|
Walter Bushnell, vicar of Box
1644 - 1655 and 1660 - 1666: The Rise, Fall and Rise Again David Ibberson July 2015 The trial of Walter Bushnell demonstrates the complex religious issues in England during the period of the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell. The Bushnell trial was not unique. The Commissioners of the Committee of Ejectors investigated many parish priests during the period 1645 to 1660. Some priests were accused of involvement with the king’s army. Some were dismissed for using the Common Prayer Book after 1645, which was thought to be insufficiently Protestant. Others were accused of theological incorrectness, including putting up pictures of the Ascension and the elevation of the communion table from the church floor.[1] In Wiltshire alone, eighty clergy were thrown out of their livings for being too traditional or having royalist sympathies; sixty clergy left in the 1660’s because they were too radical to accept the authority of bishops, the Book of Common Prayer and the Established Church.[2] Right: Postcard courtesy of Box Parish Council |
|
Introduction
Walter Bushnell lived in turbulent times. His life spanned the end of the Tudor period through the early Stuarts and the Commonwealth. We would know little of his life had he not recorded a narrative of his experience on being brought before Cromwell’s Committee of Ejectors in 1654.[3] The narrative, no doubt heavily biased, paints a picture of life during that period and the characters present at his trial. This is Walter’s story.
Early Life
Little is known of the early life of Walter Bushnell other than he was baptised in Corsham Church on the 15 January 1608. The baptism records of St Bartholomew’s suggest he was one of six children, Elizabeth, Jone, William, Sibball, Walter and Marye, their father was recorded as Oswold Bushnell.
Oswold must have been a man of some authority and learning given that in 1606 he wrote to the Earl of Salisbury petitioning on behalf of the tenants of the Queen's Manor of Corsham concerning fines imposed by the Earl of Hertford for non-payment of muster fees,[4] it has been suggested he was in fact the Bailiff. Oswold married Jane Jones on the 14 September 1595 at St Bartholomew’s Church. Interestingly their first born child, Elizabeth, was baptised on the 30 March 1596 suggesting that Jane was with child at the time of the marriage necessitating a speedy union.
John Coren: A Troublesome Priest
Meanwhile in Box, John Coren (Vicar of Box 1601 to 1644) was busy alienating his parishioners. Destiny would bring these two men, John Coren and Walter Bushnell, together in 1636.
Martin Ingram, in his book Church Courts, Sex and Marriage 1571-1640 singled out John Coren as being totally unsuited to the task. John Coren courted controversy throughout his ministry. He was accused of sexual immorality, drunkenness and blasphemy. He was deeply in debt and it is suggested that he had to be accompanied by armed guards wherever he went for fear of being given writs to pay outstanding debts. He was also engaged in numerous law suits which prompted Walter some years later to record that John Coren new the Acts of Parliament better than the Acts of the Apostles. John Coren was not impressed with his parishioners either, cursing them from the Porch of the Church.
These were dangerous times, the Church was being torn apart by internal divisions and the Clergy, in particular the Bishops, were hugely unpopular, akin to modern day Bankers. John Coren was judged as being an insufficient minister by some of his congregation, he was by no means alone, the puritanical cause was gaining momentum.
Enter Rev Walter Bushnell
Whilst John Coren was active in Box, Walter was in Corsham, in his mid teens, preparing to attend Magdalen Hall (now part of Hertford College, Oxford). He matriculated in 1628 at the age of 19; three years later in 1631 he was awarded Bachelor of Arts, followed by a Masters in 1634. On the 12 June 1636 he was ordained deacon and on the same day appointed curate of Box, in effect, carrying out the church offices, as instructed or required by John Coren.
It was a common practice for vicars to employ curates to carry out their duties, many were absent for long periods and it is possible that John Coren spent time away from the parish following his second marriage in 1631 to Mary Morgan in London. His first wife, Edith, daughter of Edward Long of Ashley Manor had died some years previous. John Coren died about 1644 to be replaced by his curate, Walter Bushnell. Walter would have been lost to history, had he not been caught up in religious disputes which swept the country at the time resulting in bloody conflict between Roundheads and Royalists.
Walter Bushnell lived in turbulent times. His life spanned the end of the Tudor period through the early Stuarts and the Commonwealth. We would know little of his life had he not recorded a narrative of his experience on being brought before Cromwell’s Committee of Ejectors in 1654.[3] The narrative, no doubt heavily biased, paints a picture of life during that period and the characters present at his trial. This is Walter’s story.
Early Life
Little is known of the early life of Walter Bushnell other than he was baptised in Corsham Church on the 15 January 1608. The baptism records of St Bartholomew’s suggest he was one of six children, Elizabeth, Jone, William, Sibball, Walter and Marye, their father was recorded as Oswold Bushnell.
Oswold must have been a man of some authority and learning given that in 1606 he wrote to the Earl of Salisbury petitioning on behalf of the tenants of the Queen's Manor of Corsham concerning fines imposed by the Earl of Hertford for non-payment of muster fees,[4] it has been suggested he was in fact the Bailiff. Oswold married Jane Jones on the 14 September 1595 at St Bartholomew’s Church. Interestingly their first born child, Elizabeth, was baptised on the 30 March 1596 suggesting that Jane was with child at the time of the marriage necessitating a speedy union.
John Coren: A Troublesome Priest
Meanwhile in Box, John Coren (Vicar of Box 1601 to 1644) was busy alienating his parishioners. Destiny would bring these two men, John Coren and Walter Bushnell, together in 1636.
Martin Ingram, in his book Church Courts, Sex and Marriage 1571-1640 singled out John Coren as being totally unsuited to the task. John Coren courted controversy throughout his ministry. He was accused of sexual immorality, drunkenness and blasphemy. He was deeply in debt and it is suggested that he had to be accompanied by armed guards wherever he went for fear of being given writs to pay outstanding debts. He was also engaged in numerous law suits which prompted Walter some years later to record that John Coren new the Acts of Parliament better than the Acts of the Apostles. John Coren was not impressed with his parishioners either, cursing them from the Porch of the Church.
These were dangerous times, the Church was being torn apart by internal divisions and the Clergy, in particular the Bishops, were hugely unpopular, akin to modern day Bankers. John Coren was judged as being an insufficient minister by some of his congregation, he was by no means alone, the puritanical cause was gaining momentum.
Enter Rev Walter Bushnell
Whilst John Coren was active in Box, Walter was in Corsham, in his mid teens, preparing to attend Magdalen Hall (now part of Hertford College, Oxford). He matriculated in 1628 at the age of 19; three years later in 1631 he was awarded Bachelor of Arts, followed by a Masters in 1634. On the 12 June 1636 he was ordained deacon and on the same day appointed curate of Box, in effect, carrying out the church offices, as instructed or required by John Coren.
It was a common practice for vicars to employ curates to carry out their duties, many were absent for long periods and it is possible that John Coren spent time away from the parish following his second marriage in 1631 to Mary Morgan in London. His first wife, Edith, daughter of Edward Long of Ashley Manor had died some years previous. John Coren died about 1644 to be replaced by his curate, Walter Bushnell. Walter would have been lost to history, had he not been caught up in religious disputes which swept the country at the time resulting in bloody conflict between Roundheads and Royalists.
There was money and influence at stake in addition to theological correctness behind the trial of Bushnell. In 1649-50, the benefice of Box was described in a survey of Wiltshire churches:
"Box is a vicarage presentative worth four score pounds (£80) per annum. Walter Bushnell, clerke, is the present Incumbent and receiveth the profitts to his own use. And that the parsonage of Haselburye being near thereunto, where no consyant preaching Minister, is thought fit to be annexed to the Vicarage of Box, which Parsonage is neare worthe twentye pounds per annum." [5]
And there was considerable patronage still in existence. In 1649 the Parish Registers record the power and influence of the Speke family, their disposition of church seating arrangements and their place in the chancel of the church.
