LAKE, Arthur (1567-1626)

Lake was born in Southampton, the son of a local customs official who had migrated to the town from Nottinghamshire. After attending Southampton grammar school, under the tutelage of an eminent Walloon scholar, Adrian à Saravia, Lake secured a scholarship to Winchester College, and from there progressed to New College, Oxford. He was ordained in 1596, while still a fellow of the latter institution, but it was another three years before he obtained his first benefice, at Havant.30 Third Bk. of Remembrance of Southampton, iv. ed. T.B. James (Southampton Recs. Ser. xxii), 88; Russell, 97. As this was a crown living, he possibly owed his advancement to his elder brother, Thomas^‡, who was clerk of the signet, and a client of the powerful Cecil family. However, around this time Lake also attracted the patronage of Thomas Bilson^*, the eminent bishop of Winchester, who presented him to his next two parishes, at Hambledon and Chilcomb, made him his chaplain, and most likely arranged for him to become a fellow of Winchester College.31 CCEd; HP Commons 1604-29, v. 58;

An ambitious cleric, 1603-16

With the accession of James I, the newly knighted Sir Thomas Lake rose to greater prominence at court, and in the spring of 1603 he persuaded the king to appoint his brother Arthur as master of St Cross hospital at Winchester.32 G. Goodman, Ct. of Jas. I, i. 14; A. Lake, Sermons with Some Religious and Divine Meditations (1629), preface (unpag.); HP Commons, 1604-29, v. 58-9. Sir Thomas failed to secure yet another benefice for Arthur in the following year, but by now Lake was attracting notice on his own account. In December 1603 Bilson entrusted him with the delicate task of preparing Sir Walter Ralegh^‡ and Henry Brooke^†, 11th Lord Cobham for their anticipated executions for treason. A few months later, Lake preached at Paul’s Cross in London, lambasting the assembled laity for undermining the position of the clergy.33 HMC Hatfield, xv. 306-7; xvi. 366-7; Fincham, 95; P. Collinson, Religion of Protestants, 88. Around this time he also joined the team of scholars translating the King James bible, on which grounds he was allowed in 1605 to defer the exercises which he should have undertaken prior to receiving the degrees of BD and DD. Five months later, Bilson appointed him archdeacon of Surrey, though Lake did not initially secure the temporalities linked to this post, which had been leased to a layman, Sir Richard Tichborne^‡.34 Reg. of Univ. of Oxf. ed. A. Clark, ii. pt. 1, pp. 63-4, 141; Fincham, 33; SP15/39/44.

In later life, Lake apparently cultivated the notion that he was not personally ambitious. However, he was happy to take what opportunities came his way during his early career. In February 1608 the deanery of Worcester fell vacant when James Montagu^* was promoted to the bishopric of Bath and Wells. Alerted to the situation by his brother Sir Thomas, for whom he was currently performing minor favours, Lake leapt at the chance of fresh preferment, reasoning that this could well be a stepping-stone to yet higher office. Moreover, he expected finally to receive the profits of his archdeaconry in two years’ time, and calculated that he could legally hold that post and the Worcester deanery simultaneously, regardless of any practical difficulties that might ensue. His wish was duly granted, and he occupied both offices for the next eight years.35 Lake, preface (unpag.); CSP Dom. 1603-10, p. 410; HMC Hatfield, xx. 89; SP15/39/44. By 1609 he was preaching occasionally at court, though it is unclear whether he ever became a royal chaplain.36 P.E. McCullough, Sermons at Ct. (suppl. cal. 155-6, 299-300); WAM, Muniment Bk. 15, f. 38; Lake, pt. 4, pp. 107-87. Meanwhile in 1613 Sir Thomas secured for him the wardenship of New College.37 K. Fincham, ‘Oxf. and the Early Stuart Polity’, Seventeenth-Century Oxf. ed. N. Tyacke (Hist. of the Univ. of Oxf. iv), 193. Once back in Oxford, Lake proved to be a generous benefactor, establishing college lectureships in Hebrew and mathematics, and donating a substantial collection of books to support these studies. However, he also supplemented his own income by obtaining the Oxfordshire benefice of Stanton St John, which was in the gift of New College.38 Ath. Ox. ii. 399-400; Lake, preface (unpag.); M. Feingold, ‘Oriental Studies’, Seventeenth-Century Oxf. ed. Tyacke, 457-8, 476; CCEd.

A pastoral bishop, 1616-21

Lake’s career reached its apogee in 1616. In July that year he was appointed vice chancellor of Oxford. Almost simultaneously, rumours circulated that he would become bishop of Bath and Wells, in succession to James Montagu. Once again, Sir Thomas Lake, now a secretary of state, was behind this promotion. However, as it took several months for his patronage to take effect, Lake was not finally consecrated bishop until early December.39 Chamberlain Letters, ii. 15; Fincham, Prelate as Pastor, 31. By that time, he had sufficiently impressed in his role as vice chancellor that the university reputedly pondered whether, contrary to precedent, he might remain in post indefinitely, notwithstanding his episcopal duties. However, Lake himself considered that this would prove unworkable. Accordingly, he continued in office only until mid-1617, long enough to see out a complete academic year, and to preside over the investiture of William Herbert^*, 3rd earl of Pembroke, as chancellor of Oxford. He then moved permanently to Wells, having by now relinquished all his other ecclesiastical appointments.40 Lake, preface (unpag.); Chamberlain Letters, ii. 56; CSP Dom. 1611-18, p. 410.

Lake had an immediate impact on his diocese. Normally resident in Somerset, unlike his predecessor, he interpreted his new role primarily in pastoral terms, and led by example. With a healthy income as bishop, he lived in some state, with a household of around 50 people, though he was personally abstemious and noted for his hospitality.41 Fincham, Prelate as Pastor, 157, 312; T. Fuller, Worthies of Eng. iii. 85; Lake, preface (unpag.). An enthusiastic preacher, who regularly occupied pulpits not just in Wells but also at Bath and other parts of the county, he conducted his visitations in person, performing confirmations and assessing the quality of his clergy. Those who fell short could expect to receive further instruction in their duties, and he removed deficient incumbents only as a last resort.42 Fincham, Prelate as Pastor, 87-8, 133, 185, 208-9, 320; Lake, preface (unpag.). Lake adopted much the same approach in his dealings with the laity. While content to leave most diocesan administration to his subordinates, he took a close interest in the punishment of those who broke Church law. Uniquely among bishops of this period, he regularly preached during acts of public penance, reminding offenders of the gravity of their situation, but also promoting reconciliation.43 Fincham, Prelate as Pastor, 157, 173, 254-5; Lake, preface (unpag.); I. Walton, Lives of Dr John Donne … and Dr Robert Sanderson (1796), 423. He maintained amicable relations with both Wells corporation and the Somerset gentry, usually attending the quarter sessions at Wells, but not otherwise interfering in county affairs unless invited to mediate in disputes. Consequently, he soon enjoyed widespread respect and even affection within his diocese.44 Fincham, Prelate as Pastor, 94, 98-9; Som. Q. Sess. Recs. 1607-25 ed. E.H. Bates (Som. Rec. Soc. xxiii), 220, 244, 264, 323, 339, 353; Wells Convocation Acts Bks. 1589-1629 ed. A. Nott and J. Hasler (Som. Rec. Soc. xc), 301; APC, 1619-21, p. 411.

It was just as well that Lake settled easily into his episcopal role, for he was rapidly losing his original patrons at court. Bilson had died in 1616, while in January 1618 Sir Thomas Lake became embroiled in scandal, after his wife and their daughter, the estranged wife of William Cecil^*, 16th Lord Ros, levelled sensational accusations of incest and attempted murder at Ros’s stepmother, the countess of Exeter. After a year-long investigation Sir Thomas, Lady Lake, and Lady Ros were all found guilty of slander, fined, and sent to the Tower. Inevitably, Sir Thomas was also dismissed from his secretaryship, his political career in ruins.45 Chamberlain Letters, ii. 132, 145, 214-15. Lake himself did what he could to help his relatives, procuring Sir Thomas’ release from close confinement in the Tower, and attempting with less success to advise Lady Ros, when she chose to make a full confession to the king. In July 1619 Lake took formal custody of his errant niece, though Sir Thomas somewhat ungraciously rejected the same option, preferring to negotiate his own freedom on bail. Although accused at the time of intervening too much on his family’s behalf, Lake emerged from this saga personally unscathed, and he was even appointed the next year to the Canterbury High Commission.46 Ibid. 233, 235, 255; Add. 72253, f. 51v.

By inclination a peacemaker, Lake eschewed controversy in religious affairs, believing that theological disputes hampered the work of the Church. A moderate Calvinist, he was tolerant of the puritan clergy in his diocese, provided that they avoided nonconformity. When consulted in 1618 by his friend and colleague Samuel Ward, a newly appointed delegate to the Synod of Dort, Lake warned against the formulation of firm doctrinal statements on debatable issues, urging a focus instead on ‘such divinity … as is least doubtful and most useful’.47 Fincham, Prelate as Pastor, 257, 269; N. Tyacke, Anti-Calvinists, 93-4; Collinson, 89. On the vexed issue of double predestination, he preferred the compromise position of hypothetical universalism, which argued that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross had wiped out original sin, although persistent individual sinfulness meant that not all people were thereby saved. Hardline Calvinists found it difficult to distinguish this view from those Arminian teachings on grace and salvation which had prompted the summoning of the synod. However, such opinions ensured that Lake remained popular both with his fellow Calvinists and with English Arminians like Peter Heylyn, who revered him as ‘a man of great learning and exemplary piety’.48 J. Davies, Caroline Captivity of the Church, 93; Tyacke, 94; Fincham, 267-8; P. Heylyn, Cyprianus Anglicus (1668), 159.

Parliament and religious politics, 1621-3

Lake is not known to have exercised electoral patronage in the run-up to the 1621 Parliament. He was present for the state opening on 30 Jan., and subsequently attended the Lords for 92 out of a possible 111 sittings. His only extended absence, for which he was formally excused, lasted for just four consecutive sittings at the start of December.49 Add. 40086, f. 30. Lake attracted 28 nominations, a respectable total for a newcomer to the upper House. Indeed, he must quickly have created a good impression, as he was appointed on 21 Feb. to help review whether certain recently-presented bills deserved a passage in the Lords. He was also subsequently named to examine the entries in the draft journal, and to consider petitions to the upper House that had not yet been dealt with.50 LJ, iii. 15a, 25b, 73b, 141a.

Lake’s maiden speech, on 23 Mar., was a brief comment on whether evidence of corruption presented against the lord chancellor, Francis Bacon^*, Viscount St. Alban, could subsequently be used against the witness in question. He presumably spoke at greater length on 30 Apr., when, during a debate on the bill to suppress recusancy, he called for measures to encourage church attendance by Catholics, rather than simply punishing their absenteeism. Lake was duly named to the bill’s committee, and also to two conferences at which both Houses discussed the proposed petition to the king for enforcement of existing anti-Catholic legislation.51 LD 1621, 1625 and 1628, p. 37; LD 1621, p. 40; LJ, iii. 17a, 18b, 101a. However, he was also keen to address the failings of the Protestant community, and on 30 Apr. introduced a bill against prophane swearing and related offences. Lake was nominated to the committee for this measure, but the bill did not return to the House. He was also named to scrutinize another bill against Sabbath abuses, and appointed to a conference which considered how to expedite this legislation.52 LD 1621, p. 41; LJ, iii. 39b, 101b, 130b.

Having been nominated to confer with the Commons on how best to apprehend the corrupt patentee Sir Giles Mompesson^‡, Lake was also appointed to a conference at which the lower House presented evidence about the wider abuse of monopolies. He was also named to the Lords’ select committee which examined grievances arising from Mompesson’s patent for gold and silver thread.53 LJ, iii. 34a, 42b, 47a. Lake doubtless took a close interest in the bill to confirm the foundation of Wadham College, Oxford, of which he was the visitor, and was nominated to its committee. He presumably also backed the similar bill concerning the Charterhouse in London, and he was named to help consider the proposal by George Villiers^*, marquess (later 1st duke) of Buckingham, for a new academy to educate the sons of the nobility and gentry.54 Ibid. 32b, 37a, 126b. Having been appointed in April to a bill committee concerning informers, Lake was also nominated during the winter sitting to a conference about this measure. In his only recorded speech during this second sitting, he supplied evidence against a man accused of forging letters of protection in the name of Edward Stafford^*, 4th Lord Stafford.55 Ibid. 75b, 177b; LD 1621, p. 96.

