matter produced by Wren, as “very rigid,” and later the same page where he states his own position.
Ibid., p. 542.
Ibid., p. 543.
Theologian and Ecclesiastic, XV, 465.
Ibid.,
Ibid., XV, 184.
Ibid.
Jacobson, Sanderson’s Works, V, 37.
See Williamson, Jeremy Taylor, pp. 101–107, where Taylor is engaged in 1657 and 1658 producing new liturgies and forms, based for the most part on older practices — particularly that of the Greek church — which a cleric might substitute for the Book of Common Prayer. He was trying to supply his brethren with forms, the use of which would not make them heterodox in the eyes of their fellows and which would, in addition, not make them liable to arrest if their services were discovered by the authorities.
CSP, Clarendon, III, 503.
R. Bosher, The Making of the Restoration Settlement, 1649–1660 (London, rev. ed., 1957), p. 91, discusses these suggestions. This work is a brilliant recent study of the Anglican maneuvering which led to the restoration of the Church.
CSP, Clarendon, III, 50.
One author — W. H. Clarke, Theologian and Ecclesiastic, VI, 30 — denies that this letter dealt with the bishop-making problem on the grounds that no attempts were ever made this early to solve this problem. However, Sheldon was extremely farsighted about practical problems such as this, and as the text of Hammond’s letter indicates, Sheldon’s letter quoted here referred to nothing else.
Ibid., VI. 30.
Ibid., IX, 294.
Ibid.
Ibid., XII, 92.
Ibid., XII, 161. Apparently this was the only time Brownrigg gave any assistance with this problem during the Interregnum. He was Calvinist by inclination and, making his peace with the Cromwellian government, he managed to retain his position and income. See Barwick, p. 213, where Hyde is severely critical of Brownrigg and Skinner, bishop of Oxford, for their lack of interest in the consecration problem.
See Theologian and Ecclesiastic, XII, 168; XII, 170; and Sanderson’s Works, VI, 390, for references to Sheldon’s efforts in the bishop-making process in 1652–53.
See Bosher, p. 90, for this curiously complacent attitude on the part of Hyde.
CSP, Clarendon, III, 50.
For this long series of letters in 1659 and 1660, see Barwick, appendix.
Isham-Duppa Correspondence, p. xxv.
For all of these excuses and problems, see Barwick, appendix, letters between Hyde and Barwick, pp. 398–524.
Ibid., p. 407. As I have pointed out earlier, the editor of Barwick’s Life mistakenly identified “our sick friend” as Juxon in every reference. Hyde was actually referring to Sheldon for the reasons I have given in footnote No. 32.
Ibid., p. 515.
Harl. Mss. 6942, Hammond to Sheldon, Aug. 20, 1659.
Barwick, p. 464.
Ibid., p. 491. Matthew Wren, the son of Bishop When, was a friend of Wallis. From the mathematician he obtained copies of letters which some of the conspirators had sent to the court. He sent the copies back to their royalist originators and asked them if they had actually written those messages. The copies were letter perfect of course and finally convinced Hyde, who heretofore had refused to believe it, that the government was privy to all of his plans.
H. R. Trevor-Roper, “The Restoration of the Church, 1660,” History Today, II, (1952), pp. 540 on.
Bosher, p. 26.
D. Underdown, Royalist Conspiracies in England, 1649–1660 (New Haven, 1960), p. 182.
Trevor-Roper, p. 540.
See W. H. Hutton, A History of the English Church (New York, 1903), VI, 166, and a memorandum from Allestree, reproduced in Bosher, p. 94.
See DNB.
Theologian and Ecclesiastic, XV, 183, where Hammond discusses Shirley’s approaching defection. When Sheldon won the latter back to the Anglican position, in order to proclaim his renewed faith in the Church, Shirley built, under Sheldon’s direction, the only Anglican church to be constructed in England in the period of the Interregnum. The wall of the church at Staunton Harold still bears Sheldon’s tribute to his patron — “In the year 1653, when all things sacred were throughout the nation destroyed or profaned, this church was built to the glory of God by Sir Robert Shirley, whose singular praise it was to have done the best things in the worst times, and hoped for them in the most calamitous.” Sheldon used almost the same words to describe himself a year or two earlier. See Theologian and Ecclesiastic, VI, 77, where he proposes to “Make use of ill-times to make me better and that will make me merrier.” 118 Parker, p. 53.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1973 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sutch, V.D. (1973). Sheldon during the Interregnum. In: Gilbert Sheldon. Archives Internationales D’Histoire des Idees / International Archives of the History of Ideas. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-6384-4_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-6384-4_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-6374-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-6384-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive