LINDSELL, Augustine (1575-1634)

The Lindsell family doubtless originated in the village of that name situated in north-west Essex. Lindsell himself was born around nine miles further north, at Helions Bumpstead. His father, John, a prosperous yeoman, settled in later life at Balsham, across the Cambridgeshire border, where he was assessed for subsidy in 1593 at £4 10s. in land.21 Fuller, i. 507; E179/82/294. Thus, Lindsell’s background was relatively comfortable, and probably also educated and devout. His uncle, Francis, and two cousins, Thomas and Samuel, all attended Cambridge University prior to seeking ordination.22 PROB 11/166, f. 366; Al. Cant.

Lindsell entered Emmanuel College, Cambridge in 1592, but the puritan ethos there probably offended him, and he completed his studies at Clare Hall (later College), where his contemporaries included Richard ‘Dutch’ Thomson, an early advocate of Arminianism. There his pupils included Nicholas Ferrar^‡, the future founder of the Little Gidding community, who remained a close friend. As a fellow of Clare, Lindsell ‘applied himself chiefly to the studies of Greek, Hebrew and all antiquity, attaining to great exactness therein’, and becoming ‘very knowing in the ancient practices of the Jews’. Indeed, he acquired a reputation as an authority on Greek manuscripts: his circle subsequently included the noted biblical scholar James Ussher, later archbishop of Armagh, who borrowed books from him, and William Laud^*, bishop of London (later archbishop of Canterbury), who not only employed him in 1629 to catalogue Greek manuscripts donated to the Bodleian Library, Oxford, but also encouraged him to publish Greek texts.23 Corresp. of James Ussher 1600-56 ed. E. Boran, i. 261, 318; ii. 452, 791; W.D. Macray, Annals of the Bodleian Lib., Oxf. (2nd edn.), 69-71. Another important contact was Richard Montagu^* (later bishop of Norwich), who consulted both him and Thomson while writing his first book, the Two Invectives of Gregory Nazianzen.24 N. Tyacke, Anti-Calvinists, 28, 127, 146; Fuller, i. 507; PROB 11/166, f. 366.

Lindsell was ordained by 1606, when he acquired his first benefice, a Huntingdonshire parish. His second, the Essex rectory of Wickford, was procured for him by his father, who purchased the right to exercise the advowson.25 CCEd (sub Wickford, Essex, 30 Mar. 1610). Around this time, Lindsell attracted the patronage of the anti-Calvinist bishop of Lincoln, William Barlow^*, who may have appointed him his chaplain, and certainly provided him with a prebend at Lincoln Cathedral in 1612. Barlow died in the following year, but his successor, Richard Neile^* (later archbishop of York), proved to be an even more significant patron. As Neile’s chaplain, Lindsell was drawn into a circle which included such prominent critics of Calvinist theology as William Laud^* (later archbishop of Canterbury), John Buckeridge^*, bishop of Rochester, and John Cosin^†, later bishop of Durham.26 Fincham, 278-9, 287; Tyacke, 107-8; Heylyn, 59, 75. In 1619 Neile provided Lindsell with an additional prebend at Durham Cathedral. For the next decade, he and Cosin actively promoted changes there which anticipated the Laudian movement of the 1630s, replacing the cathedral’s wooden communion table with a stone altar, reintroducing images, and encouraging much more elaborate liturgies which scandalized the older prebendaries. Lindsell also re-ordered the church at Houghton-le-Spring, County Durham, where he was rector, modifying its communion table in 1629 so that it could be set altar-wise. In the implementation of this programme, Cosin was the more visible party, Lindsell preferring to remain in the background. As their arch-critic Peter Smart, one of the puritan canons of Durham, later observed: ‘you, Dr Lindsell, craftily lurking in corners, make bolts for friend Cosin and others to shoot; and you are thought to sit at the stern of popish Arminianism in England’.27 Cosin Corresp. i. 162-4; K. Fincham and N. Tyacke, Altars Restored, 182.

When not engaged in these activities, Lindsell was most commonly to be found at Neile’s London residence, Durham House. From there he assisted in the publication of Richard Montagu’s highly controversial Arminian books, the New Gagg and Appello Caesarem (1624 and 1625), checking over the texts, and helping to get them licensed.28 Heylyn, 75; Cosin Corresp. i. 31, 33. In 1625 a House of Commons investigation into these publications brought Lindsell’s role to light, and it was probably only the Parliament’s premature dissolution which prevented him from being summoned and examined. Lindsell apparently wrote a pamphlet around this time in support of Montagu, but it is now lost.29 Procs. 1625, pp. 325-6; Cosin Corresp. i. 77-8.

In 1628 Bishop Neile was translated to Winchester diocese. His successor at Durham, John Howson^*, was unsympathetic to Cosin and Lindsell’s innovations. Peter Smart seized his chance, accusing the two men of breaching the Elizabethan Act of Uniformity, and launching a series of lawsuits against them, one of which described Lindsell as ‘the oracle of our Arminian sectaries’.30 Cosin Corresp. i. 144-5, 165-6, 175. The latter’s support for Montagu was reportedly discussed by a Commons committee during the 1628 parliamentary session, and by August that year Lindsell felt obliged to write to Neile, requesting his protection. In the event, his fear that Smart would promote a bill against him in Parliament came to nothing, though he was criticized by John Pym^‡ during the 1629 session for arguing that Christians could fall from grace.31 Ibid. 146; CD 1629, pp. 140, 194.

Lindsell’s appeal for help did not fall on deaf ears, and in September 1628 he was promoted to the deanery of Lichfield Cathedral, supposedly at the request of his friend Laud, whose influence with Charles I now surpassed that of Neile. However, having been presented with an escape route, Lindsell obtained a dispensation excusing him from residence at Lichfield, and returned to the fray at Durham.32 Heylyn, 228; Coventry Docquets, 136. Smart’s complaints ultimately failed to hit home, since the local assize judges felt obliged to consult Neile and Laud. Despite this, Bishop Howson himself reversed many of the cathedral’s liturgical changes. When Lindsell and Cosin complained to Neile and Laud in 1631, a furious Howson publicly disciplined them, threatening Cosin at least with sequestration. Nevertheless, the balance of power in the Church now favoured the Arminians, and once Laud was informed of the latest developments, the king intervened to protect the two prebendaries.33 CSP Dom. 1629-31, pp. 20, 483; 1631-3, pp. 152, 169; Cosin Corresp. i. 207.

In December 1632 Lindsell was nominated as bishop of Peterborough. Laud, who would shortly become archbishop of Canterbury, is generally credited with obtaining this preferment, but he himself later insisted that Lindsell’s patron was the crypto-Catholic lord treasurer, Richard Weston^*, Lord Weston (later 1st earl of Portland). The latter shared Lindsell’s Essex background, but no more specific connection has been established.34 Heylyn, 228; Works of Abp. Laud ed. J. Bliss, iv. 293. Formally enthroned in the following February, Lindsell soon made his presence felt. According to the puritan William Prynne, he was ‘an earnest promoter of the … [Book of Sports], a great champion for the Arminians, and all the late innovations in doctrine, ceremony or worship introduced among us, a bitter enemy to preaching, lecturers, lectures and godly people’.35 Fasti, viii. 116; W. Prynne, Antipathie of the English Lordly Prelacie (1641), ch. 6 (unpag.). In reality, Lindsell was more cautious than that. His 1633 visitation articles, about which he consulted Laud, were the first distinctively Arminian set of that decade, and certainly enforced the crown’s 1629 guidelines restricting puritan-style preaching. Nevertheless, in liturgical terms, he placed most emphasis on a narrow conformity to the Book of Common Prayer, promoting traditional baptismal rites, and encouraging confirmations. The more controversial Laudian altar policy was left on hold, and was eventually implemented by his successor, Francis Dee^*.36 CSP Dom. 1633-4, pp. 193-4, 297-8; J. Davies, Caroline Captivity of the Church, 133; Vis. Articles and Injunctions of the Early Stuart Church ed. K. Fincham, ii (Church of Eng. Rec. Soc. v), pp. xvii, xxiii; J. Fielding, ‘Arminianism in the Localities: Peterborough Dioc. 1603-42’, Early Stuart Church ed. K. Fincham, 103. Meanwhile, in conjunction with the keeper of the royal library, Patrick Young, Lindsell developed a proposal to publish annually one or more Greek manuscripts which were not yet in print, a project which both Laud and the king encouraged.37 CSP Dom. 1633-4, p. 412; Works of Abp. Laud, vi. 342.