While in London in November 1621, Lake was named to the highly sensitive commission appointed to grant a dispensation to the archbishop of Canterbury, George Abbot^*, for accidentally killing a gamekeeper. Even so, in the following year Lake was criticized by Abbot over Somerset’s slow progress in collecting the Palatine benevolence, prompting him to issue a gentle warning to the dean and chapter of Wells that he would report them if they failed to contribute.56 CSP Dom. 1619-23, p. 311; Fincham, Prelate as Pastor, 109. However, the bishop normally maintained good relations with the government. In June 1622 he allowed the lord keeper, John Williams^*, bishop of Lincoln (later archbishop of York), to nominate a canon of Wells, while in July 1623 he was given custody of the dowager countess of Shrewsbury, who had been imprisoned in the Tower since 1611 for assisting the flight of Arbella Stuart.57 HMC Wells, ii. 379; APC, 1623-5, p. 73; CSP Dom. 1611-18, p. 48. Lake was undoubtedly troubled by the pursuit of a Spanish bride by Prince Charles (Stuart^*, prince of Wales). While he declined to denounce the Roman Catholic Church as entirely devoid of all features of true religion, and was indeed a supporter of such Catholic practices as auricular confession, he nonetheless viewed most Roman doctrines as evidence of ‘a dying faith’, riddled with errors and intolerable superstitions. Consequently, as he explained to Samuel Ward in the autumn of 1623, he was greatly relieved to hear of ‘the prince’s safe return and so noble resolution in point of religion’, given that Protestantism had of late been ‘shrewdly shaken’.58 Fincham, Prelate as Pastor, 261; Lake, i. 538, 544; Collinson, 7.

The 1624 Parliament

In January 1624, with the next parliamentary elections imminent, the Somerset landowner Sir Edward Hext^‡ wrote to Lake, urging him to support the return of Sir Robert Phelips^‡ as a knight of the shire. The bishop apparently canvassed his fellow magistrates during the Wells quarter sessions, but reported back to Hext that he had met with a wall of silence, and was unclear whether the justices planned to promote particular candidates or not. Accordingly, he had settled for advocating a show of unity in the county. In the event, Phelips was elected as the senior knight, while Lake managed to secure the return of his nephew, Sir Arthur Lake^‡, and his diocesan chancellor, Arthur Duck^‡, at Minehead.59 Som. RO, DD/PH 224/12; HP Commons 1604-29, ii. 358.

Back at Westminster, Lake attended the Lords even more assiduously during the 1624 session, missing just four sittings. Although recorded as speaking only five times, he received 38 appointments, including membership of the committee and subcommittee for privileges. He was also named to the standing committee for petitions. On 27 Feb. he excused the absence of his friend Nicholas Felton^*, bishop of Ely, due to ill health.60 LJ, iii. 215a-b, 253a; PA, HL/PO/JO/5/1/2, f. 15.

The Lords’ immediate priority was to discuss the possibility of war with Spain. Lake initially seemed reluctant to embrace this prospect, on 28 Feb. categorizing military action as a final resort, if the options of peace and a marriage treaty were now unattainable. Despite this, he was nominated the same day to the committee to examine precedents for breaking off the current Anglo-Spanish negotiations, and on 2 Mar. to the conference at which the two Houses discussed how to persuade King James to agree to this course. Thereafter Lake was appointed to four conferences about war finance, and named to attend the king with a message from both Houses on the same topic.61 LD 1624 and 1626, p. 12; LJ, iii. 236b, 242b, 258b, 273b, 275a, 285a, 312a. Alongside the drive to war came a fresh crackdown on English Catholics, and Lake was nominated to the committee for the bill to enforce anti-recusant legislation.62 LJ, iii. 252b.

Although that issue dominated the Lords’ discussions during the early phase of this Parliament, Lake followed some private business of his own, a new bill to confirm the foundation of Wadham College. This received its first two readings in the upper House on 22 Mar., having been steered through the Commons by Arthur Duck. Lake was appointed to the committee, which approved the measure without amendments, and it was enacted at the end of the session.63 Ibid. 273a, 275a, 278b; CJ, i. 683b; Kyle thesis, 481. On 26 Feb., following his nomination to the committee for the bill to confirm hospitals and free schools, Lake successfully moved for this committee to consider at the same time the question of ‘lands given for reparation of churches’. The outcome of this intervention is unclear, but the bishop was named to a further bill committee concerned with the confirmation of hospitals and almshouses.64 LJ, iii. 219a, 268a; LD 1624 and 1626, p. 2.