"Box is a vicarage presentative worth four score pounds (£80) per annum. Walter Bushnell, clerke, is the present Incumbent and receiveth the profitts to his own use. And that the parsonage of Haselburye being near thereunto, where no consyant preaching Minister, is thought fit to be annexed to the Vicarage of Box, which Parsonage is neare worthe twentye pounds per annum." [5]
And there was considerable patronage still in existence. In 1649 the Parish Registers record the power and influence of the Speke family, their disposition of church seating arrangements and their place in the chancel of the church.
| seating_arrangements.doc |
Trial of Walter Bushnell
In 1656, Walter Bushnell was brought before the Committee of Ejectors for being an insufficient minister; in particular, he was charged with:
1. Drinking to excess
2. Playing cards and dice
3. Expressing dissatisfaction with the Government
4. Attempting to induce a servant lady to acts of un-cleanliness.
Walter wrote a narrative of the proceedings which he published after the Restoration of the monarchy in 1660. In it he paints a rather vivid picture of the witnesses giving evidence against him and the commissioners examining him. We shouldn’t be surprised that he painted the witnesses as a motley crew of villains and was uncomplimentary about the Commissioners.
The Participants
The story of the Ejectors starts in Westminster with a man called Adoniram Byfield who was to play a significant role in Walter's downfall. Byfield was appointed one of the two scribes to the Westminster Assembly. This was a synod meeting assembled to restructure the Church of England. Byfield was an enthusiastic puritan and chaplin to Sir Henry Chalmondeley's Regiment of Foot at the Battle of Edgehill in 1642. Sometime between 1649 and 1654 he was appointed rector of Collingbourne Ducis and in the same year nominated as Assistant Commissioner for Wiltshire on the Committee of Ejectors.
Joining him on the Committee (among others) was Mr Humphrey Chambers who was already in conflict with his bishop by preaching up morality of the Sabbath. It is recorded that it caused him two years of serious difficulty including imprisonment and sequestration. About 1648 Humphrey was appointed Vicar of Pewsey although he may have had a second living near Bath. He was a well-educated clergyman with a BA, BD and Doctorate from University College Oxford.
Witness for the Commonwealth
The only information we have about the witnesses comes from Walter's recorded comments. Captain John Travers of Slaughterford was a principle witness. According to Walter he was well-known in Box for his dubious horse dealing as well as infamy with the wife of Mr White. There were the Pinchins of Box Mill, Joan, William and Elizabeth, a family deeply in debt who owed Walter a significant amount of money.
Then there were the Cottles, William and Richard of Box and Lawrence of Ditteridge. Walter records that William was an habitual drinker who had once been accused of rape and on another occasion, of stealing poles from Hungerford Wood whilst accompanied by the local hangman, John Twyford. William may have died during the course of the trial, prompting Walter to write, But mark the sequel: and here I would have the reader to admire, to wonder, to tremble, but not to judge.
William Sanders of Chippenham was another witness. His father lived in Church House. Sanders was a shoemaker by trade who Walter maintained was also skilled at robbery. He apparently robbed Thomas Stockman of Bathford following a drinking bout in Corsham. He was also said to have been caught with his head up a chimney in Corsham attempting to steal bacon. Finally, there was Obidiah Cheltenham of Ditteridge, a clothier, who had accused Walter of saying the same prayer before every sermon, such that the village boys knew it by heart and laughed at it.
The Ejectors
Walter recorded the names of eight of the Ejectors: Adoniram Byfield, Humphrey Chambers, Mr Blissitt, Thomas Bayly, Thomas Hunt, Gabriel Martin, William Shute, Richard Phelps and the Marlborough Men.