In January 1634, while still barely settled at Peterborough, Lindsell learned that he was being translated to Hereford, following the unexpected collapse of plans for Godfrey Goodman^*, bishop of Gloucester, to move there.38 CSP Dom. 1633-4, p. 397; T. Birch, Ct. and Times of Chas. I, ii. 229. In his new diocese, Lindsell carried on in much the same mode as before. His 1634 visitation articles broadly repeated his Peterborough set, and he continued to clamp down on puritan preachers, though he tried a new tactic of nominating lecturers himself when vacancies occurred.39 Vis. Articles, ii. p. xvii; Davies, 154.

Opposition to Lindsell’s policies emerged primarily at Hereford Cathedral, where the new bishop reportedly tried to relocate the communion table much as at Durham. Faced with obstruction by the dean and chapter, Lindsell petitioned the king in order to ensure that a visitation of the cathedral went ahead on 29 Oct. 1634. However, according to Prynne, this event brought about Lindsell’s demise: when the canons again rejected the proposed changes, ‘he fell into such a raging choler and passion as presently put him into a fit of the stone, whereof he died within a few days after’.40 Prynne, ch. 6 (unpag.); CSP Dom. 1634-5, pp. 215-16; Vis. Articles, ii. p. xiv; Herefs. RO, AL 19/18, f. 5v ff. There may be some truth to this account. Certainly, the bishop had been plagued by kidney stones for more than a decade, even submitting to surgery in April 1624.41 Works of Abp. Laud, iii. 152; Cosin Corresp. i. 145; Ussher Corresp. i. 261-2. Moreover, it seems clear that he died unexpectedly, succumbing to his illness too fast to make a new will. Thus, his final testament reflects his social circle as it existed in 1624, when Neile was still his principal patron. Several of his intended legatees, such as Bishop Buckeridge and the antiquary Sir Robert Cotton^‡, were already dead, though presumably his bequest of his Greek manuscripts and many other Greek books to Clare Hall went ahead. Laud was also a beneficiary, one of the books which he was left being a work in Yiddish.42 PROB 11/166, ff. 365-7; HMC 12th Rep. IX, 124-5; D. Pearson, ‘Libraries of Eng. Bps., 1600-40’, The Library, 6th ser. xiv, 225, 246-7.

Lindsell died in the early hours of 6 Nov., having never had the opportunity to sit in Parliament, and was buried in Hereford Cathedral. His executor was his cousin Samuel Lindsell, whom he had presented to a Hereford prebend a few months earlier. The first fruits of his Greek publication project, his acclaimed edition of Theophylact of Ohrid’s commentaries on the Pauline epistles, appeared in 1636, with a dedication to Laud.43 PROB 11/166, ff. 366v-7; Ath. Ox. ii (Fasti), 360; Fasti, xiii. 103; H.O. Coxe, Laudian Mss. (Bodl. Lib. Quarto Cats. ii), p. x. Peter Smart lived long enough to revive his allegations against Lindsell during the archbishop’s trial in 1644, prompting Laud to call his late friend ‘as learned a man as Christendom had any of his time’.44 Works of Abp. Laud, iv. 293.