PREVIOUS CHAPTER - NEXT CHAPTER - HELP - GR VIDEOS - GR YOUTUBE - TWITTER - SD1 YOUTUBE CONTINUATION OF BOOK 9 Proceeding With THE ACTS AND THINGS DONE IN THE REIGN OF KING EDWARD THE SIXTH. BOOKS IN THE LATIN SERVICE ABOLISHED. IT followeth now in the story, that certain of the vulgar multitude, hearing of the apprehension of the lord protector, and supposing the alteration of the public service into English, and administration of the sacrament and other rites lately appointed in the church, had been the act, chiefly or only, of the said lord protector, began upon the same to noise and bruit abroad, that they should now have their old Latin Service, with holy bread and holy water, and their other like superstitious ceremonies again: whereupon the king, with the body and state of the privy-council then being, directed out his letters of request and strait commandment to the bishops, in their dioceses, touching the same, in form and manner as followeth. A2 CERTAIN PRECEPT OR DECREE OF KING EDWARD1 , DIRECTED TO THE BISHOPS IN THEIR DIOCESES, FOR THE ABOLISHING OF BOOKS OF THE LATIN SERVICE, AND OF CERTAIN OTHER CEREMONIES. Right reverend father in God, right trusty and well-beloved, we greet you well. And whereas the book, entitled The Book of Common Prayers and Administration of the Sacraments and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, after the use of the Church of England, was agreed upon and set forth by act of parliament, and by the same act commanded to be used of all persons within this our realm, yet, nevertheless, we are informed that divers unquiet and evil-disposed persons, since the apprehension of the duke of Somerset, have noised and bruited abroad, that they should have again their old Latin service, their conjured bread and water, with such like vain and superstitious ceremonies, as though the settingforth of the said book, had been the only act of the aforenamed duke: We, therefore, by the advice of the body and state of our Privy Council, not only considering the said book to be our own act, and the act of the whole state of our realm assembled together in parliament, but also the same to be grounded upon holy Scripture, agreeable to the order of the primitive church, and much to the edifying of our subjects, — to put away all such vain expectation of having the public service, the administration of the sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies, again in the Latin tongue (which were but a preferring of ignorance to knowledge, and darkness to light, and a preparation to bring in papistry and superstition again) — have thought good, by the advice aforesaid, to require and nevertheless straitly command and charge you, that ye, immediately upon the receipt hereof, do command the dean and prebendaries of your cathedral church, the parson, vicar, or curate, and churchwardens of every parish within your diocese, to bring and deliver to you, or your deputy, every of them, for their church and parish, at such convenient place as ye shall appoint, all antiphoners, missals, grails 2 , processionals, manuals, legends, pies, portuasses, journals, and ordinals, after the use of Saturn, Lincoln, York, Bangor, Hereford, or any other private use; and all other books of service, the keeping whereof should be a let to the using of the said Book of Common Prayers; and that ye take the same books into your hands, or into the hands of your deputy, and them so deface and abolish, that they never after may serve, either to any such use as they were first provided for, or be at any time a let to that godly and uniform order, which, by a common consent 3 , is now set forth. And if ye shall find any person stubborn or disobedient in not bringing in the said books 4 , according to the tenor of these our letters, that then you commit the same person to ward, to such time as ye have certified us of his misbehavior: and we will and command you, that ye also search, or cause search to be made, from time to time, whether any books be withdrawn or hid, contrary to the tenor of these our letters; and the same books to receive into your hands, and to use, as in these our letters we have appointed. And furthermore, whereas it is come to our knowledge, that divers froward and obstinate persons do refuse to pay toward the finding of bread and wine for the Holy Communion, according to the order prescribed in the said book, by reason whereof the holy communion is many times omitted upon the Sunday: these are to will and command you, to convent such obstinate persons before you, and them to admonish and command to keep the order prescribed in the said book; and if any shall refuse so to do, to punish them by suspension, excommunication, or other censures of the church. Fail ye not thus to do, as ye will avoid our displeasure. Given under our signet, at our palace of Westminster, the 25th of December, the third year of our reign. T. Cant. R. Rich, Cancel. W. Saint John, J. Russell, H. Dorset, W. Northt’.* Whereby it may appear to us now, that no wafer-cakes, but common bread was then, by the king’s appointment, ordinarily received and used in churches. This was about the latter end of December, A.D. 1549. TAKING DOWN OF ALTARS, AND SETTING UP THE TABLE INSTEAD THEREOF. Furthermore, in the year next following (1550), other letters, likewise, were sent for the taking down of altars in churches, and setting up the table instead of the same, unto Nicholas Ridley 5 , who, being bishop of Rochester before, was then made bishop of London, in Bonner’s place. The copy and contents of the king’s letters are these, as follow. THE3 KING’S LETTER TO NICHOLAS RIDLEY6 , BISHOP OF LONDON, ETC. Right reverend father in God, right trusty and well-beloved, we greet you well. And whereas it is come to our knowledge, that being the altars within the more part of the churches of this our realm [are] already upon good and godly considerations taken down, there doth yet remain altars standing in divers other churches, by occasion whereof much variance and contention ariseth amongs sundry of our subjects, which, if good foresight were not had, might perchance engender great hurt and inconvenience; we let you wit, that, minding to have all occasions of contention taken away, which many times grow by those and such like diversities, and considering that amongs other things belonging to our royal office and cure, we do account the greatest to be, to maintain the common quiet of our realm; we have thought good, by the advice of our council, to require you, and nevertheless specially to charge and command you, for the avoiding of all matters of further contention and strife about the standing or taking away of the said altars, to give substantial order throughout all your diocese, that with all diligence all the altars in every church or chapel, as well in places exempted as not exempted, within your said diocese, be taken down; and in the lieu of them a table set up in some convenient part of the chancel, within every such church or chapel, to serve for the ministration of the blessed communion. And, to the intent the same may be done without the offense of such our loving subjects as be not yet so well persuaded in that behalf as we would wish, we send unto you herewith certain considerations gathered and collected, that make for the purpose; the which, and such others as you shall think meet to be set forth to persuade the weak to embrace our proceedings in this part, we pray you cause to be declared to the people by some discreet preachers, in such places as you shall think meet, before the takingdown of the said altars; so as both the weak consciences of others may be instructed and satisfied as much as may be, and this our pleasure the more quietly executed. For the better doing whereof, we require you to open the foresaid considerations in that our cathedral church in your own person, if you conveniently may, or otherwise by your chancellor, or some other grave preacher, both there and in such other market towns, and most notable places of your diocese, as you may think most requisite. Given under our signet, at our palace of Westminster, the 23d day of November, the fourth year of our reign. E. Somerset, Thomas Cant. W. Wiltshire, J. Warwick, John Bedford, W. Northt’. E. Clinton, H. Wentworth, T. Ely. REASONS WHY THE LORD’S BOARD SHOULD RATHER BE AFTER THE FORM OF A TABLE, THAN OF AN ALTAR. * 4 “I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God unto salvation, to every one that believeth.” [Romans 1:16.] Certain reasons why the reverend father, Nicholas, bishop of London, amonges other his Injunctions given in his late visitation, did exhort those churches in his diocese, where the altars as then did remain, to conform themselves unto those other churches which had taken them down, and had set up in the stead of the multitude of their altars one decent table in every church: And that herein he did not only any thing contrary unto the Book of Common Prayer, or to the king’s majesty’s proceedings, but that he was induced to do the same partly moved by his office and duty, wherewith he is charged in the same book, and partly for the advancement and sincere setting forward of God’s holy word, and the king’s majesty’s most godly proceedings. * The First Reason. First, the form of a table shall more move the simple from the superstitious opinions of the popish mass, unto the right use of the Lord’s Supper. For the use of an altar is to make sacrifice upon it; the use of a table is to serve for men to eat upon. Now, when we come unto the Lord’s board, what do we come for? to sacrifice Christ up again 7 , and to crucify him again? or to feed upon him, that was once only crucified and offered up for us? If we come to feed upon him, spiritually to eat his body, and spiritually to drink his blood (which is the true use of the Lord’s Supper), then *seeing* no man can deny but * the form of a table is more meet to feed upon than, the form of an altar, it must also follow that 8 * the form of a table is more meet for the Lord’s board, than the form of an altar. The Second Reason. Item, whereas it is said, ‘The Book of Common Prayer maketh mention of an altar; wherefore, it is not lawful to abolish that which that book alloweth:’ to this without prescription of any form thereof, either of a table or of an altar: so that whether the Lord’s board have the form of an altar, or of a table, the Book of Common Prayer calleth it both an altar and a table. For, as it calleth an altar (whereupon the Lord’s Supper is ministered) a table, and the Lord’s board, so it calleth the table, where the holy communion is distributed with lauds and thanksgiving unto the Lord, an altar, for that there is offered the same sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving. And thus it appeareth, that here is nothing neither said nor meant contrary to the Book of Common Prayer. The Third Reason. Thirdly, the popish opinion of mass was, that it might not be celebrated but upon an altar, or at the least upon a super-altar, to supply the default of the altar, which must have had his printes and charactes; or else it was thought that the thing was not lawfully done. But this superstitious opinion is more holden in the minds of the simple and ignorant by the form of an altar, than of a table; wherefore it is more meet, for the abolishment of this superstitious opinion, to have the Lord’s board after the form of a table, than of an altar. The Fourth Reason. Fourthly, the form of an altar was ordained for the sacrifices of the law, and therefore the altar in Greek is called, qusiasth>rion ‘quasi sacrificii locus.’ But now both the law and the sacrifices thereof do cease wherefore the form of the altar used in the law ought to cease withal. The Fifth Reason. Fifthly, Christ did institute the sacrament of his body and blood at his last supper at a table, and not at an altar; as it appeareth manifestly by the three Evangelists. And St. Paul calleth the coming unto the holy communion, the coming unto the Lord’s Supper. And also it is not read, that any of the apostles or the primitive church did ever use any altar in the ministration of the holy communion. Wherefore, seeing the form of a table is more agreeable with Christ’s institution, and with the usage of the apostles and of the primitive church, than the form of an altar, therefore the form of a table is rather to be used, than the form of an altar, in the administration of the holy communion. The Sixth Reason. Finally, it is said in the Preface of the Book of Common Prayer, that if any doubt do arise in the use and practicing of the same book; to appease all such diversity, the matter shall be referred unto the bishop of the diocese, who, by his discretion, shall take order for the quieting and appeasing of the same, so that the same order be not contrary unto any thing contained in that book. * Now 9 6 it is most certain and evident, that of the form of the Lord’s board there arose great diversity, some using it after the form of a table, and some of an altar. Wherein when the said reverend father was required to say (as the bishop of the diocese) what was most meet, he could do no less of his bounden duty, for to appease all such diversity and to procure one godly uniformity, than to exhort all his diocese unto that which he thought did best agree with Scripture, the usage of the apostles and of the primitive church, and to that which is not only not contrary unto any thing contained in the said Book of Common Prayer (as is here-before proved), but also shall highly further the king’s most godly proceedings in abolishing of divers vain and superstitious opinions of the popish mass out of the hearts of the simple, and to bring them to the right use taught by holy Scripture of the Lord’s Supper. The which as every good man, no doubt will desire of God, that it may be restored again unto Christ’s church, so is it not to be doubted, but that every godly wise man (considering the just and reasonable cause thereof) cannot but allow and commend the said reverend father’s doings in this behalf. *7 And so appointed he the form of a right table to be used in his diocese, and in the church of Paul brake down the wall standing then by the high altar’s side. Now we will enter (God willing) into those matters which happened between king Edward and his sister Mary, as by their letters here following are to be seen. A LETTER OF THE LADY MARY TO THE COUNCIL, JUNE 22, 1549. To my Lord Protector, and the rest of the King’s Majesty’s Council: My lord, I perceive by the letters which I late received from you, and other of the king’s majesty’s council, that ye be all sorry to find so little conformity in me touching the observation of his majesty’s laws; who am well assured, that I have offended no law, unless it be a late law of your own making, for the altering of matters in religion, which, in my conscience, is not worthy to have the name of a law, both for the king’s honor’s sake, the wealth of the realm, and giving an occasion of an evil bruit through all Christendom, besides the partiality used in the same, and (as my said conscience is very well persuaded) the offending of God, which passeth all the rest: but I am well assured that the king-hisfather’s laws were all allowed and consented to without compulsion by the whole realm, both spiritual and temporal, and all ye executors sworn upon a book to fulfill the same, so that it was an authorized law; and that I have obeyed, and will do, with the grace of God, till the king’s majesty my brother shall have sufficient years to be a judge in these matters himself; wherein, my lord, I was plain with you at my last being in the court, declaring unto you, at that time, whereunto I would stand; and now do assure you all, that the only occasion of my stay from altering mine opinion, is for two causes: one principally for my conscience’ sake; the other, that the king my brother shall not hereafter charge me to be one of those that were agreeable to such alterations in his tender years. And what fruits daily grow by such changes, since the death of the king my father, to every indifferent person it well appeareth, both to the displeasure of God, and unquietness of the realm. Notwithstanding, I assure you all, I would be as loth to see his highness take hurt, or that any evil should come to this his realm, as the best of you all; and none of you have the like cause, considering how I am compelled by nature, being his majesty’s poor and humble sister, most tenderly to love and pray for him, and unto this his realm (being born within the same) wish all wealth and prosperity, to God’s honor. And if any judge of me the contrary for mine opinion’s sake (as I trust none doth), I doubt not in the end, with God’s help, to prove myself as true a natural and humble sister, as they of the contrary opinion. with all their devices and altering of laws, shall prove themselves true subjects; praying you my lord, and the rest of the council, no more to trouble and unquiet me with matters touchingly conscience, wherein I am at a full point, with God’s help, whatsoever shall happen to me; intending, with His grace, to trouble you little with any worldly suits, but to bestow the short time I think to live, in quietness, and pray for the king’s majesty and all you; heartily wishing, that your proceedings may be to God’s honor, the safeguard of the king’s person, and quietness to the whole realm Moreover, whereas your desire is, that I should send my comptroller and Dr. Hopton unto you, by whom you would signify your minds more amply, to my contentation and honor; it is not unknown to you all, that the chief charge of my house resteth only upon the travails of my said comptroller, who hath not been absent from my house three whole days since the settingup of the same, unless it were for my letters patent: so that if it were not for his continual diligence, I think my little portion would not have stretched so far. And my chaplain, by occasion of sickness, hath been long absent, and is not yet able to ride. Therefore, like as I cannot forbear my comptroller, and my priest is not able to journey, so shall I desire you my lord, and all the rest of the council, that, having any thing to be declared to me, except matters of religion, ye will either write your minds, or send some trusty person, with whom I shall be contented to talk, and make answer as the case shall require: assuring you, that if any servant of mine, either man or woman, or chaplain, should move me to the contrary of my conscience, I would not give ear to them, nor suffer the like to be used within my house. And thus, my lord, with my hearty commendations, I wish unto you and the rest as well to do as myself. From my house at Kenninghall, the 22d of June, 1549. Your assured friend to my power, Mary . A REMEMBRANCE OF CERTAIN MATTERS Appointed by the Council to be declared by Dr. Hopton to the Lady Mary’s Grace, for Answer to her former Letter; which said Hopton was, after she came to her reign, Bishop of Norwich. Her grace writeth, ‘that the law made by parliament is not worthy the name of law;’ meaning the statute for the communion, etc. You shall say thereto: — ‘The fault is great in any subject to disallow a law of the king, a law of the realm; by long study, free disputation, and uniform determination of the whole clergy, consulted, debated, and concluded: but the greater fault is in her grace, being next of any subject in blood and estate to the king’s majesty her brother and good lord, to give example of disobedience, being a subject, or of unnaturalness, being his majesty’s sister, or of neglecting the power of the crown, she being by limitation of law next to the same. The example of disobedience is most perilous in this time, as she call well understand: her unkindness resteth in the king’s own acceptation: the neglecting of the power, before God is answerable, and in the world toucheth her honor. ‘The executors,’ she saith, ‘were sworn to King Henry the Eighth’s laws.’ You shall say: — ‘It is true, they were sworn to him, his laws, his heirs, and successors; which oath they duly observe, and should offend if they should break any one jot of the king’s laws now being, without a dispensation by a law. And herein her grace shall understand, that it is no law, which is dissolved by a law: neither may her grace do that injury to the king’s majesty her brother, to diminish his authority so far, that he may not, by the free consent of a parliament, amend and alter unprofitable laws, for the number of inconveniences which hereof might follow; as her grace with consideration may well perceive.’ Offense taken by the sending for her officers.’ You shall say: — ‘If her grace consider the first letters of that purpose, they will declare our good meaning to her, and her gentle usage, requiring the presence of her trusty servant, because she might give more trust to our message.’ ‘Her house is her flock.’ You shall say: — ‘It is well liked, her grace should have her house or flock, but not exempt from the king’s orders: neither may there be a flock of the king’s subjects, but such as will hear and follow the voice of the king their shepherd. God disalloweth it; law and reason forbiddeth it; policy abhorreth it; and her honor may not require it.’ ‘Her grace deferreth her obedience to the king’s laws, until his majesty be of sufficient years.’ You shall say: — ‘She could in no one saying more disallow the authority of the king, the majesty of his crown, and the state of the realm. For herein she suspendeth his kingdom, and esteemeth his authority by his age, not by his right and title. Her grace must understand, he is a king by the ordinance of God, by descent of royal blood, not by the numbering of his years.’ ‘As a creature subject to mortality, he hath youth: and, by God’s grace, shall have age; but, as a king, he hath no difference by days and years. The Scripture plainly declareth it, not only young children to have been kings by God’s special ordinance, but also (which is to be noted) to have had best success in their reign, and the favor of God in their proceedings: yea, in their first years have they most purely reformed the church and state of religion. Therefore her grace hath no cause thus to diminish his majesty’s power, and to make him, as it were, no king until she think him of sufficient years. Wherein how much his majesty may be justly offended, they be sorry to think.’ She saith, ‘she is subject to none of the council.’ You shall say: — ‘If her grace understandeth it of us in that acceptation as we be private mens and not councilors sworn to the king’s majesty, we acknowledge us not to be superiors; but, if she understand her writing of us as councilors and magistrates ordained by his majesty, her grace must be contented to think us of authority sufficient, by the reason of our office, to challenge a superiority; not to rule by private affection, but by God’s providence; not to our estimation, but to the king’s honor; and, finally, to increase the king’s estate with our counsel, our dignity, and vocation. And we think her grace will not forget the saying of Solomon, in the sixth chapter of the Book of Wisdom, to move a king to rule by counsel and wisdom, and to build his estate upon them. Wherefore her grace must be remembered, the king’s majesty’s politic body is not made only of his own royal material body, but of a council, by whom his majesty ruleth, directeth, and governeth his realm: in the place of which council her grace is not ignorant that we be set and placed. Wherefore the reputation she shall give us, she shall give it to the king’s honor; and that which she shall take from us, she shall take from his majesty, whose majesty, we think, if it might take increase or honor, as God giveth a daily abundance, it should receive rather increase from her, being his majesty’s sister, than thus any abatement. ‘She received Master Arundel, and Master Englefield.’ You shall say: — ‘All the council remembereth well her refusal to have her house charged with any more number, alleging the small proportion for her charge; and therefore it was thought to come more for their earnest suit, meaning to be privileged subjects from the law, than of her desire, who refused very often to increase her number. Their cautel the king might not suffer, to have his law disobeyed; their countries where they should serve, by them to be destitute; and, having been servants to his majesty, the circumstances of their departure might in no wise be liked.’ ‘She refused to hear any man to the contrary of her opinion.’ You shall say: — ‘It is an answer more of will than of reason; and, therefore, her grace must be admonished neither to trust her own opinion without ground, neither to mislike all others having ground. If hers be good, it is no hurt if she hear the worse: if it be ill, she shall do well to hear the better: she shall not alter by hearing, but by hearing the better. And because she shall not mislike the offer, let her grace name of learned men whom she will; and further than they by learning shall prove, she shall not be moved. And so far, it is thought, reason will compel her grace.’ In the end ye shall say: — ‘The good wills and minds of the lord protector and the council are so much toward her grace, that howsoever she would herself in honor be esteemed, howsoever in conscience quieted, yea howsoever benefited, saving their duties to God and the king, they would as much; and in their doings (if it please her to prove it) will be nothing inferiors; assuring her grace, that they be most sorry that she is thus disquieted: and, if necessity of the cause, the honor and surety of the king, and the judgment of their own conscience moved them not, thus far they would not have attempted. But their trust is, her grace will allow them the more, when she shall perceive the cause, and think no less could be done by them, where she provoked them so far.’ These and other of like credit, more amply committed to you in speech, you shall declare to her grace; and further, declare, your conscience for the allowing of the manner of the Communion,8 as ye have plainly professed it before us. At Richmond the 14th 9 of June, 1549. A LETTER OF THE LADY MARY, TO THE LORD PROTECTOR AND THE REST OF THE COUNCIL, THE 27TH OF JUNE, 1549. My lord, I perceive by letters directed from you, and other of the king’s majesty’s council, to my comptroller, my chaplain, and Master Englefield my servant, that ye will them, upon their allegiance, to repair immediately to you; wherein you gave me evident cause to change mine accustomed opinion of you all (that is to say, to think you careful of my quietness and well doing), considering how earnestly I writ to you for the stay of two of them, and that not without very just cause. And as for Master Englefield, as soon as he could have prepared himself, having his horses so far off, although ye had not sent at this present, he would have performed your request. But indeed I am much deceived; for I supposed ye would have weighed and taken my letters in better part, if ye have received them; if not, to have tarried my answer: and I not to have found so little friendship, nor to have been used so ungently at your hands, in sending for him upon whose travail doth rest the whole charge of my whole house, as I writ unto you lately; whose absence therefore shall be to me and my said house no little displeasure, especially being so far off. And beside all this, I do greatly marvel to see your writing for him and the other two, with such extreme words of peril to ensue towards them in case they did not come, and specially for my comptroller, whose charge is so great, that he cannot suddenly be meet to take a journey: which words, in mine opinion, needed not (unless it were in some very just and necessary cause) to any of mine, who taketh myself subject to none of you all; not doubting but, if the king’s majesty my brother were of sufficient years to perceive this matter, and knew what lack and incommodity the absence of my said officer should be to my house, his grace would have been so good a lord to me, as to have suffered him to remain where his charge is. Notwithstanding, I have willed him at this time to repair to you, commanding him to return forthwith, for. my very necessity’s sake; and I have given the like leave to my poor sick priest also, whose life I think undoubtedly shall be put to hazard by the wet and cold painful travail of this journey. But, for my part, I assure you all, that since the king my father, your late master and very good lord, died, I never took you for other than my friends: but in this it appeareth contrary. And saving I thought verily that my former letters should have discharged this matter, I would not have troubled myself with writing the same; not doubting but you do consider, that none of you all would have been contented to have been thus used at your inferiors’ hands; I mean, to have had your officer, or any of your servants, sent for by force (as ye make it), knowing no just cause why. Wherefore I do not a little marvel, that ye had not this remembrance towards me, who always have willed and wished you as well to do as myself; and both have prayed and will pray for you all, as heartily as for mine own soul, to Almighty God, whom I humbly beseech to illuminate you all with his holy Spirit; to whose mercy, also, I am at a full point to commit myself, whatsoever shall become of my body. And thus, with my commendations, I bid you all farewell. From my house at Kenninghall, the 27th of June. Your friend, to my power, though you give me contrary cause, Mary . A COPY OF THE KING’S MAJESTY’S LETTER TO THE LADY MARY, THE 24TH OF JANUARY, 1550. Right dear, etc. — We have seen by letters of our council, sent to you of late, and by your answer thereunto, touching the cause of certain your chaplains having offended our laws in saying of mass, their good and convenient advises, and your fruitless and indirect mistaking of the same: which thing moveth us to write at this time, that where good counsel from our council hath not prevailed, yet the like from ourself may have due regard. The whole matter we perceive rests in this, that you, being our next sister, in whom above all other our subjects, nature should place the most estimation of us, would, wittingly and purposely, not only break our laws yourself, but also have others maintained to do the same. Truly, howsoever the matter may have other terms, other sense it hath not; and, although by your letter it seemeth you challenge a promise made, that so you may do; yet, surely, we know the promise had no such meaning, neither to maintain, nor to continue your fault. You must know this, sister; you were at the first time, when the law was made, borne withal, not because you should disobey the law, but that, by our lenity and love showed, you might learn to obey it. We made a difference of you from our other subjects, not for that all others should follow our laws, and you only gainstand them, but that you might be brought as far forward by love, as others were by duty. The error wherein you would rest is double, and every part so great, that neither for the love of God we can well suffer it unredressed, neither for the love of you, can we but wish it amended. First, you retain a fashion in honoring of God, who, indeed, thereby is dishonored: and therein err you in zeal for lack of science; and, having science offered you, you refuse it, not because it is science, we trust (for than should we despair of you), but because you think it is none. And, surely, in this we can best reprehend you, learning daily in our school, that therefore we learn things because we know them not, and are not allowed to say, We know not those things, or, We think they be not good, and therefore we will not learn them. Sister, you must think nothing can commend you more than reason, according to the which you have been hitherto used; and now, for very love, we will offer you reason ourself. If you are persuaded in conscience to the contrary of our laws, you or your persuaders shall freely be suffered to say what you or they can, so that you will hear what shall be said again. In this point, you see, I pretermit my estate, and talk with you as your brother rather than your supreme lord and king. Thus should you, being as well content to hear of your opinions as you are content to hold them, in the end thank us as much for bringing you to light, as now, before you learn, you are loth to see it. And if thus much reason with our natural love shall not move you, whereof we would be sorry, then must we consider the other part of your fault, which is the offense of our laws. For though, hitherto, it hath been suffered in hope of amendment, yet now, if hope be none, how shall there be sufferance? Our charge is to have the same care over every man’s estate, that every man ought to have over his own. And in your own house as you would be loth openly to suffer one of your servants, being next you, most manifestly to break your orders, so must you think in our state it shall miscontent us to permit you, so great a subject, not to keep our laws. Your nearness to us in blood, your greatness in estate, the condition of this time, maketh your fault the greater. The example is unnatural, that our sister should do less for us than our other subjects. The cause is slanderous, for so great a personage to forsake our majesty. Finally, it is too dangerous in a troublesome commonwealth, to make the people to mistrust a faction. We be young, you think, in years to consider this. Truly, sister, it troubleth us somewhat the more; for it may be, this evil, suffered in you, is greater than we can discern; and so we be as much troubled because we doubt whether we see the whole peril, as we be for that we see. Indeed we will presume no further than our years give us; that is, in doubtful things not to trust our own wits, but in evident things we think there is no difference. If you should not do as other subjects do, were it not evident that therein you should not be a good subject? Were it not plain, in that case, that you should use us not as your sovereign lord? Again, if you should be suffered to break our laws manifestly, were it not a comfort for others so to do? and if our law be broken, and contemned, where is our estate? These things be so plain, as we could almost have judged them six years past; and indeed it grieveth us not a little, that you, who should be our most comfort in our young years, should alone give us occasion of discomfort. Think you not but it must needs trouble us? and if you can so think, you ought, sister, to amend it. Our natural love towards you, without doubt, is great; and therefore diminish it not yourself. If you will be loved by us, show some token of love towards us, that we say not with the Psalm, ‘ Mala pro bonis mihi reddiderunt.’ If you will be believed, when by writing you confess us to be your sovereign lord, hear that which in other things is often alleged, ‘Ostende mihi fidem tuam ex factis tuis.’ In the answer of your letter to our council, we remember you stick only upon one reason divided into two parts. The first is, that in matters of religion your faith is none other, but as all Christendom doth confess. The next is, you will assent to no alteration; but wish things to stand as they did at our father’s death. If you mean, in the first, to rule your faith by that you call Christendom, and not by this church of England wherein you are a member, you shall err in many points, such as our father and yours would not have suffered, whatsoever you say of the standing-still of things as they were left by him. The matter is too plain to write what may be gathered (and too perilous) to be concluded against you. For the other part, if you like no alteration by our authority, of things not altered by our father, you should do us too great an injury. We take ourself, for the administration of this our commonwealth, to have the same authority which our father had, diminished in no part, neither by example of Scripture, nor by universal laws. The stories of Scripture be so plenteous, as almost the best ordered church of the Israelites was by kings younger than we be. Well, sister, we will not in these things interpret your writings to the worst; Love and Charity shall expound them. But yet you must not thereby be bold to offend in that whereunto, you see, your writings might be wrested. To conclude; we exhort you to do your duty, and if any impediment be thereof, not of purpose, you shall find a brotherly affection in us to remedy the same. To teach and instruct you, we will give order; and so procure you to do your duty willingly, that you shall perceive you are not used merely as a subject, and only commanded, but as a daughter, a scholar, and a sister, taught, instructed and persuaded: for the which cause, when you have considered this our letter, we pray you that we may shortly hear from you. THE LADY MARY, TO THE KING’S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY, FEBRUARY 3D, 1550. My duty most humbly remembered to your majesty, please it the same to understand that I have received your letters by Master Throgmorton this bearer: the contents whereof do more trouble me than any bodily sickness, though it were even to the death; and the rather for that your highness doth charge me to be both a breaker of your laws, and also an encourager of others to do the like. I most humbly beseech your majesty to think, that I never intended towards you otherwise than my duty compelleth me unto: that is, to wish your highness all honor and prosperity, for the which I do and daily shall pray. And whereas it pleaseth your majesty to write, that I make a challenge of a promise made otherwise than it was meant, the truth is, the promise could not be denied before your majesty’s presence at my last waiting upon the same. And although, I confess, the ground of faith (whereunto I take reason to be but an handmaid), and my conscience also, hath and do agree with the same, yet, touching that promise, for so much as it hath pleased your majesty (God knoweth by whose persuasion) to write, ‘it was not so meant;’ I shall most humbly desire your highness to examine the truth thereof indifferently, and either will your majesty’s ambassador, now being with the emperor, to inquire of the same, if it be your pleasure to have him move it, or else to cause it to be demanded of the emperor’s ambassador here, although he were not within this realm at that time. And thereby it shall appear, that in this point I have not offended your majesty, if it may please you so to accept it. And albeit your majesty (God be praised) hath at these years as much understanding and more, than is commonly seen in that age, yet, considering you do hear but one part (your highness not offended), I would be a suitor to the same, that till you were grown to more perfect years, it might stand with your pleasure to stay in matters touching the soul. So, undoubtedly, should your majesty know more, and hear others, and nevertheless be at your liberty, and do your will and pleasure. And whatsoever your majesty hath conceived of me, either by letters to your council, or by their report, I trust in the end to prove myself as true to you, as any subject within your realm; and will by no means stand in argument with your majesty, but in most humble wise beseech you, even for God’s sake, to suffer me, as your highness hath done hitherto. It is for no worldly respect I desire it, God is my judge; but rather than to offend my conscience, I would desire of God to lose all that I have, and also my life; and, nevertheless, live and die your humble sister and true subject. Thus, after pardon craved of your majesty for my rude and bold writing, I beseech Almighty God to preserve the same in honor, with as long continuance of health and life, as ever had noble king. From Beaulieu, the third of February. Your majesty’s most humble and unworthy sister, Mary . THE LADY MARY TO THE LORDS OF THE COUNCIL, THE 4TH OF DECEMBER, 1550. My lords, your letters dated the second of this present were delivered unto me the third of the same: and whereas you write that two of my chaplains, doctors Mallet and Barkly, be indicted for certain things committed by them contrary to the king’s majesty’s laws, and process for them also awarded forth, and delivered to the sheriff of Essex; I cannot but marvel they should be so used, considering it is done, as I take it, for saying mass within my house: and although I have been, of myself, minded always, and yet am, to have mass within my house; yet I have been advertised that the emperor’s majesty hath been promised, that I should never be unquieted nor troubled for my so doing, as some of you, my lords, can witness. Furthermore, besides the declaration of the said promise made to me by the emperor’s ambassador that dead is, from his majesty, to put my chaplains more out of fear, when I was the last year with the king’s majesty my brother, that question was then moved, and could not be denied, but affirmed by some of you before his majesty to be true; being not so much unquieted for the trouble of my said chaplains, as I am to think how this matter may be taken, the promise to such a person being no better regarded. And for mine own part, I thought full little to have received such ungentleness at your hands, having always (God is my judge) wished unto the whole number of you as to myself; and have refused, to trouble, you, or to crave any thing at your hands, but your good will and friendship, which very slenderly appeareth in this matter. Notwithstanding, to be plain with you, howsoever ye shall use me or mine, with God’s help I will never vary from mine opinion touching my faith. And if ye, or any of you, bear me the less good will for that matter, or faint in your friendship towards me only for the same, I must and will be contented, trusting that God will in the end show his mercy upon me; assuring you, I would rather refuse the friendship of all the world (whereunto I trust I shall never be driven), than forsake any point of my faith. I am not without some hope that ye will stay this matter, not enforcing the rigor of the law against my chaplains. The one of them was not in my house these four months, and Dr. Mallet, having my license, is either at Windsor, or at his benefice, who, as I have heard, was indicted for saying mass out of my house; which was not true. But indeed, the day before my removing from Woodham Walter, my whole household in effect being gone to Newhall, he said mass there by mine appointment. I see and hear of divers that do not obey your statutes and proclamations, and nevertheless escape without punishment. Be ye judges if I be well used, to have mine punished by rigor of a law, besides all the false bruits that ye have suffered to be spoken of me. Moreover, my chaplain Dr. Mallet, besides mine own commandment, was not ignorant of the promise made to the emperor, which did put him out of fear. I doubt not, therefore, but ye will consider it as, by that occasion, no piece of friendship be taken away, nor I to have cause but to bear you my good will, as I have done heretofore: for albeit I could do you little pleasure, yet of my friendship ye were sure, as, if it had lien in my power, ye should have well known. Thus, with my hearty commendations to you all, I pray Almighty God to send you as much of his grace, as I would wish to mine own soul. From Beaulieu, the 4th of December. Your assured friend to my power, Mary . THE COUNCIL TO THE LADY MARY, THE 25TH OF DECEMBER, 1550. After our due commendations to your grace. By your letters to us, as an answer to ours, touching certain process against two of your chaplains, for saying mass against the law and statute of the realm, we perceive both the offense of your chaplains is otherwise excused than the matter may bear, and also our good wills otherwise misconstrued than we looked for. And for the first part, whereas your greatest reason to excuse the offense of a law, is a promise made to the emperor’s majesty, whereof you write, that first some of us be witnesses; next, that the ambassador for the emperor declared the same unto you; and lastly, that the same promise was affirmed to you before the king’s majesty at your last being with him: we have thought convenient to repeat the matter from the beginning, as it hath hitherto proceeded; whereupon it shall appear how evidently your chaplains have offended the law, and you also mistaken the promise. The promise is but one in itself, but by times thrice as you say repeated: of which times, the first is chiefly to be considered, for upon that do the other two depend. It is very true the emperor made request to the king’s majesty, that you might have liberty to use the mass in your house, and to be as it were exempted from the danger of the statute: to which request divers good reasons were made, containing the discommodities that should follow the grant thereof, and means devised rather to persuade you to obey and receive the general and godly reformation of the whole realm, than by a private fancy to prejudice a common order. But yet, upon earnest desire and entreaty made in the emperor’s name, thus much was granted, that for his sake and your own also, it should be suffered and winked at, if you had the private mass used in your own closet for a season, until you might be better informed, whereof there was some hope, having only with you a few of your own chamber, so that for all the rest of your household the service of the realm should be used, and none other: further than this the promise exceeded not. And, truly, such a matter it then seemed to some of us, as indeed it was, that well might the emperor have required of the king’s majesty a matter of more profit, but of more weight or difficulty to be granted, his majesty could not. After this grant in words, there was, by the ambassador now dead, oftentimes desired some writing, as a testimony of the same. But that was ever denied; not because we meant to break the promise, as it was made, but because there was daily hope of your reformation. Now to the second time: you say, the emperor’s ambassador’s declaration made mention of a promise to you. It might well so be; but, we think, no otherwise than as it appeareth before written. If it were his fault, it was to declare more than he heard: ours it may not be, that deny not what we have said. As for the last time, when ye were with the king’s majesty, the same some of us (whom by these words your letter noteth) do well remember, that no other thing was granted to you in this matter, but as the first promise was made to the emperor; at which time you had too many arguments made to approve the proceedings of the king’s majesty, and to condemn the abuse of the mass, to think, that where the private mass was judged ungodly, there you should have authority and ground to use it. About the same time, the ambassador made means to have some testimony of the promise under the great seal; and that not being heard, to have it but by a letter; and that, also, was not only denied, but divers good reasons alleged, that he should think it denied with reason, and so to be contented with an answer. It was told him, in reducing that which was commonly called the mass to the order of the primitive church and the institution of Christ, the king’s majesty and his whole realm had their consciences well quieted; against the which if any thing should be willingly committed, the same should be taken as an offense to God, and a very sin against a truth known. Wherefore, to license by open act such a deed, in the conscience of the king’s majesty and his realm, were even a sin against God. The most that might herein be borne, was, that the king’s majesty might, upon hope of your grace’s reconciliation, suspend the execution of his law, so that you would use the license as it was first granted. Whatsoever the ambassador hath said to others, he had no other manner of grant from us; nor, having it thus granted, could allege any reason against it. And whereas in your letter your grace noteth us as breakers of the promise made to the emperor, it shall appear who hath broken the promise: whether we, that have suffered more than we licensed; or you, that have transgressed that which was granted. Now, therefore, we pray your grace confer the doings of your chaplains with every point of the premises; and, if the same cannot be excused, then think also how long the law hath been spared. If it prick our consciences somewhat, that so much should be used as by the promise you may claim, how much more should it grieve us to license more than you can claim? And yet could we be content to bear a great burden to satisfy your grace, if the burden pressed not our consciences so much as it doth; whereof we must say as the apostle said, ‘Gloriatio nostra est haec, testimonium conscientiae nostrae.’ For the other part of your grace’s letter, by the which we see you misconstrue our good wills in writing to you, howsoever the law bad proceeded against your chaplains, our order in sending to you was to be liked, and therein, truly, had we special regard of your grace’s degree and estate. And, because the law itself respecteth not persons, we thought to give respect to you, first signifying to you what the law required, before it should be executed; that, being warned, your grace might either think no strangeness in the execution, or for an example of obedience cause it to be executed yourself. Others we see perplexed with suddenness of matters: your grace we would not have unwarned, to think any thing done on a sudden. Truly we thought it more commendable for your grace to help the execution of a law, than to help the offense of one condemned by law. And in giving you knowledge what the king’s laws required, we looked for help in the execution, by you the king’s majesty’s sister. The greater personage your grace is, the nigher to the king, so much more ought your example to further his laws: for which cause it hath been called a good commonwealth where the people obeyed the higher estates, and they obeyed the laws. As nature hath joined your grace to the king’s majesty to love him most entirely, so hath reason and law subdued you to obey him willingly. The one and the other we doubt not but your grace remembereth: and as they both be joined together in you his majesty’s sister, so, we trust, you will not sever them; for indeed your grace cannot love him as your brother, but you must obey his majesty as his subject. Example of your obedience and reverence of his majesty’s laws, is instead of a good preacher to a great number of his majesty’s subjects, who, if they may see in you negligence of his majesty, or his laws, will not fail, but follow on hardly; and then their fault is not their own but yours, by example; and so may the king’s majesty, when he shall come to further judgment, impute the fault of divers evil people (which thing God forbid) to the sufferance of your grace’s doings. And therefore we most earnestly, from the depth of our hearts, desire it, that as nature hath set your grace nigh his majesty by blood, so your love and zeal to his majesty will further his estate by obedience. In the end of your letter two things be touched, which we cannot pretermit; the one is, you seem to charge us, with permission of men to break laws and statutes. We think indeed it is too true, that laws and proclamations be broken daily, the more pity it is; but, that we permit them, we would be sorry to have it proved. The other is, that we have suffered bruits to be spoken of you: and that also must be answered as the other. It is pity to see men so evil, as whom they may touch with tales and infamies they care not, so they miss not the best. Such is the boldness of people, that neither we can fully bridle them to raise tales of you, nor of ourselves. And yet, whensoever any certain person may be gotten, to be charged with any such, we never leave them unpunished. Indeed the best way is, both for your grace, and us also, that when we cannot find and punish the offender, let us say as he said that was evil spoken of, ‘Yet will I so live, as no credit shall be given to my backbiters.’ Certainly, if we had credited any evil tale of your grace, we would friendly have admonished you thereof; and so also proceeded, as either the tale-tellers should have been punished, or else to have proved their tales. And, therefore, we pray your grace to think no unkindness in us, that any evil bruits have been spread by evil men; but think rather well of us, that, howsoever they were spread, we believed them not. Hitherto your grace seeth we have written, somewhat at length, of the promise made to you, and our meanings in our former writings. And now, for the latter part of our letter, we will, as briefly as we can, remember to you the special matters, whereof the one might suffice to reform your proceedings; and both together, well considered, we trust shall do your grace much good. The one is, the truth of that you be desired to follow; the other is, the commodity that thereby shall ensue. They both make a just commandment, and, because of the first the latter followeth, that first shall be entreated of. We hear say, your grace refuseth to hear any thing reasoned contrary to your old determination; wherein you may make your opinion suspicious, as that you are afraid to be dissuaded. If your faith in things be of God, it may abide any storm or weather; if it be but of sand, you do best to eschew the weather. That which we profess, hath the foundation in Scriptures upon plain texts and no glosses, the confirmation thereof by the use in the primitive church, not in this latter corrupted. And indeed our greatest change is not in the substance of our faith; no, nor in any one article of our creed; only the difference is, that we use the ceremonies, observations, and sacraments of our religion, as the apostles and first fathers in the primitive church did. You use the same that corruption of time brought in, and very barbarousness and ignorance nourished; and seem to hold for custom against the truth, and we for truth against custom. Your grace, in one or two places of your letter, seemeth to speak earnestly in the maintenance of your faith, and therein (so that your faith be according to the Scriptures)we must have the like opinion. The saying is very good, if the faith be sound. But, if every opinion your grace hath (we cannot tell how conceived) shall be your faith, you may be much better instructed. St. Paul teacheth you, that faith is by the word of God; and it was a true saying of him that said, ‘Non qui cuivis credit fidelis est, sed qui Deo.’ For where hath your grace ground for such a faith, to think common prayer in the English church should not be in English, that images of God should be set up in the church, or that the sacrament of Christ’s body and blood should be offered by the priests for the dead; yea, or that it should be otherwise used than by the Scripture it was instituted? Though you have no Scripture to maintain them, we have evident Scriptures to forbid them. And although fault may be found, that of late baptism hath been used in your grace’s house, contrary to law, and utterly without license, yet is it the worse, that contrary to the primitive church, it hath been in an unknown tongue, by the which the best part of the sacrament is unused, and as it were a blind bargain made by the godfathers in a matter of illumination: and thus in the rest of the things in which your grace differeth from the common order of the realm, where have you ground or reason but from custom, which, oftentimes, is mother of many errors? And although in civil things she may be followed, where she causeth quiet, yet not in religious, where she excuseth no error, as in Leviticus it is said, ‘Ye shall not do after the custom of Egypt, wherein ye dwelled, nor after the custom of Canaan; no, you shall not walk in their laws, for I am your Lord God, keep you my laws and commandments. The points wherein your grace differeth in your faith, as you call it, may be showed where, when, how, and by whom, they began, since the gospel was preached, the church was planted, and the apostles martyred; at which time your faith depended upon the Scripture, and otherwise there was no necessity to believe. For, as Jerome saith, 10 ‘Quod de scripturis non habet auctoritatem, eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur.’ And because your grace, as we hear say, readeth sometimes the doctors, we may allege unto you two or three places of other principal doctors. Augustine saith, ‘Cum Dominus tacuerit, quis nostrum dicat, illa vel illa sunt: aut si dicere audeat, unde probat?’ And Chrysostome’s saying is not unlike: ‘Multi, inquit, jactant Spiritum Sanctum; sed qui propria loquuntur, falso illum praetendunt.’ And if you will take their meaning ‘plato,’ read the fifth chapter of the first book of ‘Ecclesiastica historia;’ and where Constantine had these words in the council,11 ‘In disputationibus, inquit, rerum divinarum habetur praescripta Spiritus Sancti doctrina; evangelici et apostolici libri cum prophetarum oraculis plene nobis ostendunt sensum Numinis; proinde, discordia posita, sumamus ex verbis Spiritus quaestionum explicationes.’ What plainer sayings may be than these, to answer your fault? Again too, infinite it were to remember your grace of the great number of particular errors (crept into the church), whereupon you make your foundation. The fables of false miracles and lewd pilgrimages may somewhat teach you. Only this we pray your grace to remember with yourself, the two words that the Father said of his Son Jesus Christ, ‘Ipsum audite.’ To the second point, of the commodity that may follow your obedience, we, having by the king’s authority in this behalf the governance of this realm, must herein be plain with your grace. And if our speech offend in the same, then must your grace think it is our charge and office to find fault where it is, and our part to amend it as we may. Most sorry truly we be, that your grace, whom we should otherwise honor for the king’s majesty’s sake, by your own deeds should provoke us to offend you; we do perceive great discommodity to the realm by your grace’s singularity (if it may be so named) in opinion; and in one respect, as you are sister to our sovereign lord and master, we most humbly beseech your grace to show your affection continually towards him, as becometh a sister. And as your grace is a subject, and we councilors to his majesty’s estate, we let you know that the example of your grace’s opinion hindereth the good weal of this realm, which thing we think is not unknown to you; and, if it be, we let your grace know it is too true. For God’s sake we beseech your grace, let nature set before your eyes the young age of the king your brother: let reason tell you the looseness of the people. How then can you, without a wailing heart, think that you should be the cause of disturbance? If your grace see the king, being the ordinary ruler under God, not only of all others in the realm, but of you also, call his people by ordinary laws one way, with what heart can your grace stay yourself without following; much worse to stay others that would follow their sovereign lord? Can it be a love in you to forsake him, his rule and law, and take a private way by yourself? if it be not love, it is much less obedience. If your grace think the king’s majesty to be over his people, as the head in a man’s body is over the rest, not only in place but in dignity and science, how can you, being a principal member in the same body, keep the nourishment from the head? We pray your grace most earnestly, think this thing so much grieveth us, as for our private affection and good wills to you though we should dissemble, yet for our public office we cannot but plainly inform your grace, not doubting but that your wisdom can judge what our office is, and, if it were not your own cause, we know your grace by wisdom could charge us, if we suffered the like in any other. Truly every one of us apart honoreth your grace for our master’s sake, but when we join together in public service, as in this writing we do, we judge it not tolerable, to know disorder, to see the cause, and leave it unamended. For though we would be negligent, the world would judge us. And therefore we do altogether eftsoons require your grace, in the king’s majesty’s name, that if any of your two chaplains, Mallet or Barkley, be returned, or as soon as any of them shall return to your grace’s house, the same may be, by your grace’s commandment or order, sent and delivered to the sheriff of Essex, who hath commandment from the king’s majesty, by order of the law and of his crown, to attach them; or, if that condition shall not like your grace, yet that then he may be warned from your grace’s house, and not kept there, to be as it were defended from the power of the law. Which thing we think surely neither your grace will mean, nor any of your council assent thereto. And so, to make an end of our letter, being long for the matter, and hitherto deferred for our great business, we trust your grace first seeth how the usage of your chaplains differeth from the manner of our license, and what good intent moved us to write to you in our former letters; lastly, that the things whereunto the king and the whole realm hath consented, be not only lawful and just by the policy of the realm, but also just and godly by the laws of God. So that if we, which have charge under the king, should willingly consent to the open breach of them, we could neither discharge ourselves to the king for our duties, neither to God for our conscience; the consideration of which things we pray Almighty God, by his holy Spirit, to lay in the bottom of your heart, and thereupon to build such a profession in you, as both God may have his true honor, the king his due obedience, the realm concord, and we most comfort. For all the which we do heartily pray, and therewith, for the continuance of your grace’s health to your heart’s desire. From Winchester, the 25th of December, 1550. THE LADY MARY TO THE LORDS OF THE COUNCIL, THE 2D OF MAY, My lords, after my hearty commendations to you, although both I have been and also am, loth to trouble you with my letters, yet nevertheless the new which I have lately heard touching my chaplain, Dr. Mallet, forceth me there unto at this present; for I hear, by credible report, that you have committed him to the Tower, which news seems to me very strange. Notwithstanding I thought it good by these to desire you to advertise me what is the cause of his imprisonment, assuring you I would be sorry that any of mine should deserve the like punishment, and there is no creature within the king’s majesty’s realm would more lament, that any belonging to them should give just cause so to be used, than I would do; who would have thought much friendship in you if you had given me knowledge wherein my said chaplain had offended, before you had ministered such punishment unto him, eftsoons requiring you to let me know by this bearer the truth of the matter. And thus, thanking you for the short dispatch of the poor merchant of Portugal, I wish to you all no worse than to myself, and so bid you farewell. From Beaulieu, the 2d of May. Your friend to my power, Mary , THE COUNCIL TO THE LADY MARY, THE 6TH OF MAY, 1551. After our humble commendations to your grace: we have received your letters of the second of this month, by the which your grace seemeth to take it strangely that Dr. Mallet is committed to prison, whereof we have the more marvel, seeing it hath been heretofore signified unto you, that he hath offended the king’s majesty’s laws, and was therefore condemned; and your grace hath been by our letters earnestly desired, that he might be delivered to the sheriff of Essex, according to the just process of the law, to the which all manner of persons of this realm be subject. Wherefore, howsoever it seem strange at this time to your grace, that he is imprisoned, it may seem more strange to others that he hath escaped it thus long; and, if the place, being the Tower, move your grace not to impute his imprisonment to his former offense, then we pray your grace to understand that indeed it is for the very same, and the place of the imprisonment to be at the king’s majesty’s pleasure, from whom, besides the charge of his laws, we have express commandment to do that we do. And so we beseech your grace to think of us, that neither in this case, nor in any other, we mean to do any other than minister, and see, as much as in our power lieth, justice ministered indifferently to all persons. Which doing, then, we think, your grace should not think it any lack of friendship that we did not certify you of the offense of your chaplain, although indeed the cause hath already been certified. And we trust your grace, both of your natural nearness to the king’s majesty, and your own good wisdom, will not mislike our ministry in the execution of the laws of the realm, and the pleasure of the king’s majesty. So we wish to your grace, from the bottom of our heart, the grace of Almighty God, with the riches of his holy gifts. THE LADY MARY TO THE COUNCIL, THE 11TH OF MAY, 1551. My lords, it appeareth by your letters of the sixth of this present, which I have received, that the imprisonment of my chaplain, Dr. Mallet, is for saying of mass; and that he was condemned for the same. Indeed, I have heard that he was indicted, but never condemned. Nevertheless I must needs confess and say, that he did it but by my commandment; and I said unto him, that none of my chaplains should be in danger of the law for saying mass in my house. And thereof to put him out of doubt, the emperor’s ambassador that dead is, declared unto him before that time, how and after what sort the promise was made to his majesty, whereby it appeareth that the man hath not in that willingly offended. Wherefore I pray you to discharge him of imprisonment, and set him at liberty. If not, ye minister cause not only to him, but to others, to think that I have declared more than was true; which I would not wittingly do, to gain the whole world. And herein, as I have often said, the emperor’s majesty can be best judge; and, to be plain with you, according to mine old custom, there is not one amongst the whole number of you all, that would be more loth to be found untrue of their word than I. And well I am assured, that none of you have found it in me. My lords, I pray you seek not so much my dishonor as to disprove my word, whereby it shall appear too plain, that you handle me not well. And if you have cause to charge my chaplain for this matter, lay that to me, and I will discharge it again, by your promise made to the emperor’s majesty, which you cannot rightfully deny; wishing rather that you had refused it in the beginning, than, after such promise made, and to such a person, to seem to go from it; which, my lords, as your very friend I heartily desire you to consider, and to give me no cause to think you otherwise than my friends, considering I have always, and yet do (God is my judge) wish to you all no worse, neither in souls nor bodies, than to myself. And so, with my hearty commendations, I commit you all to God. From Beaulieu, the 11th of May. Your assured friend to my power, Mary . THE COUNCIL TO THE LADY MARY, THE 27TH OF MAY, 1551. After our due commendations to your grace: although the same receiveth not answer so soon as perchance was looked for upon the return of your grace’s servant, yet we doubt not but your grace understandeth, that, whereas we have matters of estate pertaining to the king’s majesty in hand (as indeed we have had of late), the deferring of the answer, in a matter being no greater, requireth to be borne withal. And touching the answer of your grace’s letter for Dr. Mallet, we pray your grace to understand, that although you write, ‘he was indicted, but not condemned,’ and so seem to take exception at the manner of his imprisonment; yet, if they which informed your grace of that manner of reason in the law, were as well disposed to please your grace with truth, as the reason indeed is not true, then should they have told your grace, that, by the act of parliament, if either Mallet hath been convicted by the oaths of twelve men, or that the fact have been notorious, then the punishment doth follow justly. The truth of the one and the other way of conviction in this case is notorious enough, besides his flying from the process of the law. And whereas your grace, to relieve him, would take the fault upon yourself, we are sorry to perceive your grace so ready to be a defense to one that the king’s law doth condemn. Nevertheless, he is not punished because your grace bade him and willed him to do that which was an offense, but he is punished for doing it. And if we should not so see the king’s laws executed without respect, it might appear that we have too much neglected our duty; and for that your grace taketh it as a discredit to yourself, that he should be punished for that you bade him do, alleging to him that you had authority so to do, and that so promise was made to the emperor, it hath been both written and said to your grace what is truth in that behalf. And howsoever that your grace pretendeth your license to have mass said before yourself, for a time of your reconciliation, it had been far out of reason to have desired that whosoever was your chaplain, might say mass in any house that was yours, when your grace’s self was not there: for so is Dr. Mallet’s offense, for saying mass at one of your houses where your grace was not, which thing as it was never granted, so do we not remember that ever it was demanded. The suit that hath been at any time made, either by the emperor’s ambassador that dead is, or by him that now is, was never but in respect of your grace, and not to be taken that the emperor or his ambassador meant to privilege Master Doctor Mallet, or any other, to say mass out of your presence. Wherefore, as we do plainly write to your grace, so we do pray you to take it in good part, and think we be as ready to do our due reverence towards your grace in any thing we may do with our duty to our master, as any your grace may command; and of such wisdom we know your grace to be, that ye should judge the better of us, for that we be diligent to see the laws of the realm executed, wherein resteth the strength and safeguard of the king’s majesty, our sovereign lord and master. THE LADY MARY TO THE LORDS OF THE COUNCIL, THE 21ST OF JUNE, 1551. My lords, although I received by my servant, this bearer (who lately delivered unto you my letters, wherein I desired to have my chaplain Dr. Mallet discharged of his imprisonment), your gentle message in general words, for the which I give you most hearty thanks; yet have I no knowledge whether you will set him at liberty or no; but I think that your weighty affairs at that time was the let and cause ye did not write, for else I doubt not but ye would have answered me. Wherefore not being satisfied, and understanding ye would gladly pleasure me, I thought good eftsoons to desire you that my said chaplain may have his liberty, wherein I assure you ye shall much gratify me, being not a little troubled that he is so long in prison without just cause, seeing the matter of his imprisonment is discharged by the promise made to the emperor’s majesty, as in my late letter I declared unto you. Wherefore, my lords, I pray you let me have knowledge by this bearer, how ye will use me in this matter; wherein if ye do pleasure me accordingly, then shall it well appear that ye regard the aforesaid promise, and I will not forget your gentleness therein, God willing, but requite it to my power. And thus, with my hearty commendations to you all, I bid you farewell. From Beaulieu, the 21st of June. Your assured friend to my power, Mary . THE COUNCIL TO THE LADY MARY, THE 24TH OF JUNE, 1551. After our humble commendations to your grace: we have received your grace’s letter of the 21st hereof, wherein is received the same request that in your former letters hath been made for the release of Dr. Mallet; and therein also your grace seemeth to have looked for the same answer of your former letter, the which indeed partly was omitted (as your grace conjectureth) by the reason of the king’s majesty’s affairs, wherewith we be thoroughly occupied: partly for that we had no other thing to answer than you had heretofore heard in the same matter. And therefore whereas your grace desireth a resolute answer, we assure the same we be right sorry for the matter, and that it should be your grace’s chance to move it, sith we cannot, with our duties to the king’s majesty, accomplish your desire. So necessary a thing it is to see the laws of the realm executed indifferently in all manner of persons, and in these cases of contempt of the ecclesiastical orders of this church of England, that the same may not, without the great displeasure of God, and the slander of the state, be neglected: and therefore your grace may please to understand, that we have not only punished your chaplain, but all such others whom we find in like case to have disobeyed the laws of the king’s majesty. And touching the excuse your grace oftentimes useth, of a promise made, we assure your grace, none of us all, nor any other of the council, as your grace hath been certified, hath ever been privy to any such promise, otherwise than hath been written. And in that matter your grace had plain answer both by us of the king’s majesty’s council, at your being last in his majesty’s presence; and therein also your grace might perceive his majesty’s determination; whereunto we beseech your grace not only to incline yourself, but also to judge well of us that do addict ourselves to do our duties. And so also shall we be ready to do, with all our hearts, our due reverence toward your grace, whose preservation we commend to Almighty God with our prayer. THE LADY MARY TO THE KING’S MAJESTY 10 , THE 19TH OF AUGUST, 1551. My duty most humbly remembered to your majesty: it may please the same to be advertised, that I have received by my servants your most honorable letters, the contents whereof do not a little trouble me; and so much the more, for that any of my said servants should move or attempt me in matters touching my soul, which I think, the meanest subject within your highness’s realm could evil bear at their servants’ hands; having, for my part, utterly refused heretofore to talk with them in such matters, and of all other persons least regarded them therein, to whom I have declared what I think, as she which trusted that your majesty would have suffered me, your poor sister and beadswoman, to have used the accustomed mass, which the king, your father and mine, with all his predecessors, did evermore use: wherein also I have been brought up from my youth. And thereunto my conscience doth not only bind me, which by no means will suffer me to think one thing, and do another, but also the promise made to the emperor by your majesty’s council was an assurance to me, that in so doing I should not offend the laws, although they seem now to qualify and deny the thing. And at my last waiting upon your majesty, I was so bold to declare my mind and conscience in the same, and desired your highness, rather than you should constrain me to leave mass, to take away my life; whereunto your majesty made me a very gentle answer. And now I most humbly beseech your highness, to give me leave to write what I think touching your majesty’s letters. Indeed, they be signed with your own hand, and nevertheless (in mine opinion) not your majesty’s in effect, because it is well known (as heretofore I have declared in the presence of your highness), that although, our Lord be praised, your majesty hath far more knowledge and greater gifts than others of your years, yet it is not possible that your highness can at these years be a judge in matters of religion; and therefore I take it that the matter in your letters proceedeth from such as do wish those things to take place which be most agreeable to themselves, by whose doings, your majesty not offended, I intend not to rule my conscience. And thus, without molesting your highness any further, I humbly beseech the same, even for God’s sake, to bear with me as you have done; and not to think that by my doings or example any inconvenience might grow to your majesty or your realm; for I use it not after such sort: putting no doubt but in time to come, whether I live or die, your majesty shall perceive that mine intent is grounded upon a true love towards you, whose royal estate I beseech Almighty God long to continue, which is and shall be my daily prayer, according to my duty. And, after pardon craved of your majesty for these rude and bold letters, if neither at my humble suit, nor for the regard of the promise made to the emperor, that your highness will suffer and bear with me as you have done, till your majesty may be a judge herein yourself, and rightly understand their proceedings (of which your goodness yet I despair not): otherwise, rather than to offend God and my conscience, I offer my body at your will; and death shall be more welcome than life with a troubled conscience: most humbly beseeching your majesty to pardon my slowness in answering your letters; for mine old disease would not suffer me to write any sooner. And thus I pray Almighty God, to keep your majesty in all virtue and honor, with good health and long life to his pleasure. From my poor house at Copped-Hall, the 19th of August. Your majesty’s most humble sister, Mary . THE KING’S ANSWER TO THE LADY MARY, THE 24TH OF AUGUST, 1551. Right dear and right entirely beloved sister, we greet you well, and let you know that it grieveth us much to perceive no amendment in you, of that which we, for God’s cause, your soul’s health, our conscience, and the common tranquillity of our realm, have so long desired; assuring you that our sufferance hath much more demonstration of natural love, than contentation of our conscience, and foresight of our safety. Wherefore, although you give us occasion, as much almost as in you is, to diminish our natural love; yet we he loth to feel it decay, and mean not to be so careless of you as we be provoked. And therefore, meaning your weal, and therewith joining a care not to be found guilty in our conscience to God, having cause to require forgiveness that we have so long, for respect of love toward you, omitted our bounden duty, we send at this present our right trusty and right well-beloved councilor, the lord Rich, chancellor of England, and our trusty and right well-beloved councilors, sir A.W., knight, comptroller of our household, and sir W.P., knight, one of our principal secretaries, in message to you, touching the order of your house, willing you to give them firm credit in those things they shall say to you from us, and do there in our name. Given under our signet at our castle of Windsor, the 24th of August, in the fifth year of our reign. A COPY OF THE KING’S INSTRUCTIONS, GIVEN TO THE SAID LORD CHANCELLOR, AND TO SIR A.W. AND W.P. KNIGHTS, ETC., THE 24TH OF AUGUST, 1551. First, you the said lord chancellor, and your colleagues, shall make your immediate repair to the said lady Mary, giving to her his majesty’s hearty commendations, and show the cause of your coming to be as followeth. Although his majesty hath long time, as well by his majesty’s own mouth and writing; as by his council, travailed that the said lady, being his sister, and a principal subject and member of his realm, should both be indeed, and also show herself, conformable to the laws and ordinances of the realm, in the profession and rites of religion, using all the gentle means of exhortation and advice that could be devised, to the intent that the reformation of the fault might willingly come of herself, as the expectation and desire of his majesty and all good wise men was; yet, notwithstanding, his majesty seeth that hitherto no manner of amendment hath followed, but, by the continuance of the error, and manifest breach of his laws, no small peril consequently may hap to the state of his realm; especially the sufferance of such a fault being directly to the dishonor of God, and the great offense of his majesty’s conscience, and all other good men; and therefore of late, even with the consent and advice of the whole state of his privy council, and divers others of the nobility of his realm, whose names ye may repeat, if you think convenient, his majesty aid resolutely determine it just, necessary, and expedient, that her grace should not, in any wise, use or maintain the private mass, or any other manner of service than such as, by the law of the realm, is authorized and allowed. And, to participate this his majesty’s determination to her grace, it was thought, in respect of a favorable proceeding with herself, to have the same not only to be manifested by her own officers and servants, being most esteemed with her, but also to be executed with them in her house, as well for the quiet proceeding in the very matter, as for the less molesting of her grace with any message by strangers, in that time of her solitariness, whereto her grace was then, by reason of the late sickness. For which purpose her three servants, Rochester, Englefield, and Waldgrave, were sent in message in this manner: first, to deliver his majesty’s letter to her; next to discharge the complaints of saying mass, and prohibiting all the household from hearing any. Wherein the king’s majesty perceiveth upon their own report, being returned to the court, how negligently, and indeed how falsely, they have executed their commandment and charge; contrary to the duty of good subjects, and to the manifest contempt of his majesty. Insomuch as manifestly they have, before his majesty’s council, refused to do that which pertaineth to every true faithful subject, to the offense so far of his majesty, and derogation of his authority, that in no wise the punishment of them could be forborne: and yet, in the manner of the punishment of them, his majesty and his council have such consideration and respect of her person, being his sister, that without doubt his majesty could not with honor have had the like consideration or favor in the punishment of the dearest councilor he hath, if any of them had so offended. And therefore his majesty hath sent you three, not only to declare to her grace the causes of their sending thither of late his officers in message, but also the causes of their absence now presently; and further, in the default of the said officers, to take order, as well with her chaplains, as with the whole household, that his majesty’s laws may be there observed. And in the communication with her, you shall take occasion to answer, in his majesty’s name, certain points of her letter, sent now lately to his majesty; the copy of which letter is now also sent to you to peruse, for your better instruction how to proceed therein. First, her allegation of the promise made to the emperor must be so answered, as the truth of the matter serveth, whereof every of you have heard sufficient testimony divers times in the council. For her offering of her body at the king’s will, rather than to change her conscience, it grieveth his majesty much, that her conscience is so settled in error, and yet no such thing is meant of his majesty, nor of any one of his council, once to hurt, or will evil to her body; but, even from the bottom of their heart, they wish to her ‘mentem sanam in corpore sano.’ And therefore ye shall do very well to persuade her grace, that this proceeding cometh only of the conscience the king hath to avoid the offense of God, and of necessary counsel and wisdom to see his laws in so weighty causes executed. Item, because it is thought that Rochester had the care and consideration of her grace’s provision of household, and by his absence the same might be disordered or disfurnished, his majesty hath sent a trusty skillful man of his own household, to serve her grace for the time; who also is sufficiently instructed by Rochester of the state of her things, of household. And if there shall be any thing lacking in the same, his majesty’s pleasure is, that his servant shall advertise his own chief officers of household, to the intent, if the same may be supplied of any store here, or other-where helped conveniently, her grace shall not lack. Item, Having thus proceeded with her grace, as for the declarations of the causes of your coming, ye shall then cause to be called before you the chaplains, and all the rest of the household there present; and, in the king’s majesty’s name, most straitly forbid the chaplains either to say or use any mass or kind of service, other than by the law is authorized. And likewise ye shall forbid all the rest of the company to be present at any such prohibited service, upon pain to be most straitly punished, as worthily falling into the danger of the king’s indignation; and alike charge to them all, that if any such offense shall be openly or secretly committed, they shall advertise some of his majesty’s council. In the which clause ye shall use the reasons of their natural duty and allegiance that they owe as subjects to their sovereign lord, which derogateth all other earthly duties. Item, If you shall find either any of the priests, or any other person, disobedient to this order, ye shall commit them forthwith to prison, as ye shall think convenient. Item, Forasmuch as ye were privy to the determination at Richmond, 12 and there understood how necessary it was to have reformation herein; his majesty, upon the great confidence he hath in your wisdom and uprightness, remitteth to your discretion the manner of the proceeding herein, if any thing shall chance to arise there that in your opinions might, otherwise than according to these instructions, conduce you to the execution of your charge; which, in one sum, is to avoid the use of the private mass, and other unlawful service, in the house of the said lady Mary. Item, Ye shall devise by some means as you may, to have understanding after your departure, how the order you give is observed, and as you shall judge fit, to certify hither. E.S., W.W., I.W., I.B., W.N., W.H., F.H., I.G., T.D., W.C. HERE FOLLOWETH THE HISTORY OF THE DOINGS AND ATTEMPTS OF STEPHEN GARDINER, LATE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER, WITH THE PROCESS OF HIS ARTICLES AND EXAMINATIONS UPON THE SAME * Now 2 that we have discoursed the process, doings, and examinations of Edmund Bonner, followeth next in order the Story of Stephen Gardiner bishop of Winchester, in process not much unlike to the other; in stoutness alike arrogant and glorious; in craft and subtlety going before him, although the order and time of his examinations came behind him. This Gardiner, having precept and commandment given unto him by the king to preach upon certain points which they had him in suspicion for, in much like sort as Bonner did before, showed himself, in performing the same, both stubborn and willful, as was declared of the other before. Whereupon the next day after his sermon ensuing, being arrested by sir Anthony Wingfield and sir Ralph Sadler, knights, accompanied with a great number of the guard, he was committed to the Tower; from whence, at length, he was brought to Lambeth, to his examinations, whereof more shall be said hereafter (Christ permitting) at large. In the mean time to comprehend and collect all things in order, first, we will begin with the beginning of his deserved trouble: how he was committed to keep his house, and afterwards had to the Fleet; and what letters he wrote, as well to others as especially to the lord protector; whose answers again to the said bishop, as many as came to our hands, we have thereto annexed, by the example and copy of which his letters, here being expressed for thee, gentle reader, to peruse, thou mayest easily perceive and understand the proud and glorious spirit of that man, his stubborn contumacy against the king, and malicious rebellion against God and true religion, with sleight and craft enough to defend his peevish purposes.* THE EXAMPLES AND COPIES OF CERTAIN LETTERS WRITTEN BY STEPHEN GARDINER, BISHOP OF WINCHESTER, CONTAINING DIVERS MATTERS NOT UNWORTHY TO BE KNOWN FOR THIS PRESENT HISTORY. WINCHESTER TO THE LORD PROTECTOR, IN CONSEQUENCE OF A SERMON OF THE BISHOP OF ST. DAVID’S. May it please your grace to understand, that I have noted some points in my lord of St. David’s sermon 4 which I send unto you herewith, whereby to declare unto you some part what I think, for the whole I cannot express. Somewhat I shall encumber you with my babbling, but he hath encumbered some friends more with his tattling. And alas, my lord! this is a piteous case, that having so much business as ye have, these inward disorders should be added unto them, to the courage of such as would this realm any ways evil. For this is the thing they would desire, with hope thereby to disorder this realm, being now a time rather to repair that which needeth reparation, than ‘to make any new buildings which they pretend. Quiet, tranquillity, unity, and concord shall maintain estimation: 5 the contrary may atomate the enemy to attempt that which was never thought on, which God forbid. There was never attempt of alteration made in England, but upon comfort of discord at home; and woe be to them that mind it! If my lord of St. David’s, or such others, have their head encumbered with any new platform, I would wish they were commanded, between this and the king’s majesty’s full age, to draw the plat, diligently to hew the stones, dig the sand, and chop the chalk, in the unseasonable time of building; and, when the king’s majesty cometh to full age, to present their labors to him; and, in the mean time, not to disturb the state of the realm, 6 whereof your grace is protector; but that you may, in every part of religion, laws, lands, and decrees (which four contain the state), deliver the same unto our sovereign lord, according unto the trust you be put in; which shall be much to your honor, and as all honest men wish and desire: to which desired effect there can be nothing so noisome and contrarious as trouble and disquiet. Wherein your grace shall be specially troubled, as on whose shoulders all the weight lieth; and whatsoever shall happen amiss by the faults of others, shall be imputed to your grace, as doer thereof, or wanting foresight in time to withstand the same. And albeit that your mind be not faulty in either, yet, if the effect be not to the realm as it were to be wished, the prince, though he were of age, should be excused, and the governors bear the blame. And this is the infelicity of pre-eminence and authority, and specially in this realm, as stories make mention, which should not discourage you, for you need fear nothing without, if quiet be reserved at home; and at home, if the beginning be resisted, the intended folly may easily be interrupted. But if my brother of St. David’s may, like a champion with his sword in his hand, make entry for the rest, the door of license opened, there shall more by folly thrust in with him than your grace would wish. Thus, as I think, I write homely to your grace, because you were content I should write, wherein I consider only to have all things well. And because your grace is the protector and the chief director of the realm, to present unto your wisdom what my folly is, I have been oftentimes blamed for fearing overmuch, and yet I have had an inkling that they that so blamed me, feared even as much as I. Being in the state that you be in, it shall be ever commendable to foresee the worst. In quiet ye be strong, in trouble ye be greatly weak, and bring yourself in danger of one part, when parties be, therewith one to scourge the other: whereas, in concord, they be both yours, in an honest, reverent, lowly fear to do their duty; which, I doubt not, your wisdom can consider, and consider also how noisome any other outward encumber might be, in the time of the minority of our sovereign lord. I told the emperor’s council, that our late sovereign lord did much for the emperor, to enter war with him, and to put his realm in his old days in the adventure of fortune, whether he should enjoy it or no; for that is the nature of war. And sometimes the contemned and abject have had the upper hand. And when ye administer the realm for another, it were a marvelous question of him that shall enjoy the realm to say, What meant you, in the time of administration to adventure my realm? Why took ye not rather, for the time of my minority, any peace, whatsoever it were? which is better than the best war, as some men have written. I know you have authority sufficient, and wisdom plenty, and yet, being entered to write, I forget for the time what ye be, and commune with you as I were talking at Brussels with you, devising of the world at large. And if I were sworn to say what I think of the state of the world, I would, for a time, let Scots be Scots, with despair to have them, unless it were by conquest, which shall be a goodly enterprise for our young master, when he cometh to age. And, in the meantime, prepare him money for it, and set the realm in an order which it hath need of. 8 And for a stay, if the emperor would offer the daughter of the king of Romans, as he did, do with him in our master’s minority, as he did with us in his, whereby all this hath chanced unto him. And by this alliance your estimation shall increase, and our sovereign lord’s surety not a little increase and be augmented. For of France it must be taken for a rule, ‘They be so wanton, they cannot do well longer than they see how they may be scourged, if they do not.’ Here is all the wit that I have, which I offer unto you upon this occasion of writing, and shall pray God to put into your mind that which shall be for the best, as I trust he will; and, in the mean time, to extinguish this barbarous contention at home, which can serve only to do hurt, and no good. I had fashioned a letter to Master Ridley, 9 which I send unto your grace, and encumber you with these melancholy writings, engendered of this fondness, which be not worth the reading. And so it may like you to use them, for having heard that which ye have said unto me, and otherwise heard and seen what you do, I shall go occupy my wit in other matters; and now such as have found enterprises shall see, that I letted not their follies (which they called God’s word): 10 but for his time the king our sovereign lord that dead is; and after his time you have done much to your honor and reputation; 11 howsoever any shall be here not contented; which miscontentation hath been so fond in some, as they have burst out and wished, that they might, without breach of his laws, kill me; which is to me a token of a marvelous fury, which hath been cause why I am glad both to depart hence, and to depart the sooner, and pray to God to order all things for the best, with preservation of our sovereign lord, and increase of your grace’s honor. At my house in Southwark, the last of February. Your grace’s humble bead-man, S.W. A LETTER OF WINCHESTER TO CAPTAIN VAUGHAN, DATED THE 3D OF MAY, 1547. Master Vaughan, after my right hearty commendations: In my last letters to my lord protector, signifying, according to the general commandment by letters given to all justices of peace, the state of this shire, I declared (as I supposed true) the shire to be in good order, quiet, and conformity; for I had not then heard of any alteration in this shire, which the said letters of commandment did forbid. Now of late, within these two days, I have heard of a great and detestable (if it be true that is told me) innovation in the town of Portsmouth, where the images of Christ and his saints have been most contemptuously pulled down, and spitefully handled. Herein I thought good both to write to you and the mayor, the king’s majesty’s chief ministers, as well to know the truth, as to consult with you for the reformation of it, to the intent I may be seen to discharge my duty, and discharging it indeed both to God and to the king’s majesty, under whom I am here appointed to have cure and care to relieve such as be by any ways fallen, and preserve the rest that stand, from, like danger. Ye are a gentleman with whom I have had acquaintance, and whom I know to be wise, and esteem to have more knowledge, wisdom, and discretion than to allow any such enormities; and therefore I do the more willingly consult with you herein, with request friendly to know of you the very truth in the matter: who be the doers, and the circumstances of it, and whether ye think the matter so far gone with the multitude, and whether the reproof and disproving of the deed, might, without a further danger, be enterprised in the pulpit or not; minding, if it may so be, to send one thither for that purpose upon Sunday next coming. I would use preaching as it should not be occasion of any further folly where a folly is begun; and to a multitude, persuaded in the opinion of destruction of images, I would never preach: for, as Scripture willeth us, we should cast no precious stones before hogs. Such as be infected with that opinion, they be hogs and worse than hogs 12 (if there be any grosser beasts than hogs be), and have been ever so taken; and in England they are called Lollards, who, denying images, thought therewithal the crafts of painting and graying to be generally superfluous and naught, and against God’s laws. In Germany such as maintained that opinion of destroying of images, were accounted the dregs cast out by Luther after he had turned all his brewings in Christ’s religion, and so taken as hog’s meat; for the reproof of whom Luther wrote a book specially: and I have with mine eyes seen the images standing in all churches where Luther was had in estimation. For the destruction of images containeth an enterprise to subvert religion, and the state of the world with it, and especially the nobility, who, by images, set forth and spread abroad, to be read of all people, their lineage and parentage, with remembrance of their state and acts; and the poursuivant carrieth not on his breast the king’s name, written with such letters as a few can spell, but such as all can read be they never so rude, being great known letters in images of three lions, and three fleurs-de-lis, and other beasts holding those arms. And he that cannot read the Scripture written about the king’s great seal, yet he can read St. George on horseback on the one side, and the king sitting in his majesty on the other side; and readeth so much written in those images, as, if he be an honest man, he will put off his cap. And although, if the seal were broken by chance, he would and might make a candle of it, yet he would not be noted to have broken the seal for that purpose, or to call it a piece of wax only, whilst it continueth whole. And if by reviling of stocks and stones, in which matter images be graven, the setting of the truth (to be read of all men) shall be contemned; how shall such writing continue in honor as is comprised in clouts and pitch, whereof and whereupon our books be made, such as few can skill of, and not the hundredth part of the realm? And if we (a few that can read), because we can read in one sort of letters, so privileged as they have many reliefs, shall pull away the books of the rest, and would have our letters only in estimation, and blind all them 11 , shall not they have just cause to mistrust what is meant? And if the cross be a truth, and if it be true that Christ suffered, why may we not have a writing thereof, such as all can read, that is to say, an image? If this opinion should proceed, when the king’s majesty hereafter should show his person, his lively image, the honor due by God’s law among such might continue; but as for the king’s standards, his banners, his arms, they should hardly continue in their due reverence for fear of Lollards’ idolatry, which they gather upon Scripture beastly — not only untruly. The Scripture reproveth false images made of stocks and stones, and so it doth false men made of flesh and bones. When the emperor’s money was showed to Christ, wherein was the image of the emperor, Christ contemned not that image calling it an idol, nor noted that money to be against God’s law, because it had an image in it, as though it were against the precept of God, ‘Thou shalt have no graven image;’ but taught them good civility, in calling it the emperor’s image, and bade them use the money as it was ordered to be used, in its right use. There is no Scripture that reproveth truth, and all Scripture reproveth falsehood. False writings, false books, false images, and false men, all be naught; to be contemned and despised. As for paper, ink, parchment, stones, wood, bones, A.G. of the chancery hand, and A.B. of the secretary hand, a letter of German fashion, or of any other form, they be all of one estimation, and may be of man, inclining to the devil, used for falsehood, or, applying to God’s gracious calling, used to set forth truth. 13 It is a terrible matter to think that this false opinion conceived against images should trouble any man’s head; and such as I have known vexed with that devil (as I have known some), be nevertheless wondrously obstinate in it; and if they can find one that can spell Latin to help forth their madness, they be more obdurate than ever were the Jews, and slander whatsoever is said to them for their relief. Of this sort I know them to be; and, therefore, if I wist there were many of that sort with you, I would not irritate them by preaching without fruit, but labor for reformation to my lord protector. But if you thought there might be other ways used first to a good effect, I would follow your advice, and proceed with you and the mayor, with both your helps to do that may lie in me to the redress of the matter, which I take to be such an enterprise against Christ’s religion, as there cannot be a greater by man excogitated with the devil’s instigation, and at this time much hurtful to the common estate, as ye can of your wisdom consider; whom I heartily desire and pray to send me answer, by this bearer, to these my letters, to the intent I may use myself in sending of a preacher thither, or writing to my lord protector, as the case shall require accordingly. And thus fare you heartily well. From my house at Wolvesey, the 3d of May, 1547. Steph. Winchester. A LETTER OF THE LORD PROTECTOR, ANSWERING TO THE SAME. After hearty commendations: I received of late two letters from your lordship, the one enclosed in a letter of Master Vaughan’s to us, and directed to him, the other directed strait unto us; very wittily and learnedly written, whereby we do perceive how earnest you are, that no innovations should be had. The which mind of yours, as we do highly esteem and allow, proceeding from one that would quietness, so we would likewise wish, that you should take good heed that too much fear of innovation or disturbance doth not cause both of them to be. Many times in a host, he that crieth ‘Enemies! enemies!’ when there be none, causeth not only disturbance, but sometimes a mutiny or rebellion to be made; and he that for fear of a sickness to come, taketh unadvisedly a purgation, sometimes maketh himself sick indeed. We perceive by the said your letters, that heinouser facts and words have been brought to your ears, than there was cause why; and those facts which were punishable, be already by him redressed. For the matter of images, an order was taken in the late king of famous memory our sovereign lord’s days. When the abused images (yet lurking in some places, by negligence of them who should ere this time have looked unto the same) be made now abolished, let not that be made a matter of the abolishing of all images. Though felons and adulterers be punished, all men be not slain. Though the images which did adulterate God’s glory be taken away, we may not think by and by all manner of images to be destroyed. Yet, after our advice, better it were for a time to abolish them all, than for that the dead images, the king’s loving subjects, being faithful and true to the king’s majesty, should be put to variance and disturbance. With quietness the magistrates and rulers shall keep them well in order, whom contentious preachers might irritate and provoke to disorder and strife. So it must be provided that the king’s majesty’s images, arms, and ensigns, should be honored and worshipped after the decent order and invention of human laws and ceremonies; and, nevertheless, that other images, contrary to God’s ordinances and laws, should not be made partakers of that reverence, adoration, and invocation, which (forbidden by God) should derogate his honor, and be occasion to accumulate God’s wrath upon us. Where they be taken for a remembrance, it maketh no great matter though they stand still in the church or market-stead, following the late king of famous memory’s counsel and order; yet more gentleness was showed to those books of images, than to the true and unfeigned books of God’s word, both being abused, the one with idolatry, the other with contention. The Scripture was removed for a time from certain persons, and almost from all. The images were left still to them who most did abuse them, the thing being yet closed from them which should teach the use. Wherefore it may appear unto us meet, more diligent heed to be taken, that the abused before be not abused again, the advantage of some priests, simplicity of laymen, and great inclination of man’s nature to idolatry, giving cause thereto. They that contemn images, because the matter that they are made of is but vile, as stocks and stones, may likewise despise printing in paper, because the ink hath pitch in it, and the paper is made of old rags. And if they be both alike, it might be reasoned why a man should be more aggrieved, that an image of wood, though it were, of St. Anne, or St. Margaret, should, be burned, than he will that the Bible, whereto the undoubted word of God is comprised, should be torn in pieces, burned, or made paste of. Nor do we now speak of false bibles, nor false gospels, but of the very true gospel, either in Latin, Greek, or English, which we see every day done, and sometimes commanded, because the translator displeaseth us; and yet herein no man exclaimeth of a terrible and detestable fact done. But let one image, either for age, and because it is worm-eaten, or because it hath been foolishly abused, be burnt or abolished, by and by some men are in exceeding rage, as though not a stock or a stone, but a true saint of flesh and bone should be cast into the fire, which were a detestable and a terrible sight. We cannot see but that images may be counted marvelous books, to whom we have kneeled, whom we have kissed, upon whom we have rubbed our beads and handkerchiefs, unto whom we have lighted candles, of whom we have asked pardon and help: which thing hath seldom been seen done to the gospel of God, or the very true Bible. For who kisseth that, but the priest at the mass, at a painted picture, or in such a ceremony: or who kneeleth unto it, or setteth a candle before it? and yet it seeth or heareth, as well as the images or pictures either of St. John, or our Lady, or Christ. Indeed images be great letters; yet as big as they be, we have seen many which have read them amiss. And belike they be so likely to be read amiss, that God himself, fearing the Jews to become evil readers of them, generally did forbid them. Nor is it any great marvel though in reading of them the lay-people are many times deceived, when your lordship (as appeareth) hath not truly read a most true and a most common image. Your lordship hath found out, in the king’s highness’s great seal, St. George on horseback, which the graver never made in it, nor the sealer ever sealed with it; and this inscription is not very little, and if it were, it could not escape your lordship’s eyes. As the inscription testifieth, the king’s image is on both the sides; on the one side, as in war, the chief captain; on the other side, as in peace, the liege sovereign; In harness, with his sword drawn, to defend his subjects; in his robes, in the seat of justice, with his scepter rightfully to rule and govern them; as he whom both in peace and war we acknowledge our most natural and chiefest head, ruler, and governor. If it were St. George, my lord, where is his spear and dragon? And why should the inscription round about tell an untruth, and not agree to the image? Yet it is called sometimes so of the rude and ignorant people; but not, by and by, that what is commonly called so, is always truest. And some have thought that by like deceiving, as your lordship herein appeareth to have been deceived, the image of Bellerophon or Perseus was turned first and appointed to be St. George, and of Polyphemus, of Hercules, or of some other Colossus, to be St. Christopher, because authentical histories have not fully proved their two lives. But those be indifferent to be true or not true, either thus invented upon some device, or rising of a true fact or history; and whether it were true or not, it maketh no great matter. It were hardly done indeed, my lord, if that you, and a few which can read, should take away from the unlearned multitude their books of their images: 14 but it were more hardly done, if that you, or a few which can read in one or two languages (as Greek and Latin) the word of God, and have had thereby many reliefs and privileges, should pull away the English books from the rest which only understand English; and would have only your letters of Greek and Latin in estimation, and blind all them which understand not these languages, from the knowledge of God’s word. And indeed, my lord, by your saying they have just occasion to suspect what is