Byfield received most of Walter's criticism. Walter implied that he had difficulty keeping his tongue stationary, encouraging witnesses when he approved of their testimony and throwing out others. It seems he was only silent when his tongue was wrapped around his pipe. In fairness to Byfield, he was known as a skilled examiner as a result of lessons learned when a scribe to the Westminster Assembly.
Mr Blissett also failed to endear himself to Walter when it was suggested he accepted £20 from Mr Stern (subsequently Walter's replacement). This may well have been innocent but Walter commented that had he been so inclined, he also could purchase an advantage. Walter suggested that another Commissioner, Humphrey Chambers, turned a blind eye to irregularities in witnesses' signed depositions, but he did acknowledge that he was a man possessed of strict puritanical views.
The Outcome
The Committee of Ejectors removed Walter from his living in Box in 1655, considering him an ignorant and insufficient minister and he was replaced by John Stern. This was not the end, however. Walter returned to Box in 1660 and was re-appointed as Box's vicar in 1662. He died in 1666 and is buried in the churchyard of St Thomas à Becket.
In 1656, Walter Bushnell was brought before the Committee of Ejectors for being an insufficient minister; in particular, he was charged with:
1. Drinking to excess
2. Playing cards and dice
3. Expressing dissatisfaction with the Government
4. Attempting to induce a servant lady to acts of un-cleanliness.
Walter wrote a narrative of the proceedings which he published after the Restoration of the monarchy in 1660. In it he paints a rather vivid picture of the witnesses giving evidence against him and the commissioners examining him. We shouldn’t be surprised that he painted the witnesses as a motley crew of villains and was uncomplimentary about the Commissioners.
The Participants
The story of the Ejectors starts in Westminster with a man called Adoniram Byfield who was to play a significant role in Walter's downfall. Byfield was appointed one of the two scribes to the Westminster Assembly. This was a synod meeting assembled to restructure the Church of England. Byfield was an enthusiastic puritan and chaplin to Sir Henry Chalmondeley's Regiment of Foot at the Battle of Edgehill in 1642. Sometime between 1649 and 1654 he was appointed rector of Collingbourne Ducis and in the same year nominated as Assistant Commissioner for Wiltshire on the Committee of Ejectors.
Joining him on the Committee (among others) was Mr Humphrey Chambers who was already in conflict with his bishop by preaching up morality of the Sabbath. It is recorded that it caused him two years of serious difficulty including imprisonment and sequestration. About 1648 Humphrey was appointed Vicar of Pewsey although he may have had a second living near Bath. He was a well-educated clergyman with a BA, BD and Doctorate from University College Oxford.
Witness for the Commonwealth
The only information we have about the witnesses comes from Walter's recorded comments. Captain John Travers of Slaughterford was a principle witness. According to Walter he was well-known in Box for his dubious horse dealing as well as infamy with the wife of Mr White. There were the Pinchins of Box Mill, Joan, William and Elizabeth, a family deeply in debt who owed Walter a significant amount of money.
Then there were the Cottles, William and Richard of Box and Lawrence of Ditteridge. Walter records that William was an habitual drinker who had once been accused of rape and on another occasion, of stealing poles from Hungerford Wood whilst accompanied by the local hangman, John Twyford. William may have died during the course of the trial, prompting Walter to write, But mark the sequel: and here I would have the reader to admire, to wonder, to tremble, but not to judge.
William Sanders of Chippenham was another witness. His father lived in Church House. Sanders was a shoemaker by trade who Walter maintained was also skilled at robbery. He apparently robbed Thomas Stockman of Bathford following a drinking bout in Corsham. He was also said to have been caught with his head up a chimney in Corsham attempting to steal bacon. Finally, there was Obidiah Cheltenham of Ditteridge, a clothier, who had accused Walter of saying the same prayer before every sermon, such that the village boys knew it by heart and laughed at it.