One unexpected side-effect of the drive to war was the emergence of corruption allegations against the lord treasurer, Lionel Cranfield^*, 1st earl of Middlesex. On 16 Apr. Lake was added to the committee investigating these complaints, while on 24 Apr. he was named to consider two petitions relating to a peripheral aspect of the inquiry, the earl’s land purchases from Sir Roger Dallison^‡.65 LJ, iii. 310b, 317b, 320b. When Middlesex finally responded to the charges against him, Lake was appointed to assess his arguments, a task for which he was now well-equipped, having in recent weeks helped to examine more than 20 witnesses.66 Ibid. 329a, 346a-9a, 353a-6-b, 357b-8a, 365a. On 12 May he observed that the earl had questioned the accuracy of one charge of bribery, prompting Lord Keeper Williams to affirm the reliability of the evidence. Once Middlesex had been found guilty by the Lords, Lake was named to the committee for the bill to make the earl’s estates liable for payment of his debts, and also nominated to assess the compensation owing to the Dallison family.67 LD 1624 and 1626, p. 79; LJ, iii. 386a, 396a.

Lake’s only other speech during this session concerned the bill to confirm an exchange of property between the crown and Tobie Matthew^*, archbishop of York. The debate on 14 May threw up the issue of how this deal might affect Matthew’s local jurisdictions, whereupon Lake explained the system of dispensations enjoyed by bishops when visiting other dioceses.68 LD 1624 and 1626, p. 95. His other appointments included the legislative committees dealing with purveyance, the granting of subsidies, monopolies, usury, and magistrates’ powers to grant restitution of possession.69 LJ, iii. 267b, 288b, 296a, 325a, 406b.

Final years and reputation, 1625-6

Lake was recorded as preaching at court in the closing weeks of James I’s reign, though the text has not been identified, and it is not known whether he was still in London when the king died.70 LC5/183, f. 2; McCullough (suppl. cal. 289). He presumably returned to Somerset in time for the elections to the first Caroline Parliament. Lake seems not to have involved himself in the shire election, but he was granted the nomination of one burgess-ship at Wells, which he handed to his nephew, Sir Thomas Lake^‡. A seat was also found for Sir Arthur Lake at Bridgwater, though it is unclear whether this was due to the bishop’s influence or the local standing of the Rodney family, into which Sir Arthur’s sister, the former Lady Ros, had married.71 HP Commons 1604-29, ii. 352, 361; The Gen. n.s. xvii. 102; Wells Convocation Acts Bks. 407.

As usual, Lake was a regular face in the Lords during this session, attending both the Westminster and Oxford sittings, and missing just two days at each venue. He is not known to have contributed to debates in the Lords, but he received 11 appointments, one of the first being to the committee for privileges. Much of his business this time related to religion. On 23 June he was named to confer with the Commons about the proposed petition for a general fast. Five days later he was appointed to preach at the Lords’ own fast day on 2 July.72 Procs. 1625, pp. 43, 45, 69. Lake’s sermon, on 1 Kings 8:37-40, was for the most part a conventional exposition of national hardships as evidence of God’s displeasure, which could be removed only by an appropriate display of repentance. However, drawing on his own evangelical preoccupations, he also identified as a current cause for concern the slow growth rate of Christianity in recent times, what he termed ‘the great diminution of the orthodox Church’. Here he particularly criticized the many people who now travelled to the Indies or America to enrich themselves, but did nothing to spread the gospel to the native inhabitants. This was not simply an attempt by Lake to add novelty to a time-worn theme. His circle of friends included John White, the godly founder of the Massachusetts Bay Company, and, according to the radical Hugh Peter, the bishop expressed disappointment that he was unable to undertake missionary work in America himself.73 Lake, ii. 200-20 (esp. 207 and 217); H. Peter, A Dying Father’s Last Legacy to an Onely Child (1660), 101. Lake was formally thanked for his preaching two days later, but his zeal for converting the colonies was largely lost on the Lords, who were more concerned with the immediate threat posed by Catholics at home. Three of Lake’s remaining appointments concerned conferences about the joint petition of both Houses against recusants. He was also named to help amend this document, and to scrutinize the latest bill designed to enforce existing anti-Catholic measures. Nevertheless, it was probably not coincidental that he was also nominated to the committee for the bill on the American fisheries, the only legislation in this session which touched on the new colonies.74 Procs. 1625, pp. 78, 84, 146, 174, 179.