meant. What you mean by true images and false images, it is not so easy to perceive. It they be only false images, which have nothing that they represent, as St. Paul writeth, ‘An idol is nothing,’ (1 Corinthians 8) (because there is no such god,) and therefore the cross can be no false image, because it is true that Christ suffered upon it: then the images of the sun and the moon were no idols, for such things there be as the sun and the moon, and they were in the image then so represented, as painting and carving doth represent them. And the image of Ninus and Caesar, and (as some write) the images of all the twelve chosen gods (as they called them), were the images of once living men. And it might be said, that the image of God the Father hath no such eyes, nose, lips, and a long gray beard, with a furred robe, nor ever had, as they carve and, paint him to have. But, if that be a false image and an idol which is otherwise worshipped and accepted than it ought to be, as the brazen serpent, being a true image and representation of Christ, by abuse was made an idol; it may be thought in times past, and, peradventure, now at this time, in some places, the images not only of St. John, or St. Anne, but of our Lady and Christ be false images and idols, representing to foolish, blind, and ignorant men’s hearts and thoughts, that which was not in them, and they ought not to be made for. The which were by you, my lord, to have been removed sooner, and before that the captain there should have need to have done it. But if your lordship be slack in such matters, he that removeth false images and idols abused doth not a thing worthy of blame. Christ called not the money, having Caesar’s image in it, an idol, when it was used to lawful uses, and to pay the due tribute withal. But, when a man doth not use those images graven in money to do his neighbor good, and the commonwealth service, St. Paul, Christ’s disciple, called that covetousness, and the serving and bondage to idols. So that even in money may be idolatry, if we make too much of those images which Christ here doth not reprehend. There be some so ticklish, and so fearful one way, and so tender stomached, that they can abide no old abuses to be reformed, but think every reformation to be a capital enterprise against all religion and good order; as there be on the contrary side some too rash, who, having no consideration what is to be done, headlong will set upon every thing. The magistrate’s duty is betwixt these, so in a mean to sit and provide, that old doting should not take further or deeper rust in the commonwealth, neither ancient error overcome the seen and tried truth, nor long abuse, for the age and space of time only, still be suffered; and yet all these with quietness and gentleness, and without all contention, if it were possible, to be reformed. To the which your lordship, as a man to whom God hath given great qualities of wit, learning, and persuasion, could bring great help and furtherance, if it were your pleasure, with great thanks of men and reward of God. The which thing is our full desire and purpose, and our hearty and daily prayer to God, that in the king’s majesty’s time (whose majesty’s reign God preserve!) all abuses with wisdom reformed, Christ’s religion, with good and politic order of the commonwealth, without any contention and strife among the king’s subjects, might flourish and daily increase. And this to your lordship’s letter sent to Master Vaughan of Portsmouth. ANOTHER LETTER OF WINCHESTER TO THE LORD PROTECTOR. After my most humble commendations to your grace, it may like the same to understand, I have seen of late two books set forth in English by Bale, very pernicious, seditious, and slanderous. And albeit that your grace needeth not mine advertisement in that matter, yet I am so bold to trouble your grace with my letters for mine own commodity, wherewith to satisfy mine own conscience, to write and say as becometh me in such matters, which I desire your grace to take in good part. For it grieveth me not a little to see, so soon after my late sovereign lord and master’s death, a book spread abroad more to his dishonor (if a prince’s honor may be by vile inferior subjects impeached) than professed enemies have imagined, to note a woman to have suffered under him as a martyr; and the woman therewith to be, by Bale’s own elucidation (as he calleth it) so set forth and painted as she appeareth to be, and is boasted to be, a sacramentary, and by the laws worthy (as she suffered) the pains of death; such like things have, by stealth, in our late sovereign lord’s days, gone abroad as they do now. And as I am wont in such cases to speak, I keep my wont to write to your grace now, in whose hands I know the state of the realm to be for the time in government, and to whom, for respects of old acquaintance, I wish all felicity. In these matters of religion I have been long exercised, and have (thanks be to God) lived so long as I have seen them thoroughly tried; and, besides that I have learned in written books of authority, I have perceived by books written without authority, as by Master Bale, Joy, and others, and especially as Bale useth now, that Scripture doth, by abuse, service to the right hand and the left at once, insomuch as at one time Bale praiseth Luther, and setteth his death forth in English, with commendation as of a saint; which Luther (whatsoever he was otherwise) stoutly affirmed the presence really of Christ’s natural body in the sacrament of the altar. And yet Bale, the noble clerk, would have Anne Askew, 16 blasphemously denying the presence of Christ’s natural body, to be taken for a saint also. So as Bale’s saints may vary in heaven, if they chance not by the way; which might suffice to disprove the man’s credit, if thwarting talk were more desired of many, than the truth indeed; which truth was supposed to have been, both in writing and exercise, well established long before our late lord’s death, and Bale and his adherents in their madness plainly reproved and condemned. I cannot forget, your grace told me you would suffer no innovation; and indeed if you deliver this realm to the king at eighteen years of age, as the king his father, whose soul God assoil, left it, as I trust you shall, the act is so honorable and good, as it were pity to trouble it with any innovation, which were a charge to your grace more than needed, being already burdened heavily. 17 And albeit in the commonwealth every man hath his part, yet as God hath placed you, the matter is (under the king’s majesty) chiefly yours, and as it were yours alone. Every man hath his eye directed unto you, both here and abroad; you shall shadow men’s doings, if they be done, which is one incommodity of high rule. And, for my part, besides my duty to the king’s majesty and the realm, I would that your grace (in whom since your government I have found much gentleness and humanity) had as much honor with good success as ever any had, and pray to God that men would let your grace alone, and suffer the realm in the time of your government in quiet among ourselves, whereby we may be the more able to resist foreign trouble, which your grace doth prudently foresee. Certain printers, players, and preachers, make a wonderment, as though we knew not yet how to be justified, nor what sacraments we should have. And if the agreement in religion made in the time of our late sovereign lord he of no force in their judgment, what establishment could any new agreement have? and every uncertainty is noisome to any realm, 18 And where every man will be master, there must needs be uncertainty. And one thing is marvelous, that at the same time it is taught that all men be liars, at the selfsame time almost every man would be believed; and amongst them Bale, when his untruth appeareth evidently in setting forth the examination of Anne Askew, which is utterly misreported. I beseech your grace to pardon my babbling with you; but I see my late sovereign lord and master slandered by such simple persons, religion assaulted, the realm troubled,19 and peaceable men disquieted, with occasion given to enemies to point and say, that after Wickliff’s strange teaching in the sacraments of Christ’s church hath vexed others, it is finally turned unto us to molest and scourge us, 20 for other fruit cannot Bale’s teaching have, nor the teaching of such others as go about to trouble the agreement established here. In which matter I dare not desire your grace specially to look earnestly unto it, lest I should seem to note in you that, which becometh me not. And I know that your grace being otherwise occupied, these things may creep in, as it hath been heretofore. Sometimes it may be hard for your grace to find out or pull out the root of this haughtiness: but yet I am so bold to write of these, of mine own stomach, who have ever used, for discharge of myself, to say and write in time and place as I thought might do good for relief of the matter, remitting the rest to the disposition of God, who hath wrought wonders in these matters, since they were first moved, and given me such knowledge and experience in them, as I ought to take them (as they be) for corruption and untruth; I mean knowledge and experience Of them that be chief stirrers, to infect with untruth, as they cannot speak or report truly in common matters. — The pretense is of the spirit, and all is for the flesh, women, and meat, with liberty of hand and tongue, a dissolution and dissipation of all estates, clean contrarious to the place God hath called your grace unto. For it tendeth all to confusion and disorder, which is the effect of untruth. Bale hath set forth a prayer for the duke John of Saxony, wherein the duke remitteth to God’s judgment, to be showed here in this world, the justness of his cause concerning religion; and desireth God, if his cause be not good, to order him to be taken, and to be spoiled of his honor and possessions, with many such gay words whereby to tempt God; since which prayer the duke is indeed taken, as all the world saith; and, at the time of his taking, as the account is made, such strangeness in the sun, as we saw it here, as hath not been seen. They happened both together, this we know, and be both marvelous; but, whether the one were a token ordered to concur with the other, God knoweth, and man cannot define. Many commonwealths have continued without the bishop of Rome’s jurisdiction; but without true religion, and with such opinions as Germany maintained, 21 no estate hath continued in the circuit of the world to us known since Christ came. For the Turks and Tartars’ government is, as it were, a continual war, and they uphold their rule with subduing of nobility by fire and sword. Germany 22 with their new religion could never have stood, though the emperor had let them alone: for if it be persuaded the understanding of God’s law to be at large in women 23 and children, whereby they may have the rule of that, and then God’s law must be the rule of all, is not hereby the rule of all brought into their hands? These of some will be called witty reasons, but they be indeed truth’s children; and so is all the eloquence, which some (to dispraise, me) say I have, whatsoever they say of me. For truth is of itself, in a right meaning, man’s mouth; more eloquent than forged matters can with study bring forth. What rhymes be set forth to deprave the Lent, and how fond (saving your grace’s honor) and foolish! and yet the people pay money for them, and they can serve for nothing, but to learn the people to rail, and to cause such as used to make provision for fish against Lent, fearing now in Lent to be so sick as the rhyme purporteth, and like to die indeed, to forbear to make their accustomed provision for the next year. And thereto shall it come, if the common diet be not certain: for the fishmonger will never hope to have good sale, when the butcher may with flesh outface him. And fish is the great treasure of this realm, and food inestimable. And these good words I give, although I love it not myself: for such as love not fish should nevertheless commend it to others, to the intent the flesh by them forborne, might be, to such as love it, only the more plenty. The public defamation and trifling with Lent is a marvelous matter to them that would say evil of this realm; for there is nothing more commended unto us christian men in both the churches of the Greeks and Latins, than Lent is, if all men be not liars. In the king our late sovereign lord’s days this matter was not thus spoken of. And I think our enemies would wish we had no Lent. Every country hath its peculiar inclination to naughtiness: England and Germany unto the belly, the one in liquor, the other in meat; France a little beneath the belly; Italy to vanities and pleasures devised; and let an English belly have a further advancement, and nothing can stay it. When I was purveyor for the seas, what an exclamation was there (as your grace showed me) of the bishops’ fasting-day, as they called Wednesday, and ‘Winchester, Winchester, grand mercy for your wine; I beshrew your heart for your water.’ Was not that song, although it was in sport, a signification how loth men be to have their license restrained, or their accustomed fare abated? unless it were in extreme necessity. I hear say 369 that the Lent is thus spoken of by Joseph and Tonge 12 , with other new 13 (whom I know not), as being one of Christ’s miracles, which God ordained not man to imitate and follow; at which teaching all the world will laugh. For christian men have Christ for an example in all things, both to use the world as he did, only for necessity, and to contemn the world as he did; and in case to refuse it, and choose the vile death, as he did the death of the cross, which things he did like a master most perfect, for he was very God; and we must endeavor ourselves, in the use of his gifts, to follow that he did — not to fast forty days without meat as Christ did, for we be but prentices, and carry about a ruinous carcase, that must have some daily reparation with food — but yet was there never any that said, how therefore we should do nothing, because we cannot do all, and take Christ’s fast for a miracle only. And yet all that follow Christ truly, they work daily miracles, in subduing and conforming, by God’s grace, their sensual appetites, and humbly obeying to the will of God; which no man can of himself do. And Christ promised that his true servants should work the works that he did, and greater works also. Wherefore it is a slender matter to say, Lent was one of Christ’s miracles, for so it was, to love his enemies, and specially those that scourged and bobbed him; which may not be (if that allegation hath place) taught christian men to follow, because it was a miracle, as they might say. It were more tolerable to forget Lent, as Poggius telleth of a priest in the mountains, that knew not how the year went about; and when the weather opened, and he went abroad, and perceived his neighbors were towards Palm-Sunday, he devised an excuse to his parish, and bade them prepare there-for, for indeed the year had somewhat slipped him, but he would fashion the matter so as they should be as soon at Easter as the rest; and thus did he pass over Lent with much less slander, than to teach it for a doctrine, that Lent was one of Christ’s miracles, and therefore not to be imitated of us. For although it was indeed a great miracle (as all Christ’s doings were), yet was it not a greater miracle, nor more against man’s nature, than to love them that labored and were busy to take away the natural life of his manhood. For as the nature of man desireth relief, so doth it abhor destruction or hurt. In will and desire men follow Christ in all things; in execution they cannot; for we have brittle vessels, and God giveth his gifts to men, as he seeth expedient for his church; so as men cannot heal the lame when they will, as Christ did when he would, but as God shall think profitable for the edification of the flock assembled. Gregory Nazianzen speaketh of some that enterprised to imitate Christ’s fast above their power, whose immoderate zeal he doth not disallow, not requiring of all men so to do, for that is an extremity, nor yet assoiling the matter, as our new schoolmen do, that christian men should let Christ’s fast alone as a miracle; which manner of solution I heard a good fellow make, when it was told him he might not revenge himself, and when he was stricken on the one ear, he should put forth the other. ‘I am,’ quoth he, ‘a man; I am not God. If Christ being God did so, he might,’ quoth he, ‘if it had pleased him, have done otherwise.’ And so when it hath been alleged that Christ fasted forty days. ‘He might,’ quoth he, ‘have eaten if he had list.’ These triflings in sport might be drawn to grave speech, if christian men shall refuse to follow Christ in miracles. For all his life was miracles, and his love, that is our badge, most miraculous of all, to die for his enemies. I beseech your grace to pardon me, for I am like one of the Commons’ house, that, when I am in my tale, think I should have liberty to make an end; and specially writing to your grace, with whom I account I may be bold, assuring you it proceedeth of a zeal towards you to whom I wish well, whose intent although it be such as it ought to be, and as it pleased you to show me it was, yet are such things spread abroad whereof the evil willers of the realm will take courage, and make account (although it be wrong) that all goeth on wheels. If any man had either fondly or indiscreetly spoken of Lent to engrieve it to be an importable burden, I would wish his reformation; for I have not learned that all men are bound to keep the Lent in the form received. But this I reckon, that no christian man may contemn the form received, being such a devout and profitable imitation of Christ to celebrate his fast; and in that time such as have been in the rest of the year worldly, to prepare themselves to come, as they should come, to the feast of Easter, whereof St. Chrysostome speaketh expressly. And for avoiding contempt, a license truly obtained of the superior serveth. And so I heard the king’s majesty our sovereign lord declare, when your grace was present: and therefore he himself was very scrupulous in granting of licenses. And to declare that himself contemned not the fast, he was at charge to have (as your grace knoweth) the Lent diet daily prepared, as if it had been for himself; and the like hereof I hear say your grace hath ordered for the king’s majesty that now is; which agreeth not with certain preaching in this matter, nor the rhymes set abroad. Lent is, among christian men, a godly fast to exercise men to forbear, and in England both godly and politic, such as without confusion we cannot forbear, as the experience shall show, if it be ever attempted; which God forbid. And yet Lent is buried in rhyme, and Stephen Stockfish bequeathed not to me, though my name be noted; wherewith for mine own part I cannot be angry,25 for that is mitigated by their fondness. But I would desire of God to have the strength of this realm increased with report of concord, which doth quench many vain devices and imaginations. And if all men be liars, as it is now to my understanding strangely published, methinketh Bale and such new men, as be new liars, should be most abhorred and detested, and so much the more dangerous as they be new. That which in Italy and France is a matter of combat, is now found to be impropriate to all men. God grant the truth to be desired of all men truly! But, as one asked, when he saw an old philosopher dispute with another, what they talked on; and it was answered how the old man was discussing what was virtue; it was replied, ‘If the old man yet dispute of virtue, when will he use it?’ so it may be said in our religion, ‘If we be yet searching for it, when shall we begin to put it in execution?’ I would make an end of my letters, and cannot; wherein I account myself faulty. And though I may err, as every man may, yet I lie not, for I say as I think; forsomuch as I have said, and further think, [that] your grace hath no trouble troublesome, but this matter of religion unseasonably brought into the defamation of our late sovereign lord’s acts, doings, and laws. I beseech your grace take my meaning and words in good part, and pardon my boldness, which groweth of the familiarity I have heretofore had with your grace, which I cannot forget. And thus enforcing myself to an end, I shall pray to Almighty God to preserve your grace in much felicity, with increase of honor and achieving of your heart’s desire. At Winchester the 21st of May Your grace’s humble bead-man, S.W. THE LETTER OF THE LORD PROTECTOR, ANSWERING TO WINCHESTER. Your letters dated the 21st day of May, as concerning two books new set forth by one Bale, and certain sermons preached here, were with convenient speed delivered unto us. And like as in your letters to Edward Vaughan of Portsmouth, so in those to us, we perceive that you have a vigilant and diligent eye, and very fearful of innovation: which as it cannot be blamed, proceeding of one which is desirous of quiet, good order, and continuance of the godly state of this realm; so we do marvel that so soon, so far off, and so plainly, you can hear tell and say of so many things done here, which indeed we, being here, and attendant upon the same, cannot yet be advertised of. The world never was so quiet or so united, but that privily or openly those three which you write of, printers, players, and preachers, would set forth somewhat of their own heads, which the magistrates were unawares of. And they which already be banished and have forsaken the realm, as suffering the last punishment, be boldest to set forth their mind; and dare use their extreme license or liberty of speaking, as out of the hands or rule of correction, either because they be gone, or because they be hid. There have foolish and naughty rhymes and books been made and set forth, of the which, as it appeareth, you have seen more than we; and yet, to our knowledge, too many be bought: but yet, after our mind, it is too sore and too cruelly done, to lay all those to our charge, and to ask as it were account of us of them all. In the most exact cruelty and tyranny of the bishop of Rome, yet Pasquill (as we hear say) writeth his mind, and many times against the bishop’s tyranny, and sometimes toucheth other great princes; which thing, for the most part, he doth safely: not that the bishop alloweth Pasquill’s rhymes and verses — especially against himself; but because he cannot punish the author, whom either he knoweth not, or hath not. In the late king’s days of famous memory, who was both a learned, wise, and politic prince, and a diligent executer of his laws — and when your lordship was most diligent in the same — yet, as your lordship yourself writeth, and it is too manifest to be unknown, there were that wrote such lewd rhymes and plays as you speak of, and some against the king’s proceedings, who were yet unpunished, because they were unknown or ungotten. And when we do weigh the matter, we do very much marvel, why that about Jack of Lent’s lewd ballad, and certain, as it was reported unto us, godly sermons (which be evil in your letters joined together), you be so earnest, when against Dr. Smith’s book, being a man learned in the doctors and Scripture, which made so plain against the king’s highness’s authority, and for the furtherance of the bishop of Rome’s usurped power, your lordship neither wrote nor said any thing. And, as it appeared, you be so angry with his retractation (which frankly without fear, dread, compulsion, or imprisonment, only with learning and truth overcome, he came unto), that you cannot abide his beginning, although having the very words of Scripture: except, peradventure, you think that the saying of David, ‘Omnis homo mendax,’ cannot be interpreted, ‘Every man is a liar;’ which, howsoever your lordship taketh it at pleasure, it appeareth unto us then of him taken but godly, to declare the infirmity of man, and the truth of God and his word. And we are not able to reason so clearly with you, and yet we have heard of the subtle difference of lying, and telling of a lie, or, as it is in Latin called, ‘mentiri’ and ‘mendacium dicere.’ But if your lordship be loth to be counted ‘mendax’ (which belike Dr. Smith hath interpreted a liar, or a lying man, and you think it a matter of combat, or that he was deceived in the interpretation, and it is a matter for clerks to dispute of), we would have wished your lordship to have written against his book before, or now with it, if you think that to be defended which the author himself refuseth to aver. Your lordship writeth earnestly for Lent, which we go not about to put away; no more than, when Dr. Smith wrote so earnestly that every man should be obedient to the bishops, the magistrates by and by went not about to bring kings and princes, and others, under their subjection. Writers write their fantasy, my lord, and preachers preach what either liketh them, or what God putteth in their heads. It is not by and by done, that is spoken. The people buy those foolish ballads of Jack-a-Lent. So bought they in times past pardons, and carols, and Robin Hood’s tales. All be not wise men, and the foolisher a thing is, to some (although not to the more part) it is the more pleasant and meet. And peradventure of the sermons there is (and indeed there is, if it be true that we have heard) otherwise spoken and reported to you, than it was of the preachers there and then spoken or meant. Lent remaineth still, my lord, and shall, God willing, till the king’s highness, with our advice and the residue of his grace’s council, take another order, although some light and lewd men do bury it in writing; even as the king’s majesty remaineth head of the church, although, through sinister ways, and by subtle means, some traitors have gone about, and daily do, to abuse the king’s majesty’s supremacy, and bring in the bishop of Rome’s tyranny, with other superstition and idolatry. On both sides great heed is to be taken, and as your lordship writeth, we are set in a painful room, to reform all lightness and lewdness, to the which we do endeavor ourself to the best of our power, although not so cruelly and fiercely as some peradventure would wish, yet not so loosely that there needeth such exclamations or great fear to be. We do study to do all things attemperately, and with quiet and good order; and we would wish nothing more than your lordship to be as ready to the reformation of the one as of the other, that neither superstition, idolatry, or papacy, should be brought in, nor lightness, nor contempt of good order to be maintained. They both take beginning at small things, and increase by little and little at unawares. And quiet may as well be broken with jealousy as negligence, with too much fear or too reach patience: no ways worse, than when one is over light-cared the one way, and deaf on the other side. Rumors by space and times increase naturally; and by that time they come at you, as it appeareth, they be doubled and trebled. We do perceive your diligent eye towards us, and we will wish (and trust you have) your heart faithful to us. Our most hearty desire and continual prayer to God is, to leave this realm to the king’s highness, at his grace’s age by you written, rather more flourishing in men, possessions, wealth, learning, wisdom, and God’s religion and doctrine, if it were possible and God’s will, than we found it. And that is our whole intent and esperance, to the which we refuse no man’s help, as knoweth God; in whom we bid you heartily, farewell. A LETTER OF WINCHESTER TO THE LORD PROTECTOR. After my most humble commendations to your good grace: upon the return of my servant Massie with your grace’s letters, answering to such my letters wherein I signified the robbing of my secretary, I read the same gladly, as by the contents of the matter I had cause so to do; which was such a comfortative, as I digested easily the rest of the great packet, having been accustomed thereunto in the king my late sovereign lord’s days; 27 which fashion of writing, his highness (God pardon his soul!) called ‘whetting’: which was not all the most pleasant unto me at all times; yet when I saw in my doings was no hurt, and sometimes by the occasion thereof the matter amended, I was not so coy as always to reverse my argument; nor, so that his affairs went well, did I ever trouble myself, whether he made me a wanton or not. And when such as were privy to his letters directed unto me, were afraid I had been in high displeasure (for the terms of the letters sounded so), yet I myself feared it nothing at all. I esteemed him, as he was, a wise prince; and whatsoever he wrote or said for the present, he would after consider the matter as wisely as any man, and neither hurt nor inwardly disfavor him that had been bold with him; whereof I serve for a proof, for no man could do me hurt during his life. And when he gave me the bishopric of Winchester, he said, he had often squared with me, but he loved me never the worse; and for a token thereof gave me the bishopric. And once, when he had been vehement with me in the presence of the earl of Wiltshire, and saw me dismayed with it, he took me apart into his bed-chamber, and comforted me, and said, that his displeasure was not so much to me as I did take it; but he misliked the matter, and he durst more boldly direct his speech to me, than to the earl of Wiltshire. And from that day forward he could not put me out of courage, but if any displeasant words passed from him, as they did sometimes, I folded them up in the matter; which hindered me a little. For I was reported unto him that I stooped not, and was stubborn; and he had commended unto me certain men’s gentle nature (as he called it), that wept at every of his words; and methought that my nature was as gentle as theirs, for I was sorry when he was moved. But else I know when the displeasure was not justly grounded in me, I had no cause to take thought, nor was I at any time in all my life miscontent or grudging at any thing done by him, I thank God for it. And therefore, being thus brought up, and having first read your grace’s most gentle letters, signifying the device of a proclamation to stay these rumors, and reading the same proclamation, which my servant brought with him, I read with the more quiet your grace’s great letters; and would have laid them up without further answer, were it not that, percase, my so doing might be mistaken. For glum silence may have another construction than frank speech, where a man may speak, as I reckon I may with your grace; upon confidence whereof I am bold to write thus much for my declaration touching your grace’s letters of the 27th of May, that how earnest soever my letters be taken in fearing any innovation, I neither inwardly fear it, neither show any demonstration in mine outward deeds to the world here, or in communication, that I do fear it to be done by authority; but in myself resist the rumors and vain enterprises, with confidence in the truth and your grace’s wisdom. For if I feared that indeed, with persuasion, it should come to pass, I should have small lust to write in it; but I fear more indeed the trouble that might arise by light boldness of others, and the encumbrance of such matters while other outward affairs occupy your grace’s mind, than the effect by your direction that hath been talked of abroad. And yet, in the writing, I do speak as the matter leads, continuing mine old manner, to be earnest; which as some men have dispraised, so some have commended it. And therefore, in a good honest matter I follow rather mine own inclination, than to take the pains to speak as butter would not melt in my mouth; wherewith I perceive your grace is not miscontent, for the which I most humbly thank you. And first, as concerning Portsmouth, I wrote to the captain and mayor in the thing as I had information, and by men of credence: and yet I suspended my credit till I had heard from thence, as by my letters appeareth; and as I was loth to have it so, so was I loth to believe it. And, to show that I feared no innovation by authority, nor regarded any such danger, I went thither myself; and in conclusion was in such familiarity with the captain, that after he had showed me all the gentle entertainment that he could, he desired me to make an exhortation to his men, as they stood handsomely with their weapons, wherewith they had showed warlike feats: which I did, and departed in amity with the captain and soldiers, and all the town; the captain telling me plainly, he was nothing offended with any thing I had said in my sermon: nor was there cause why he should. But the very act indeed in defacing the images, had no such ground as Master Captain pretended: for I asked specially for such as had abused those images, and no such could be showed, for that I inquired for openly. And the image of St. John the Evangelist, standing in the chancel by the high altar, was pulled down, and a table of alabaster broken; and in it an image of Christ-crucified so contemptuously handled, as was in my heart terrible — to have the one eye bored out, and the side pierced! wherewith men were wondrously offended: for it is a very persecution beyond the sea, used in that form where the person cannot be apprehended. And I take such an act to be very slanderous, and, esteeming the opinion of breaking images as unlawful to be had very dangerous, void of all learning and truth, wrote after my fashion to the captain; which letters I perceive to have come to your grace’s hands. I was not very curious in the writing of them, for with me truth goeth out plainly and roundly; and, speaking of the king’s seal, I uttered the common language I was brought up in, after the old sort. When, as I conject of a good will, the people taking St. George for a patron of the realm under God, and having some confidence of succor by God’s strength derived by him, 28 to increase the estimation of their prince and sovereign lord, I called their king on horseback, in the feat of arms, St. George on horseback; my knowledge was not corrupt. I know it representeth the king, and yet my speech came forth after the common language, wherein I trust is none offense. For besides learning, I by experience have known the pre-eminence of a king both in war and peace; and yet, if I had wist my letter should have come to your grace’s hands to be answered, then I would have been more precise in my speech, than to give occasion of so long an argument therein. As for St. George himself, I have such opinion of him as becometh me. And have read also of Bellerophon in Homer, as they call him, the father of tales, but I will leave that matter. And as for books, let Latin and Greek continue as long as it shall please God, I am almost past the use of them — what service those letters have done, experience has showed; and religion hath continued in them fifteen hundred years. But as for the English tongue, itself hath not continued in one form of understanding two hundred years; and without God’s work and special miracles it shall hardly contain religion long, when it cannot last itself. And whatsoever your grace’s mind is now in the matter, I know well, that having the government of the realtor your grace will use the gift of policy, which is a gift of God. And even as now, at this time, bishops be restrained by a special policy to preach only in their cathedral churches (the like whereof hath not been known in my time), so, upon another occasion, your grace may percase think expedient to restrain (further than the parliament hath already done) the common reading of the Scripture, as is now restrained the bishops’ liberty of preaching. As for the brazen serpent, it did not in all men’s language represent Christ; and if I had written to another than your grace, I might have had the like matter of argument that was taken against me, of St. George on horseback. For Gregory Nazianzen, chief divine in the Greek church, calleth the serpent’s death the figure of the death of Christ; but not the serpent to be the figure of Christ. And yet, when I had done all my argument, I would resolve (as is resolved with me in the speech of St. George on horseback), that the common speech is otherwise (and so it is), in saying the serpent to be a true figure of Christ: and yet Gregory Nazianzen called the serpent itself Anti>tupon of Christ, in these words, Ode< etc., in his sermon De Paschate; and yet in Alma chorus Domini 14 , we read Aries, Leo, Vermis, spoken of Christ; and some expound the Scripture ‘sicut Moses,’ etc. after that sort. And, as your grace said when I was last at your house with the French ambassador, ye wished him and me, together disputing, to see when we would make an end; even so it is in these matters, when they come in an argument. For a bye thing, as St. George on horseback, when it escaped me, or speaking of the brazen serpent following a speech not thoroughly discussed, shall be occasion of a digression all out of purpose. And therefore was it a great gift of God, that our late sovereign lord (God rest his soul!) set these matters in quiet; who had heard all these reasons touching images which be now rehearsed in your grace’s letters; and, having once my lord of Canterbury and me present with him alone in his palace, that they call otherwise New-Hall, handled that matter at length, and discussed with my lord of Canterbury the understanding of God’s commandment to the Jews, so as all the clerks in Christendom could not amend it. And whereas one had denied the image of the Trinity to be had, by reasons as be touched in your grace’s letters, I heard his highness answer to them at another time. And when he had himself specially commanded divers images to be abolished, yet (as your grace knoweth) 29 he both ordered, and himself put in execution, the kneeling and creeping before the image of the cross, and established agreement in that truth through all this realm, whereby all arguments to the contrary be assoiled at once. I would wish images used as the book, of his highness set forth, doth prescribe, and no otherwise. I know your grace only tempteth me with such reasons as others make unto you, and I am not fully at liberty, although I am bold enough (and some will think too bold) to answer some things as I would to another man mine equal, being so much inferior to your grace as I am: but methinketh St. Paul’s solution, during the king’s majesty’s minority, should serve instead of all; ‘Nos talem consuetudinem non habemus,’ ‘We have no such custom in the church.’ When our sovereign lord cometh to his perfect age (which God grant), I doubt not but God will reveal that 30 which shall be necessary for the governing of his people in religion. And if any thing shall be done in the mean time (as I think there shall not) by your grace’s direction, he may, when he cometh to age, say in the rest, as I hear say he said now of late concerning procession, that in his father’s time men were wont to follow procession; upon which the king’s majesty’s saying, the procession (as I heard) was well furnished afterwards by your grace’s commandment: which speech hath put me in remembrance, that if the bishops and others of the clergy should agree to any alteration in religion, to the condemnation of any thing set forth by his father, whereby his father might be noted to have wanted knowledge or favor to the truth, what he would say I cannot tell, but he might use a marvelous speech (and, for the excellency of his spirit, it were like he would); and, having so just a cause against bishops as he might have, it were to be feared he would. And when he had spoken, then he might, by his laws, do more than any of our sort would gladly suffer at these days. For as the allegation of his authority represented by your grace shall be then answered (as your grace now writeth unto me, ‘That your grace only desireth truth according to God’s Scripture),’ and it may be then said, ‘We bishops, when we have our sovereign lord and head in minority, we fashion the matter as we lust.’ And then some young man that would have a piece of the bishops’ lands shall say, ‘The beastly bishops have always done so; and when they can no longer maintain one of their pleasures, of rule and superiority, then they take another way, and let that go, and, for the time they be here, spend up what they have, which eat you and drink you what they list, and we together, with ‘Edamus et bibamus, cras moriemur.’ And if we shall allege for our defense the strength of God’s truth, and the plainness of Scripture, with the word of the Lord, and many gay terms, and say, ‘We were convinced by Scriptures,’ such an excellent judgment as the king’s majesty is like to have, will never credit us in it, nor be abused by such a vain answer. And this is a worldly politic consideration, and at home: for the noise abroad in the world will be more slanderous, than this is dangerous. And touching the bishop of Rome, the doings in this realm hitherto have never done him so much displeasure, as the alteration in religion during the king’s majesty’s minority should serve for his purpose. For he wanteth not wits to beat into other princes’ ears, that where his authority is abolished, there shall, at every change of governors, be change in religion; and that which hath been amongst us by a whole consent established, shall, by the pretense of another understanding in Scripture, strait be brought in question; for they will give it no other name but a pretense, how stiffly soever we will affirm otherwise, and call it God’s word. And here it should be much noted that my lord of Canterbury, being the high bishop of the realm, highly in favor with his late sovereign lord, and my lord of Durham, a man of renowned fame in learning and gravity (both put by him in trust for their counsel in the order of the realm), should so soon forget their old knowledge in Scripture set forth by the king’s majesty’s book, and advise to inveigh such matter of alteration. All which things be (I know well) by your grace and them considered. And therefore it is to me incredible, that ever any such thing should be indeed with effect, whatsoever the lightness of talk shall spread abroad, which your grace hath by proclamation well stayed. But if you had not, and the world talked so fast as ever they did, I assure your grace I would never fear it, as men fear things they like not, unless I saw it in execution: for of this sort I am, that in all things I think should not be done in reason, I fear them not, wherewith to trouble me, otherwise than to take heed, if I can; and to the head governors (as now to your grace) show my mind: and such experience hath every man of me, that hath communed with me in any such matters. And therefore, albeit your grace writeth wisely, that over much fear doth hurt, and accelerateth sometimes that which was not intended, yet it needs not to me; for I have learned that lesson already, and would a great many more had, which indeed should be great stay. And thus I talk with your grace homely, with multiplication of speech impertinent and not necessary, as though I meant to send you as great a packet as I received from you. One thing necessary to answer your grace in, is touching your marvel, how I know sooner things from thence, than your grace doth there; which ariseth not upon any desire of knowledge on my behalf (for evil things be over soon known), nor upon any slackness of your gracc’s behalf there, who is and is noted very vigilant; as your grace’s charge requireth. But thus it is, even as it was when I was in some little authority: they that were the evil doers in such matters, would hide them from me. So, now, they have handled it otherwise; for as for Jack of Lent’s English Testament, it was openly sold in Winchester market before I wrote unto your grace of it. And as for Bale’s books, called the Elucidation of Anne Askew’s Martyrdom, 31 they were in these parts common, some with leaves unglued, where Master Paget was spoken of; and some with leaves glued. And I call them common, because I saw at the least four of them. As for Bale’s book, touching the death of Luther, wherein was the duke of Saxony’s prayer (whereof I wrote), it was brought down into this country by an honest gentleman, to whom it was (as I remember he told me) given at London for news; and he had it a great while ere I wrote to your grace. I had not then received the inhibition for preaching, whereof men spake otherwise than they knew. And in the mean time Dr. Smith recanted, which a priest of this town (who to mine own mouth boasted himself to be your grace’s chaplain, but I believed it not) brought down with speed, and made bye means to have it brought to my knowledge, which I knew besides, for they had by and by filled all the country hereabouts with tales of me. And when I saw Dr. Smith’s recantation begin with ‘omnis homo mendax,’ so englished, and such a new humility, as he would make all the doctors of the church liars with himself; knowing what opinions were abroad, it enforced me to write unto your grace for the ease of my conscience; giving this judgment of Smith, that I neither liked his tractation of unwritten verities, nor yet his retractation; and was glad of my former judgment, that I never had familiarity with him. I saw him not, that I wot, these three years, nor talked with him these seven years, as curious as I am noted in the commonwealth. And whereas in his unwritten verities he was so mad to say, ‘Bishops in this realm may make laws,’ I have witness that I said at that word, we should be then ‘daws:’ and was by and by sorry that ever he had written of the sacrament of the altar, which was not, as it was noised, untouched with that word, ‘All men are liars;’ which is a marvelous word, as it soundeth in our tongue, when we say a man were better to have a thief in his house, than a liar. And the depraving of man’s nature in that sort is not the setting out of the authority of the Scripture. For, albeit the authority of the Scripture dependeth not upon man, yet the ministration of the letter, which is writing and speaking, is exercised, and hath been from the beginning delivered, through man’s hand, and taught by man’s mouth; which men the Scripture calleth holy men; and that is, contrary to liars. And therefore St. Augustine in his book ‘De Mendacio’ sayeth, ‘omnis homo mendax’ signifieth ‘omnis homo peccans.’ If Smith had only written of bishops’ laws, and then said loudly, he had (saving your honor) lied, or, to mitigate the matter, said he had erred by ignorance, that had been done. truly and humbly: for he that seeketh. for much company in lying, as he did, hath small humility; for he would hide himself by the number. And thus much as touching Smith, of whom, or his hook, till he was in trouble, I never heard talking. But to the matter I wrote of; I have told your grace how I came to knowledge of them, very scarcely in time, but in the thing over quickly: and never had any such thought in my life, as I denied to your grace, to be worthily charged with them (by them, I mean, that may hereafter charge); for I know no such yet in this world, and I never was in mine opinion so mad, as to write to your grace in that sort. When all things be well, I have many causes to rejoice; but where things were otherwise (as I trust they shall not), I have nothing to do to ask any account: I trust I shall never forget myself so much. I thank God, I am even as well learned to live in the place of obedience, as I was in the place of direction in our late sovereign lord’s life. And for my quietness in this estate, I account myself to have a great treasure of your grace’s rule and authority; and therefore will worship and honor it otherwise than to use such manner of presumption to ask any account. And I know your grace cannot stay these matters so suddenly; and I esteem it a great matter, that things be stayed hitherto thus: but, if things had increased as the rumors purported, your grace might have been incumbered more in the execution of your good determination. Now, thanks be to God, your grace goeth well about to stay it. As for myself, I know mine inward determination to do, as I may, my duty to God and the world, and have no cause to complain of the universal disposition of them in my diocese. I know but one way of quiet: to keep and follow such laws and orders in religion as our late sovereign lord left with us; which, by his life, as the bishops and clergy said, was the very truth, so I never yet read or heard any thing why to swerve from it, or think it expedient to call any one thing in doubt, during the king’s majesty’s minority, whereby to impair the strength of the accord established. Which I write, not mistrusting your grace in the contrary, but declaring myself, and wishing the same mind to others about you, as I trust they have, for which I shall pray to God, who prospered our late sovereign lord in that rebellion, as we have seen experience, and, by your grace’s foresight and politic government, shall send the like prosperity to our sovereign lord that now is; wherein I shall do my part, as a subject most bounden many ways thereunto. I send unto your grace herewith, my discussion of my lord of St. David’s purgation, wherein I walk somewhat more at liberty than writing to your grace; and yet I take myself liberty enough, with a reverend mind, nevertheless, to keep me within my bounds; which if I at any time exceed, I trust your grace will bear with me after your accustomed goodness, for whose prosperity I shall continually pray, with increase of honor. At Winchester, the 6th of June [1547.] *STEPHEN WINCHESTER, TO THE LORD PROTECTOR. After most humble commendations to your grace: I have received this day letters from my lord of Canterbury, touching certain homilies, which the bishops, in the convocation holden A.D. 1542, agreed to make for stay of such errors as were then by ignorant preachers sparkled among the people; for other agreement there had not then passed among us. Since that time God gave our late sovereign lord the gift of pacification in those matters, which, established by his highness’s authority in the convocation, extinguished our devices, and remaineth of force with your grace; wherein to avoid many encumbrous arguments which wit can devise against the truth, I send to your grace the copy of mine answer to my lord of Canterbury, to whom I write and offer myself more largely than I ever did in any matter of the realm, to any man besides my sovereign lord, or the chief governor as your grace. For I am not factious, and use only to say as I am bound to say, as occasion serveth; for that is my duty: having no other thing purposed but truth and honesty, whatsoever any man shall otherwise say of me. I am busier with your grace than needeth; but such commendations as it pleased your grace to send me by Master Coke (for the which I most humbly thank your grace), have engendered thus much more boldness than ever. Methinketh I should desire your grace, not to suffer the king’s majesty our late sovereign lord’s determination to slip the anchor-hold of authority, and come to a loose disputation; for decision whereof afterwards, the burden must rest on your grace, unto whom I desire all prosperous success, and the increase and continuance of such honor as God hath granted to your virtue, not to fall by encumbrance of any bye-matters that need not to be stirred. If your grace think not yourself encumbered with my babbling, and inculcating that which needeth not unto you, I would answer your grace’s letters of the sixteenth of April, so as your grace will, by other letters, withdraw your name; that I may be seen to dispute with one not so far above me in authority, as your grace is; which I have thought requisite to advertise, lest by my silence your grace should deem I thought myself overcome in those matters, where indeed I am of a contrary mind, and can show whereupon to ground me, why I should so think: and thus, desiring your grace to take in good part my doings, I shall continually pray for the preservation of your grace long in felicity. At Winchester, the 10th of June, 1547. TO THE LORD PROTECTOR. After my most humble commendations to your grace: since my letters unto your grace, wherewith I sent unto you such letters as I had written to my lord of Canterbury, for answer to his letters touching homilies, I have eftsoons received other letters from my said lord of Canterbury, requiring the said homilies by virtue of a convocation holden five years past, wherein we communed of that which took none effect then, and much less needeth to be put in execution now, nor in my judgment cannot without a new authority from the king’s majesty that now is, commanding such a matter to be enterprised. I wrote at length to my lord of Canterbury, and sent the copy of those letters to your grace; not to the intent your grace should lose so much time to read them, for they be tedious in length, but only for my discharge; who never meddled yet, by private letters, with any man in the realm, to persuade or dissuade matters of religion, but with the prince himself, or him that had the managing of the great matters under him. And following this determination, I am so bold to send your grace the copy of such letters as I write to my lord of Canterbury, whose letters to me, I could not of congruence forbear to answer, nor answering, forbear to speak freely as I think. And sorry I am to hear the matter of homilies spoken of in this time. Your grace hath done prudently to stop the vain rumors by proclamation, and it hath wrought good effect, and methinketh it is not best to enterprise any thing to tempt the people with occasion of tales, whereby to break the proclamation and offend: and to this effect I wrote to my lord of Canterbury. For like as in a natural body, rest without trouble doth confirm and strengthen it, so is it in a commonwealth: trouble travaileth, and bringeth the things to looseness. And my lord of Canterbury is not sure of his life, when the old order is broken, and a new brought in by homilies — that he shall continue to see his new device executed; for it is not done in a day. I would there were nothing else to do now. I have known business to occupy such as were put in trust, when religion hath been untouched. A new order engendereth a new cause of punishment against them that offend; and punishments be not pleasant to them that have the execution, and yet they must be: for nothing may be contemned. And thus I travail in the matter with my lord of Canterbury, because he would I should weigh things. And so do I as indifferently, as ever did man for the preservation of the ship, wherein I sail myself, and so many others, whose prosperity I am bound to wish. I can admit no innovations. [A.D. 1547.] A LETTER OF WINCHESTER, TO THE LORD PROTECTOR. After my