The Ejectors
Walter recorded the names of eight of the Ejectors: Adoniram Byfield, Humphrey Chambers, Mr Blissitt, Thomas Bayly, Thomas Hunt, Gabriel Martin, William Shute, Richard Phelps and the Marlborough Men.
Byfield received most of Walter's criticism. Walter implied that he had difficulty keeping his tongue stationary, encouraging witnesses when he approved of their testimony and throwing out others. It seems he was only silent when his tongue was wrapped around his pipe. In fairness to Byfield, he was known as a skilled examiner as a result of lessons learned when a scribe to the Westminster Assembly.
Mr Blissett also failed to endear himself to Walter when it was suggested he accepted £20 from Mr Stern (subsequently Walter's replacement). This may well have been innocent but Walter commented that had he been so inclined, he also could purchase an advantage. Walter suggested that another Commissioner, Humphrey Chambers, turned a blind eye to irregularities in witnesses' signed depositions, but he did acknowledge that he was a man possessed of strict puritanical views.
The Outcome
The Committee of Ejectors removed Walter from his living in Box in 1655, considering him an ignorant and insufficient minister and he was replaced by John Stern. This was not the end, however. Walter returned to Box in 1660 and was re-appointed as Box's vicar in 1662. He died in 1666 and is buried in the churchyard of St Thomas à Becket.
| 586_walter_bushnell_will.pdf |
Walter published the narrative of his appearances before the Commissions after the Restoration of the king, on which I based my story in The Vicars of Thomas à Becket (which I must confess is heavily biased in favour of Walter).[6] However, the Commissioners responded to Walter's narrative and Humphrey Chambers published his own response in a paper entitled His answer to Mr Bushnell about the proceedings of the Commission. Unfortunately I have been unable to trace a copy of this paper.
Conclusion
So what are we to conclude? I believe Walter Bushnell to be no saint, possessive of human frailty as we all are, I believe the Commissioners acted in accordance with their strong puritanical faith and as for the witnesses, were they motivated by greed, vindictiveness or belief? That we will never know.
Conclusion
So what are we to conclude? I believe Walter Bushnell to be no saint, possessive of human frailty as we all are, I believe the Commissioners acted in accordance with their strong puritanical faith and as for the witnesses, were they motivated by greed, vindictiveness or belief? That we will never know.
Sources
www.ancestory.com, Parish Registers
National Archives, Oswold Bushnell -The Cecil Papers
Martin Ingram, Church Courts, Sex and Marriage 1571-1640, John Coren
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboniram_Byfield
http://www.apuritansmind.com/the-puriton-era/puriton-memoirs/puiton-memoirs-mr-humphrey-chambers/
www.ancestory.com, Parish Registers
National Archives, Oswold Bushnell -The Cecil Papers
Martin Ingram, Church Courts, Sex and Marriage 1571-1640, John Coren
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboniram_Byfield
http://www.apuritansmind.com/the-puriton-era/puriton-memoirs/puiton-memoirs-mr-humphrey-chambers/
References
[1] Victoria County History of Wiltshire, Vol III, p.41
[2] Derek Parker and John Chandler, Wiltshire Churches: An Illustrated History, 1993, Alan Sutton, p.105-6
[3] Government committee to interview and expel inadequate spiritual leaders in parish positions and schoolmasters.
[4] National Archives, Oswold Bushnell -The Cecil Papers
[5] Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, Vol XLI, p.2
[6] David Ibberson, The Vicars of St Thomas à Becket, Box, 1987
[1] Victoria County History of Wiltshire, Vol III, p.41
[2] Derek Parker and John Chandler, Wiltshire Churches: An Illustrated History, 1993, Alan Sutton, p.105-6
[3] Government committee to interview and expel inadequate spiritual leaders in parish positions and schoolmasters.
[4] National Archives, Oswold Bushnell -The Cecil Papers
[5] Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, Vol XLI, p.2
[6] David Ibberson, The Vicars of St Thomas à Becket, Box, 1987