HOME
a1
When we think of the 95 theses, we immediately think grace versus works. However, a case can be made for the thought that what really caused the conflict between Luther and the Catholic Church was his belief that man could go directly to God as a free agent with no need for an intermediary. This was a direct challenge to the entire structure of the Catholic Church, which was based on the belief that man had to conduct his business through the divinely appointed officials of the church. Divine right was the issue. In this case the church, and, during Stephen's time in the English renaissance, the crown. This was seen with Elizabeth I as well as James I. Even though Elizabeth didn't authorize the Bishop's Bible, she had it placed in every church. The Bishop's Bible, which was the model for the King James Version, softened the Geneva Bible's stance on divine right. The crown felt their position was threatened by the Geneva Bible, just as the Catholic Church had felt threatened by Luther's 95 theses. In 1603, King James I took the throne and in very short order had commissioned a panel to revise the Bishop's Bible. The result was the Authorized King James Version of 1611. Apparently, the threat from a challenge to the divine right concept that Elizabeth had felt, was stronger to James. In 1605, 12 years after his appearance before the Archbishop of Canterbury, Stephen was replaced as vicar at Wherwell because of his "ejection". It appears that Stephen was very outspoken, but not suicidal, and those twelve years at Wherwell had to be uncomfortable years for all concerned. Each year the relationship between Stephen and his superiors had to become more tense and adverarial in nature. Twelve years on a tight rope is a long time. Ten of those years were under Queen Elizabeth, and it appears that two years under King James were all that was needed to expel Stephen. King James was much more sensitive to the divine right issue. There is no record of what happened to Stephen's first wife, Ann Bates Bachiler, but some reconstruction and speculation may be made. She and Stephen were married, probably, no later than 1587. Stephen at that time would have been 25 or 26. A logical time would have been after his graduation in February of 1587. Ann may have died, or they may have taken Henry VIII's approach and divorced, we don't know. We do know that the fifth of six children born to them was the Reverend Samuel Bachiler who was born in 1597. The date Anne, the sixth child was born is unknown. The children seem to have been born in three year intervals, and that would place her birth somewhere around 1600. The stress caused by the ejection of Stephen from his vicarage probably had considerable impact on Ann and either death or divorce could have been the case. It would appear that Stephen married Helena sometime close to his years that are unrecorded. That could also explain why there is no data available on their marriage date, as well as Helena's birth date. We have no record of Stephen for the 15 years from 1607 through 1622, but some writers suggest he was in Holland at least part of that time. A trip to Antwerp for study with Geneva Bible proponents wouldn't be surprising. At any rate those 15 years were probably spent in meditation, reflection, and study in a place or places unknown. Supportive of the fact that he was associated with the upper class is the fact that after 15 years, possibly with little or no income, he bought property in Newton Stacey, a village a few miles east of Wherwell. In 1629 he made another substantial transaction with a Mr. Holloway, acquiring a cottage, two gardens, two orchards, and 40 acres of land. Charles I ascended to the throne in 1625. The first purchase under the rule of James I possibly was rather tentative in nature. Conjecture could lead to a speculation that Stephen, possibly wasn't certain if he would be allowed back into English society. If that were the case the larger purchase under Charles' reign and subsequent investments would be a natural extension of Stephen's realization that if he hadn't been forgiven, at least he was forgotten and ignored. Charles I, in fact was even less tolerant of the puritans, and separatists. Patents were being granted in the New World in an attempt to open new -4-