Lake’s final months were overshadowed by illness. In October 1625 he agreed to the cancellation of the customary fair at Wells, due to the risk of plague. Meanwhile, his own health was failing, and when he drew up his will on 27 Dec. he described himself as ‘weak in body’. Despite this, he was again able to exert influence over the parliamentary elections at Wells and Bridgwater, where Sir Thomas and Sir Arthur Lake resumed their seats. Back in London in early 1626, the bishop was accorded a place of great honour in Charles I’s coronation procession on 2 Feb., walking alongside the king himself.75 Wells Convocation Acts Bks. 420-1, 427-9; PROB 11/152, f. 318v; HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 352; T. Fuller, Church Hist. of Britain, vi. 27-8.

Lake’s performance during the second Caroline Parliament was curtailed by his physical decline. He attended the Lords for all but two days up to mid-April, but during the latter part of that month took his seat only on the 24th and 29th, his final appearances. He was excused for the fourth and last time on 1 May.76 Procs. 1626, i. 62, 267, 300, 327. Presumably he was still in reasonable health at the start of this session, since he was as usual named to the standing committees for privileges and petitions. However, he made no known speeches, and attracted only 15 other appointments. These included select committees to consider the defence of the realm, the plight of captives held by Barbary pirates, and assistance for plague victims in London.77 Ibid. 48, 110, 192, 258. His 12 bill committees covered such topics as recusancy, the maintenance of almshouses, increase of trade and, once again, the foundation of Sutton’s Hospital.78 Ibid. 53, 110, 127-8.

Lake died on 4 May, having made ‘a zealous and devout confession’ on his deathbed to his friend Bishop Felton. In his will, which he reconfirmed that day, he described himself as ‘well nigh thirty years a preacher’, and expressed the hope that the Anglican Church would ‘ever flourish and fructify in this kingdom … and from thence to be propagated to other countries which sit in darkness’. Much of the will was devoted to the disposal of his books, the beneficiaries including New College, Winchester College, Wells Cathedral library and four kinsmen. The collection ranged from Foxe’s Actes and Monumentes and Holinshed’s Chronicles, to the collected works of St Augustine and St Ambrose, Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History ‘in Greek and Latin’, and ‘the king of Spain’s bibles in eight volumes’. Lake divided the residue of his goods into three parts, one for his godson Lancelot Lake^‡, one for his servants, and one for assorted poor relatives. He had already provided for a favourite nephew, Philip Mahat, by appointing him a canon of Wells, and he now bequeathed to him the manuscripts of his collected sermons, which he wished to have published. His episcopal and Parliament robes were to be disposed of at the discretion of his executor, his brother Sir Thomas Lake.79 Lake, preface (unpag.); PROB 11/152, ff. 318v-19v; HMC Wells, ii. 377; Fincham, Prelate as Pastor, 190.

At his own request Lake was buried in Wells Cathedral, close to the bishop’s seat, though the poetic epitaph that he penned for himself was not used on his simple gravestone. A copious selection of his sermons was published by Mahat in 1629, prefaced with a eulogistic account of Lake’s life by John Harris, another New College man; and a further collection appeared 11 years later.80 PROB 11/152, 318v; Ath. Ox. ii. 399; Hembry, 216-17; Ten Sermons upon Several Occasions (1640). Lake was held in high regard at the time of his death, and his reputation endured in subsequent decades. As the generally jaundiced Anthony Wood later observed, ‘in all [the bishop’s] places of honour and employment, he carried himself the same in mind and person, showing by his constancy, that his virtues were virtues indeed; in all kind of which, whether natural, moral, theological, personal, or pastoral, he was eminent, and indeed one of the examples of his time’.81 T. Birch, Ct. and Times of Chas. I, i. 107; Ath. Ox. ii. 399.