most humble commendations to your good grace, with thanks that it hath pleased you to be content to hear from me, wherein now I have from your grace liberty to write at large, I cannot find the like gentleness in my body to spend so much time as I would; and therefore shall now desire your grace to take in good part, though I gather my matter into brief sentences. The injunctions in this visitation contain a commandment to be taught and learned: two books, one of the Homilies that must be taught others by priest; another of Erasmus’s Paraphrase, that the priest must learn himself. These books strive one with all other directly 15 , etc. Thus I have signified to your grace some special faults that be Erasmus’s own faults, and in my judgment great faults; but I have not written all. And your grace shall further understand, that he (who it is, I know not) who hath taken the labor to translate Erasmus into English, hath for his part offended sometimes, as appeareth plainly, by ignorance, and sometimes evidently of purpose, to put in, leave out, and change as he thought best, never to the better but to the worse; with the specialties whereof, I will not now encumber your grace, but assure you it is so. And here I will grant to your grace, that for every lie I make unto you, set one hundred pounds fine upon mine head; and let me live here like a beggar, whilst my revenues pay it. My words you have in writing, and be against me matter of record; and so I yield to have me charged, as the bishop of London was, with offering the farm of his bishopric; which matter came to my remembrance in the writing hereof. And now I have written unto your grace upon what foundation my conscience is grounded, I shall truly declare unto you the manner of my proceeding from the beginning. I never heard of the execution of the visitation, till your grace was departed from London northward; and as the books flowed abroad by liberty of the printers, they came to my hands. I never slept 33 while I had perused them. As soon as I had found certain faults I wrote to the council, trusting upon such earnest advertisement as I made, they would incontinently have sent for me; and, upon knowledge of so evident matter as methought I had to show, have stayed till your grace’s return. I saw a determination to do all things suddenly at one time; whereunto although your grace agreed, yet of your wisdom I conjectured ye had rather have had it tarry whiles your return, 34 if you had not been pressed. And that word ‘pressed’ I noted in your grace’s letters to me, wherein you wrote you were pressed on both sides. Methought if by bringing myself to most extreme danger in your absence, I could have stayed this matter, besides my duty to God, and to my sovereign lord, I had done also your grace pleasure; of whom I have this firm opinion, that willingly and wittingly your grace will neither break the act of parliament, nor command books to be bought with authority, that contain such doctrine as these books do. Thus I adventured in your grace’s absence, wherein although I had remembrance of your grace, yet I made not your grace my foundation, but God chiefly (as God knoweth), with the preservation of our late sovereign lord’s honor that dead is, and the security of our sovereign lord that now is. Let no man be offended with the vehemency of my writing, for I wrote with a whole heart; and if I could have written it with the blood of my heart, I would have done it, to have done good, in staying the thing till it had been more maturely digested, and till your grace’s safe return. I touched the act of parliament lively, but as truly as ever was any thing spoken of. And I never wept more bitterly than I did. for a conceit that troubled my head, which never passed my lips, nor shall ever come out of my pen: I will tell it your grace, and you require it. Now whether the king may command against an act of parliament, 35 and what danger they may fall in, that break a law with the king’s consent, I dare say no man alive at this day hath had more experience, what the judges and lawyers have said, than 1. First I had experience in mine old master the lord cardinal, who obtained his legacy by our late sovereign lord’s request at Rome; and in his sight and knowledge occupied the same, with his two crosses and maces borne before him, many years. Yet, because it was against the laws of the realm, the judges concluded the offense of the praemunire: which conclusion I bear away, and take it for a law of the realm, because the lawyers so said, but my reason digested it not. The lawyers, for confirmation of their doings, brought in a case of the lord Tiptoff, 36 as I remember, a jolly civilian (he was chancellor to the king), who, because in execution of the king’s commission he had offended the laws of the realm, suffered on Tower-hill. They brought in examples of many judges that had fines set on their heads in like case, for doing against the law of the realm by the king’s commandment. And then was brought in the judges’ oath, not to stay any process or judgment for any commandment from the king’s majesty. And one article against my lord cardinal was, that he had granted injunctions to stay the common laws. And upon that occasion Magna Charta was spoken of, and it was made a great matter, the stay of the common law. And this I learned in that case (since that time being of the council), when many proclamations were devised against the carriers out of corn, at such time as the transgressors should be punished, the judges would answer, it might not be by the laws; whereupon ensued the act of proclamations, in the passing of which act many liberal words were spoken, and a plain promise, that by authority of the act for proclamations, nothing should be made contrary to an act of parliament, or common law. When the bishop of Exeter, and his chancellor, were by one body brought in a praemunire (which matter my lord privy seal cannot forget), I reasoned with the lord Audley, then chancellor, so far as he bade me hold my peace for fear of entering into a praemunire myself. Whereupon I stayed, but concluded, it seemed to me strange that a man, authorized by the king (as, since the king’s majesty hath taken upon him the supremacy, every bishop is such a one), could fall in a Praemunire. After, I had reasoned the matter once in the parliament house, where was free speech without danger; and there the lord Audley, then chancellor, to satisfy me familiarly, because I was in some secret estimation, as he then knew — ‘Thou art a good fellow, bishop,’ quoth he (which was the manner of his familiar speech): ‘look at the Act of Supremacy, and there the king’s doings be restrained to spiritual jurisdiction; and in another act it is provided, that no spiritual law shall have place contrary to a common law or act of parliament. And this were not,’ quoth he, ‘you bishops would enter in with the king, and, by means of his supremacy, order the laity as ye listed. But we will provide,’ quoth he, ‘that the praemunire shall ever hang over your heads; and so we laymen shall be sure to enjoy our inheritance by the common laws, and acts of parliament.’ It is not yet full two years ago, since, in a case of jewels, I was fain with the emperor’s ambassador, and after in the emperor’s court, to defend and maintain by commandment, that the kings of this realm, were not above the order of their laws. And therefore the jeweller, although he had the king’s bill signed, yet it would not be allowed in the king’s court, because it was not obtained according to the laws; in which matter I was very much troubled, even this time twelvemonth, when I was in commission with my lord great master, and the earl of Southampton, for altering the court of augmentations. There was my lord Mountague, and other of the king’s learned council, of whom, by occasion of that matter, I learned what the king might do contrary to an act of parliament, and what danger it was to them that meddled against the act. It is fresh in memory, and they can tell whether I said true or no. And therefore, being learned in so notable cases, I wrote in your grace’s absence to the council therein, as I had learned, by hearing the commons speak (whose judgments rule those matters, howsoever my reason can digest them), and so wrote to the council; which my writings I fashioned so as I trusted my lord would have stayed till your grace’s return. And thus I have declared to your grace the purpose of my writing to the council so vehement, while, nevertheless, I continued with all humility to abide the order of authority, and learn all other obedience: for thereunto I have ever had as great regard, as any man in this realm. And as my word is ‘vana salus hominis,’ so I assure your grace I practice it thoroughly in my deeds. When my lords sent last for me, 37 I came to them with as much speed as I might, with my sleeves and bosom trussed full of books, to furnish my former allegations. I was heard very well and gently; and methought I showed matter that should have moved, for I showed the two books to be contrary, as I have written before; wherewith, they said, they were not moved; adding how their conscience agreed not with mine: using many good words to bring me to such conformity, as they would have had me at. Whereupon, knowing that I know, I could not relent. But after I had been a little beside from them, and was returned, they entered a precise order with me, either to receive precisely the injunctions, or to refuse; in which case they had further to say to me: adding, that your grace was privy to that was done there that day. My answer was, that I would receive the injunctions as far as God’s law and the king’s would bind me. And because I saw they grew to such preciseness, and remembering how, after a good sort, they had caused me to be accompanied before with Master Wingfield, making intimations, what would be the end if I would not yield I would not therefore leave unspoken, that which I thought might avoid what followed. I told them there were three weeks of delay to the coming of the visitors to me. In the mean time I offered to go to Oxford, to abide the discussion there; which offer was not allowed. I desired then to go to my house at London, and to have learned men speak with me there; which was not accepted. I entered then the allegation of the gospel, of the servant, that said we would not do a thing, and yet did it: and so I said it might be, that although I then said nay, as my conscience served me, yet I might percase change, and was a man that might be tempted. But, as my conscience was then, roethought God’s law and the king’s letted me. And upon knowledge of their pleasures, that I must to the Fleet, I told my lords I thought it hard, unless there were a greater matter than [that,] to send me to prison for declaring beforehand what I minded to do, before any thing had been by me actually done to resist the visitation, who had all the mean time to think on the matter, and repent me. Whereunto the answer was such as displeased me not inwardly so much, but I have well digested it, and (so all may be well) care not what becometh of my body. I departed as quietly from them as ever man did, and have endured with as little grudge here; and have learned this lesson in the world, never to look backward, as St. Paul saith, nor remember that is past; I will never grudge or complain of any thing for myself. As for the matter to have such books recommended to the realm in the king’s name by your grace’s direction, [it] me seemeth very weighty, and your grace not to have been well handled in it. All the world knoweth the king’s highness himself knew not these books, and therefore nothing can be ascribed unto him. Your grace hath been to your increase of honor so occupied, as all men know, your grace had no leisure yourself to peruse these books; and yet be the books as I have written. I leave the rest to your grace. If I, that tell the council my mind of them, have done so far amiss, because, when I know so much, I will not yet allow them, I shall from henceforth the more regard the lesson of an old ambassador, that bade me let evil tidings go home to my master a-foot, and send only good tidings by post, ashift with the word which agreeth not with my nature, as Master Wallop saith. Upon Friday last past, my lord of Canterbury sent for me to the dean of Paul’s house, whither I went with some gazing of the world. There I found my lord of Canterbury, accompanied with the bishop of Rochester, Master Dr Coxe, and Master Aire 16 ; and I was brought thither by the bishop of Lincoln. What report my lord of Canterbury hath made thereof I cannot tell. My lord of Canterbury was in hand with his Homily of Salvation, but nothing heard or saw I to save my conscience in agreeing to him; but heard that I should justly confirm me in mine own conscience. I made offer to yield to them in that homily, if they could show me any old writer that wrote how faith excluded charity in the office of justification. It is against Scripture’s plain words, and to swerve from Scripture without any one doctor to lean to it, were sore. Where Scriptures and doctors want, my lord of Canterbury would fall to arguing, and overcome me that am called the sophister, by sophistry. When I heard my lord’s argument, I denied it, and would enter none other declaration; for I keep that answer till some others than were there be present; my solution whereunto, when I declare it, shall make all the rest of the matter very weak, and my lord not to like his argument at all. One argument I could not assoil to come again to the Fleet. My lord of Canterbury charged me, that I like nothing, unless I do it myself; whereof I am not guilty. I was never author of any one thing, either spiritual or temporal; I thank God for it. I am also charged, that all the realm hath received these homilies without contradiction, save I: whereunto I answer, I think they have not read what I have read in these books. What hath been done I cannot tell, now I am kept as I cannot know, though I would. When I was abroad, I never sought to know more than was brought by common fame; for this shall be found true: I never advised any man to object any thing against these books, no one man, not my chaplains. A kinsman of mine, beneficed in my diocese, and not unlearned, came to me, and told me how he heard a lewd fellow say, that I would not receive the injunctions. ‘And sir,’ quoth he, ‘I rebuked him, and reviled him, and said you would as readily receive as any man.’ I told him, that in so saying he did very well. Upon my coming up, a chaplain, of mine, a doctor, of divinity, told me, he would receive the injunctions quietly, and say nothing. I told him, it should be well done, if I had tarried in my diocese. If any man had spoken but myself, I would have lost my life for it; nor I think there hath not now. This matter was to try a bishop, whether he careth more for the truth, or his own rest. What examples have I seen in this realm, how freely men have said their conscience against our late sovereign lord’s determination, and against the act of parliament? Dr. Crome, a mean man, preached against our late sovereign lord’s determinations; and how daintily he was handled to relieve his conscience! If your grace would have this for a precedent, that whatsoever the king’s council for the time of a prince’s minority shall send to be preached, must needs be received without allegation, of what strength is the act of parliament against the bishop of Rome? The king’s majesty, when he cometh to his age, will look to be bold to do as much with his subjects, as his council did in his minority; whereof the counsellors may be then weary. Precedents be dangerous, for I have seen it almost for a rule, that whatsoever hath been once done, may then, without question, be done again. In our late sovereign lord’s time, I have seen the council much astonied, when the king would have done somewhat against an act of parliament: it was made then a great matter. The lord Cromwell had once put in the king our late sovereign lord’s head, to take upon him to have his will and pleasure regarded for a law; for that, he said, was to be a very king: and thereupon I was called for at Hampton-court. And as the lord Cromwell was very stout, ‘Come on, my lord of Winchester,’ quoth he (for that conceit he had, whatsoever he talked with me: he knew ever as much as I; Greek or Latin, and all). ‘Answer the king here,’ quoth he; ‘but speak plainly and directly, and shrink not, man! Is not that,’ quoth he, ‘that pleaseth the king, a law? Have ye not there, in the civil laws,’ quoth he, ‘quod principi placuit, and so forth?’ quoth he: ‘I have somewhat forgotten it now.’ I stood still, and wondered in my mind to what conclusion this should tend. The king saw me musing, and with earnest gentleness said, ‘Answer him whether it be so or no. I would not answer my lord Cromwell, but delivered my speech to the king, and told him, I had read indeed of kings that had their will always received for a law; but, I told him, the form of his reign, to make the laws his will was more sure and quiet; ‘and by this form of government ye be established,’ quoth I, ‘and it is agreeable with the nature of your people. If ye begin a new manner of policy, how it will frame no man can tell; and how this frameth ye can tell, and I would never advise your grace to leave a certain for an uncertain.’ The king turned his back, and left the matter after till the lord Cromwell turned the cat in the pan afore company; when he was angry with me, and charged me as though I had played his part. This tale is true, and not without purpose to be remembered, how I have been tossed to and fro in this kind of matter. Thus I have showed your grace the whole matter with many more words than I intended in the entry of my letter, and make now an end; enforced by weariness of my body, fed with close air, rather than meat, which my stomach desireth not; yet I must say somewhat in the matter of only faith, wherein my lord of Canterbury so much travaileth. First, it is sure, he shall never prove that he would say in that matter. But, to make an end of it, either I am a very fool in mine own conceit, which may easily be, or I see an occasion given to your grace to make such a true determination in it, as may be honorable to your grace, the contentation of all the world, the preservation of the king’s honor that dead is — without prejudice of the act of parliament, without derogation to my lord of Canterbury’s honor, without diminution of the reputation of the council, and without any glory to the bishop of Winchester; which is, in some men’s conceit, the greatest matter of all that be yet rehearsed; and in good faith I would I were not, so all were well. Your grace’s doing in Scotland is not, to my judgment, more to your grace’s honor than this would be, which God grant, and your grace much honor and felicity. At the Fleet, the 14th of October. [A.D. 1547.] Your grace’s humble bead-man, S. W. A LETTER OF WINCHESTER TO THE LORD PROTECTOR. After my most humble commendations to your good grace: since the writing of my last long letters to your good grace, which as they wearied me in writing, so they have, I think, wearied your grace in reading, I have been in great expectation to hear somewhat from your grace; of whose gentle and favorable mind towards me I cannot doubt, howsoever the declaration thereof at this time be hindered by other bye-persuasions, wherewith although your grace may be somewhat moved, I marvel not; and therefore, whiles all things may be tried, do well satisfy myself, not minding by any suit I have or shall make, otherwise to press your grace than may be conveniently obtained of you in the state you now present. And yet sue I must of congruence, for declaration of my humility, and also importunely sue, lest I should be seen to contemn, and to be entered into a melancholy, proudly to disdain the world, which, I assure your grace, I do not, nor ever had any such fantasy; whereof they can be witness, that have continually seen my behavior, since the death of our late sovereign lord, and since my coming to this prison. And yet my lord of Canterbury, when he sent for me last out of the Fleet, handled me with fair words, declaring me a man meet, in his opinion, to be called to the council again; adding how we (he said) did daily choose in others, that were not appointed by our late sovereign lord. They were worldly comfortable words, and as far contrarious on the one side, as the Fleet is on the other side. But I have not, I thank God, that deceit which my lord of Canterbury thought to be in me, or would seem to think so, whereby to induce others to think the same: as though I were not moved to say as I do, for any zeal to the truth, but of perverse frowardness; as one that liked not his estate, and therefore cared not what became of him. The truth whereof to be otherwise God knoweth: and I am able to make to the world sufficient proof and testimony of the contrary, if it he required. First, as touching the book of Paraphrase, whereof I wrote to your grace special faults, and others I have to show as great as they, I trust: and doubt not, the matter itself shall sufficiently declare, that I have done well to speak against that book; assuring your grace, that since my coming to prison, many days together when I looked on it, I saw every day some new thing in such sort of fault, as ought worthily to condemn the work. I have favored Erasmus’s name as much as any other, but I never studied over this book till now, and now I agree with them that said, ‘Erasmus laid the eggs, 39 and Luther hatched them:’ adding further, that of all the monstrous opinions that have arisen, evil men had a wondrous occasion ministered to them of that book. And, therefore, I trust the matter of that book will purge the evil opinion as might be gathered of me, wherein I offer to prove that I said with any learned man, [under] pain of shame and rebuke, and to be taken for a malicolyke beast. As for the Book of Homilies, in that point where my lord of Canterbury would have taught how faith excludeth charity in the office of justifying, besides that my conscience is otherwise persuaded, and truly persuaded, it doth so touch me outwardly in the world, as, if I would [agree], for any intercession or request upon offer to be a councillor, or have as much more land as all the bishops may spend, I were worthy (for so agreeing, for meed on the one side, or dread on the other side), first, to be whipped in every market town in the realm, and then hanged for example, as the veriest varlet that ever was bishop in any realm christened; unless my lord of Canterbury could show me either Scripture that so said, or some ancient writer: 40 wherein I desire only to see but one, where commonly two be required in every matter. But because it is in a matter of only faith, I require but one ancient writer, whereby I cared not for my conscience, as some would have it; persuaded, if I might excuse myself at least to the world, that I were not worthy to be whipped and hanged in all good men’s judgments, and mine own also. And this matter I write unto your grace, to declare unto you in what straits I am tied inwardly in my conscience by very truth, so I am tied outwardly in the world with shame: whereby appeareth that I resist not this matter of a wilful purpose, or that I like it not because I was not a counsaylle (which words my lord of Canterbury used to me); for I am even driven to do as I do of necessity on both sides, in my conscience before God and the world abroad, whereof if I show not your grace such a proof as cannot be denied, let me be out of all credit in every thing, and be accounted a liar; which I abhor above all faults. Whereupon me seemeth my case is miserable, to be so encumbered as I am, and yet to be used as I were without cause obstinate, notwithstanding all such circumstances as I have used to humble myself to learn and abide. I yielded myself to be opposed at Oxford, that I might say, if I yielded, learning had overcome me. When that was refused, I offered myself to go to school at home, with offer to yield to the truth. And although I have to maintain me, both the plain Scriplures, the doctors plain, and the plain act of parliament; yet, for conformity, offered to my lord of Canterbury, to yield, if he could show me one scripture 41 affirming faith to exclude charity in justification; or, Scripture failing (as it doth indeed), to show me but one ancient writer that writeth so, with offer to yield and give place: which offer excludeth all stubbornness, and all evil opinion that might be conceived of wilfulness in me. It is now twenty days ago since I spake with my lord of Canterbury, when the strongest arguments he made me, were, to agree, with hope to be a councillor again, or go to the Fleet from whence I crone: for, when I made request to the contrary, he said he had no such commission from the council And so here I remain without bail or mainprise; without comfort of any of my friends or servants; as one divided from the world; no chaplain to accompany me in prayer; no barber nor tailor for bodily necessaries, nor liberty to use physician for relief of disease, whereof I have need. And your grace, who I think would show me relief (for I will never think want of good will in you), is percase persuaded, by means, that I resist the truth wilfully, and that your grace may not in any wise show me the least comfort in the world: for then no man shall rule me. And then your grace, that showed so much favor to the earl of Southampton, late chancellor, wherein all the world commended your gentleness, if your grace should now any ways comfort me in prison with the least token of gentleness, ye might be noted to favor Winchester’s faction, as some term it: whereas, I take God to record, I never joined myself with any man, nor have secretly encouraged any man to be of my opinion; and as yet I have none other opinion, but such as the parliament hath established. The earl of Southampton did many things while he was chancellor, touching religion, which misliked me not, but I did never advise him so to do; nor made of him the more for it, when he had done. He was one of whom, by reason, I might have been bold; but I left him to his conscience. Therein I never said so much secretly to any nobleman of the realm, as I have to your grace; at which time I advised your grace to be noted neither on the one side nor on the other. And your grace hath for yourself as good a name as can be. And I shall say this without flattery, that like as chance very notably hath advanced your estate many degrees, since the time of my first acquaintance with you, so have you had occasion to show your virtue, whereby to be thought worthy your estate, by means whereof you cannot wish a more felicity than you have, to be the beginning of such an estate as ye shall leave, by God’s grace, to your posterity. This is not altogether out of my matter, for whatsoever become of me, I would your grace did well. Men be mortal, and deeds remain, and methinketh my lord of Canterbury doth not well to entangle thus your grace with this matter of religion, and to borrow of your authority the Fleet, the Marshalsea, and the King’s Bench, with prisonment in his house, wherewith to cause men to agree to that it pleaseth him to call truth in religion, leaving that he setteth forth, not stablished by any law in the realm, but contrary to a law in the realm. At the least a law it is not yet; and, before a law made, I have not seen such a kind of imprisonment as I sustain, humbly offering myself ready to learn. Our late sovereign lord, whose soul God pardon, suffered every man to say his mind without imprisonment, till the matter were established by law. If my lord of Canterbury hath the strength of God’s Spirit, with such a learning in his laws as he be able to overthrow with that breath all untruths, and establish truths — I would not desire the let of it by your grace, nor the work of God’s truth any way hindered. In which case if all the realm be persuaded besides myself in this matter, it shall be easy for to reprove me in the face of all the world, and drive me to the ground with the sword of God’s Scripture; which he should rather desire to do, than to borrow the sword your grace hath the rule of, wherewith to fear men; which is a mean to slander all that is done, or shall be done, if men be prisoned before a law made. And I cannot believe but there be more than I, or else I should not be kept so secret. For and all my folks resorted to me, and told me there was no reason to stand alone against all men, to undo them, and myself, also, in this world; it were a greater temptation than my lord of Canterbury made, to put me in hope to be a councillor again. Be your grace assured, the foundation of my ground is a zeal to the truth. Although I have many worldly considerations to allege for me, which serve to purge me of wilfulness, which I assure your grace is not my fault, I will not trouble your grace with all I could say of my knowledge: whatsoever my words be of my lord of Canterbury, which the matter enforceth me to speak, I am in none enmity with his person, and that I am able to prove; but my lord hath, in the homily of Salvation, taken such a matter in hand, and so handled it as, if I were his extreme enemy, I would have wished him to have taken that piece in hand, and so handled it as he hath done. For that asseveration, how faith excluded charity, can neither be proved by scripture, nor confirmed by any ancient writer, or persuaded by any effectual argument. And one argument my lord hath devised, which he frameth thus: ‘We be justified by faith without all works of the law: charity is a work of the law: ergo we are justified without charity.’ The answering of which argument (which I can do plainly by authority) shall declare, that either my lord is deceived himself, if he take it for a strong argument, when the opinion of his learning shall be hindered; or, if he use it willingly, knowing the fault in it, the lack is greater another way. But the answer to that argument dissolveth all the matter, whereunto I have an answer made one thousand two hundred years by-past; which I will of my peril show, if my lord will avow it for his argument. And if my lord will send me the argument of his hand, I will send him the answer of my hand, whereby shall shortly appear, whether I trifle or no. In the latter end of my last letter to your grace, I spake of a determination, whereof I wished your grace were author. For weariness of writing I did not open what I meant in specialty, intending now to begin in the middle of this sorrow, with a merry tale; but a very true tale, and not unmeet to be rehearsed. Thus it happened: Certain doctors of divinity at Paris, minding with utterance of some learning, whereof they had store, to requite a gentleman that had bidden them to dinner, using a preface, that as he had fed them with bodily meat, they would feed him with spiritual food, propoiled this question, to be disputed amongst them’. ‘Whether the ass that carried, our Lady and Christ, when Joseph fled with them into Egypt, when it carried our Lady only with Christ in her lap, carried then as perfect a burden as when it carried our Lady with Christ on her lap, and a flea sitting on her head?’ Herein the doctors were in great earnest, and many hot arguments were between them in the matter, with much expense of language, ‘whether our Lady alone, with Christ in her lap, were as perfect a burden, as our Lady and Christ, with a flea upon our Lady’s head?’ The audience, which was learned, was well cheered with laughing; but other edification the matter had not. And it may be laughed at, whensoever it is told, to see in what trifles many men spend their time. And now I shall say that which is strange at the first reading, but it is true. The matter of justification — whether only faith justifieth, and whether faith excludeth charity in justification, — pertaineth no more to the use and practice of our church of England (although in knowledge it be a grave matter), than the trifling question I rehearsed,pertained to the hearers’ edification in good living. 42 I beseech your grace to know how I put a difference between use and knowledge. The knowledge of justification (as I have said) is, in learning, of more weight, and such as for the entreating of it, many have wept even here at home, besides those that have wept in Germany. But the use and practice of it is no more necessary in the state of the church of England, than is the handling of the other question; and for any use in the church, the one may be forborne as well as the other, considering the baptism of infants is so duly observed; in which sacrament of baptism all we be justified before we can talk of this justification we strive for. And unless the church leave the use to christian infants (which shall not be), there cannot be a time, in which the knowledge of the justification we strive for, can be practised: but all men shall (as we already, have), receive their justification in baptism in their infancy. So as the doctnne of ‘only faith justifieth,’ if it were true as the homily declareth, it is no more necessary for the present state of the church, than to know whether the burden of our Lady and Christ only, were as perfect, as the burden of our Lady and Christ, with a flea sitting upon our Lady’s head, which the solemn doctors of Paris so earnestly entreated of. Some will say I am waxed mad in prison to compare these two together: but as I compare them for use and practice, the one is as necessary as the other; and I was bold to use the merry example, to imprint the matter the better in your grace’s memory. For it is as I say, when we have all talked; for we all are justified in baptism while younglings; and, falling after baptism, we must arise by the sacrament of penance, which must be confessed of all men, unless they be such as deny all sacraments, as some have done indeed; wading so far in the sifting of only faith, that they have left nothing but faith alone; and yet spent a great deal of their faith in the handling of it, or rather all. And that is a general fault I find, that such as write in that matter, do not handle it faithfully, in alleging the doctors and Scriptures right as they be. Now if this be true that I have written (which is true indeed), were it not an horrible, part of you to say, ‘Why trouble ye the world for a thing not necessary; and so put it from the country, and make it as it were a Chequer- Chamber case? And so to be sent to the universities, for whom it is meet soberly to talk, and not for homilies, wherein the people shall hear that they shall never practice, because they learn it too late; being justified before in their infancy in baptism. My lord of Canterbury told me, his intent is only to set out the freedom of God’s mercy; which may be done much more plainly, with putting the people in remembrance of the constantly received faith of the church in the baptism of infants; whereby such as be justified and saved in the virtue of Christ’s passion, who, after baptism, by malice fall not to sin, those must return to Christ by penance; but such as die before that actual sin hath defiled their soul again, if they die in the innocency received in baptism, be saved. And yet those children, when they were christened, did nothing but cry for cold, or, when they were over-hard griped, for fear of falling. And when this is believed, is not God’s mercy believed to be ministered after a most free liberal sort, if my lord of Canterbury mind only that the matter shall appear without argument, as we practice justification in receiving the sacrament of baptism? And as for justification by only faith, it is all out of use, howsoever we expound it, as the state of the church is now. And it is a terrible matter to think on, to see such a contention to rise upon a matter not necessary to be spoken of; wherein if my lord of Canterbury will needs travail, my judgment is, that he shall never persuade that faith excludeth charity in justification, unless he borrow, of your grace’s authority, prisons; and then he shall percase have some agree unto it, as poor men kneel at Rome, when the bishop there goeth by; that is to say, are knocked on the head with a halbert, if they kneel not; for that is one piece of the office of the bishop of Rome’s guard. Finally, there hath been nothing done, but your grace may use it to the augmentation of your honor. I have things more to say, but this matter is over long already, and me thinks I have been over long here; and, showing myself so humble a scholar as I have done, it is much to be beaten because I do not learn where no man teacheth me, and so willing to learn as I ask but one Scripture, or, Scripture failing (as it doth for my lord of Canterbury’s purpose), I ask but one ancient doctor. This is my case; for as touching any act of disobedience, my lords of the council did foresee, that I should not fall in that danger, and therefore would not trust my frailty to be in the country, when the visitors should be there; but made me sure here, lest I might have offended, if I had been there: though I had but a few words to speak (that is to say, ‘saving God’s laws and the king’s’), yet they might have been misreported, and so engendered me more trouble. And this good I have of my being here, which I suffer patiently, and make it to serve for my purpose in my conceit; as, I thank God, I have no displeasure of mind, and only feel such as the body engendereth for want of some necessaries, whereof if I may have relief at your grace’s hand, I will accept it as thankfully as any man hath any benefit at your hand, and as instantly require it of you. And yet, if I have no other comfort from your grace than I have hitherto had, I will think nevertheless as well of your grace as ever I did, and be only sorry, that in the state you be in, the liberty of doing that your heart would persuade you, should be as straitly enclosed with respects, as my body is with aches. Thus, desiring your grace to take in good part my bold writing to you, I shall make an end, and pray Almighty God for the preservation of your person, with increase of honor and felicity. At the Fleet, or rather in the Fleet. Your grace’s humble bead-man, S.W. A LETTER OF WINCHESTER TO THE LORD PROTECTOR. After my most humble commendations to your good grace: upon trust that your grace would take my letters in good part, and not otherwise than I wrote them, I wrote to your grace out of this prison, as I was wont to write to our late sovereign lord (whose soul God pardon!) when I was ambassador, refreshing myself sometimes with a merry tale in a sad matter; which his highness ever passed over without displeasure, as I trust your grace will do the semblable. For though some account me a papist, yet I cannot play the pope-holy, as the old term was: I dare not use that severity in writing, which my cause requireth, to speak of God, and his truth in every second sentence, and become suddenly a prophet to your grace, with a new phrase of speech, with whom I have been heretofore so familiarly conversant. As I think honor hath not altered your grace’s nature, even so adversity hath not changed mine. Of your high place in the commonwealth, no man is more glad than I, nor no man shall do his duty further than I, to acknowledge you, as your grace is now, protector and governor of the realm. But I have been so traded to speak boldly, that I cannot change my manner now, when percase it doth me no good. And although there be an Italian in prison with me, in whom I see a like folly, who, living with a little miserably, will not for his honor take alms, fancying to be still in the state he was some time, which manner I condemn in him, yet I follow him thus far, rather to write after my old manner, which cometh plainly to mind, than to take alms and aid of eloquence, whereof I have, in this estate, need. For your grace’s letters return every word of my letters in my neck, and take my fly as it were a bee, which, I thought, should have stung no man: which matter, in mirth, declareth the necessity of the other matter, as aply as may be, neither to be necessary. And when I wrote, I forgat, as my fellow-prisoner the Italian doth, the state I am in now; and wrote as I had written from Antwerp in the state of ambassador. The Italian my companion hath his folly of nature; I have it, of custom in bringing up, which hath the effect of nature, and is called of learned men, another nature. And then the proverb of gentleness hath place, when men say to him that is offended, ‘You must bear with the man’s nature;’ and so I trust you will do with me. Two things there be in your grace’s letter, which I trust I may touch without contention: one is, that if your grace will, in a plain similitude, see the issue of faith only, and whether faith may exclude charity in the office of justifying, or not, it may be well resembled in the making of laws in this parliament, where the acts be passed by three estates, which be all three present, and do somewhat together, and concur to the perfecting of the law; wherein we may not say, that any one estate only made the law, or that any one estate excludeth the other in the office of making the law. This may be said: that these three estates only, in respect of the rest of the realm, make the law; and there need no more of the realm be present but they. But if we speak of these three estates within themselves, there is none estate only, that maketh the law. But whereas the law hath as it were a body and a soul, the high house and the low house of the parliament make as it were the body of the law; which lieth as it were a dead matter, such as is not apt to take life, till the king’s majesty hath, by the breath of his mouth (saying, le roi le veult), breathed a full life into it, in the conclusion; besides the life, the assembly of the other estates had, by his authority, to assemble; which had else been a dead assembly, even as faith and hope be dead without charity. And as the king’s majesty, in this similitude of making laws, exchdeth not in office of the whole the other two estates, no more do the estates, because they devise and frame laws, exclude the king’s majesty in the office of making laws; for without his authority they be nothing, as faith and hope be without charity not effectual. And look, what absurdity and untruth this saying hath in this realm, to say, ‘The higher house and the lower house exclude the king in the office of making of laws,’ the same absurdity is yet in religion, to say, that faith excludeth charity in the office of justification: and therefore it was never written of ancient writers. And therefore I desired my lord of Canterbury to show me but one, and yet he cannot. In our time this dream hath been dreamed without Scripture, without authority, against Scripture, and against authority, as I can show. And further I can show, how this imagination extendeth so far by them that open their mind in it thoroughly, as your grace would not at the first believe, if I did express it. But I can show, that I fain not evidently, as clearly for my discharge as I could wish. Another matter of your grace’s letter is, where your grace reasoneth with me that I am over precise in finding of faults in the Paraphrase, seeing every book hath some faults. And then your grace taketh not Erasmus for a gospel, but as one in whom somewhat may be reprehended or amended. After which manner of sort, if your grace take the Homilies (as, for like reason, in my judgment they must; for they be men’s compositions, as the Paraphrase is, and. not the very gospel itself), why should I be kept in prison, who offered to receive the Homilies and Erasmus both, so far as they were without fault, either of God’s law or of the king’s. Because I saw the errors before, and spake of them, I have made more speed to prison than others have done, who, percase, for troubling of their conscience, have received the books close, with such reverence as becometh men to receive that are sent from their prince; wherein I would have done as they did, if I had not seen the books before. But I did, as I have seen divers noblemen do (and among them, as I remember, your grace), when they have been sent in service, to have used such diligence, as to see their commission and instructions made, or they went; and finding something doubtful or amiss (after the commission was sealed, and instructions signed), worthy to be mended, have, upon declaration of their mind therein, obtained amendment with commendation. Now I have a charge in the bishopric of Winchester, to see the people fed with wholesome doctrine; wherein if I be so diligent as to look upon the commission, and considering what I shall be charged with to do, take this or that for a fault in my judgment, and labor to have it amended, wherein differ I, from other men’s diligence? and how can it be taken for a fault, to say reverently to the council, ‘My lords! me seemeth, this and this cannot stand together: either instruct me in them, or amend them.’ In what nature of crime should this humility be? Am I worthy, for so saying, to be condemned to a perpetual prison? and to be a close prisoner, to speak with no man, to hear from no man, to talk with no man? for my household, which is a great number, [to be] wandering and lamenting for me? My case should be in the nature of praise, in the nature of commendation, in the nature of thanks, if none other have said that I can say. If one only man in a realm saith, He knoweth treason to subvert the whole realm; and can show evident proof of his so saying, shall he be prisoned, because of good-will he offereth to say and prove that, no man else uttereth but he, and therewith offereth to prove that he saith to be true? It is incredible that a king should set forth a hook tending to the subversion of his own estate; and therefore that I shall say, cannot touch his majesty, who knoweth not what is done (as reason judgeth) in his tender age. It is also incredible that your grace, being uncle to him, should be content that any book should be set forth, that might tend to the subversion of his estate. And I dare say for your grace, you would not — if the book be like the horse that the Trojans received into their city, wherein the Trojans knew not what was in it. Let me be heard, that know what is in the book, and so know it, as I can show it as evidently as I can the sun and the moon in bright days and bright nights, when both shine. I do not trifle with my wit to undo myself, but travail with my honesty to preserve my country, to preserve my prince, to preserve religion: and this your grace shall find to be true, which, knowing my letters to be construed to the extremity, I would not write, unless I were furnished with matter to discharge my writing. Your grace, I doubt not, remembereth Singleton’s conspiracy: and Erasmus hath framed his doctrine, as though Singleton had required him thereunto. I have such matter to show, as though I had myself devised it for my justification; and yet I am reasoned with, as though one given to let good doctrine, to find a knot in a rush, to trouble good enterprises; after which sort your grace is moved to write unto me; and thereupon I remain here still without hearing, having such matter to utter as shall confound them all; which I would not write if I were not assured. For it were a small pleasure to me, writing thus extremely, to be confounded when I had been heard, andthen worthily sent hither again for lying so manifestly; which I would think a worthy punishment, as this is unworthy — to be handled as I am for virtue, that I dare say the truth,can declare the abomination of this Paraphrase, and of the Homilies also — in both which matters I have showed all I can show. I shall declare I am not worthy to be kept here, and yet here I have remained these eight weeks, without speaking with any man saving my physician, who, I thank your grace, hath done me good. And yet, when men see I am thus banished from the world, so as no man may speak with me, it is not pleasant for any man to resort unto me. And this I perceive: If my lord of Canterbury think I will wax mad, he is deceived; for I wax every day better learned than other, and find every day somewhat to impugn the Paraphrase and Homilies, 43 not by wit or device, or other subtlety, but plain sensible matter, if I may be heard. And if I be not heard, my conscience telleth me I have done my duty, and therewith from travail shall apply myself to prayer, wherein I shall remember the properous estate of your grace, — whom God preserve! In the Fleet. S.W. TO THE LORD PROTECTOR. After my most humble commendations to your good grace: whatsoever your grace’s considerations be not to hear me yet, nor answer me, and howsoever I determine and do bear patiently the state I am now in, reason, nevertheless, bindeth me to continue my suit, that if your grace seeth at any time occasion to change your determination, there shall nothing want on my behalf to provoke your grace so to do. He that is refused at one time may be heard at another, and importunity speedeth, when none other mean can prevail: being also a fault in the inferior, to despair of the superior in so reasonable a request as mine is; which I cannot do of your grace for other respects: I have remained here long unheard of your grace, enclosed up more closely, now close religions be begun, than ever were any whilst they were here. No stranger may speak with me. I cannot have the company of my chaplain, which is necessary for me after so long time. And if your grace hath no leisure to hear me shortly, I trust you will, without delay, suffer my chaplain to resort unto me; as well as of your gentleness ye have suffered the physician for my body to come to me, for the which I most humbly thank your grace. Herein I desire your grace to answer me by this bearer, that I may have some comfort from you, for whose preservation I shall pray to Almighty God. Your grace’s humble bead-man, S.W. TO THE LORD PROTECTOR. After my most humble commendations to your good grace: I am very loth, knowing your grace’s business, to trouble you with many letters; and yet, not hearing from your grace any thing for answer to mine other letters before written, I am so bold to write these, wherewith to put your grace in remembrance of mine estate in prison, as one dissevered from the use of his servants and friends, and as it were buried quick, without knowledge of any just cause wherefore; and with knowledge, by course of time, that now the parliament is begun, whereof I am a member, unless my fault had cut me off; and whereunto I was called by writ, which I received before my coming hither; where I would also gladly do my duty, as I am bounden, if I were not detained and bounden in prison from my liberty that I might so do; which allegation I make the rather to your grace, to the intent, with the opening of a necessary suit worthy to be regarded, I might minister occasion to your grace, whereupon to show such gentleness to me, as of your own gentle heart, I am persuaded, your grace gladly would; for whose preservation, with increase of honor, I shall pray to Almighty God; who have your grace in his tuition! Your grace’s humble bead-man, S.W. TO THE LORD PROTECTOR. After my most humble commendations to your good grace: I cannot discuss by conjecture, why evidence is thus put off in my case, that hath been wont commonly to be granted to all men. If it should be of any man, through policy, to keep me from the parliament, it were good to be remembered, whether mine absence from the upper house, with the absence of those I have used to name in the nether house, will not engender more cause of objection, if opportunity serve hereafter, than my presence with such as I should appoint were there, the signification whereof is the chief cause of these letters; for as I am now encumbered with being here, so might some be encumbered therewith hereafter; which should do me pleasure. My matter that I have to say, toucheth the highest, and is worthy to be heard: whereunto my lord of Canterbury can only answer, that he would never have thought it, or that he hath been otherwise informed of them he put in trust. For it,would touch him overmuch, to grant he had so much knowledge in the Paraphrase, as I now have; and, knowing the same, to have advised your grace to set it forth to the people. I can say much which is expedient for your grace to hear and consider; desiring only this credit of your grace, to think me worthy to be heard, and thereupon give me audience. I cannot enchant men, nor look to be believed in the matter, unless it be so plain as no man can gainsay it, and therein the book to be judge. The nature of my cause should move your grace — my long imprisonment should move your grace — the present assembly of learned men should move your grace; to celebrate mine audience; and if your grace knew what I could say of the long letters your grace sent, good faith! your grace would make so much the more speed. For whereas the purpose of your grace, in these letters, is to alter my judgment, the handling of the matters is such, as I am able to show good cause why they should, as they do, work a contrary effect; as I am able to declare, if ever I come to your presence. My lord of Canterbury will needs maintain, that our late sovereign lord was seduced; and then it is possible that your grace may be seduced also: and therefore it is good for your grace to hear, and to hear in time. Whatsoever I have written to your grace, is true; and I have not written all the specialties I know in the greatest matters, which your grace shall perceive to be true. I see evidently, that unless my matter be very notable, and also plain, it shall not boot me to allege it. Thus much I am learned by your grace’s letters, and therefore, if I had any cause to mistrust it, I would use another mean, whereof in your grace’s letters I see some comfort: but my matter is so plain and so expedient to be understood, that I must needs desire of your grace to be heard in it, wherein it may like you to send me knowledge of your pleasure, and that my suit to your grace may stand in some stead, for whose preservation in honor In the Fleet. Your grace’s humble bead-man, S. W.* TO THE LORD PROTECTOR. After my most humble commendations to your good grace: in my third letter I signified unto your grace my need of the counsel of a physician, as the state of my body then required: whereunto because I had no answer, I have used all other means of relief that I could, to avoid that need; as one loth to trouble your grace with requests not necessary. Master Warden of the Fleet, and my servants, know that I fain not; and I have cause to fear, the effect will show I fain not indeed. In this case I may not desperately forbear to write to your grace, and think that because I have had no answer to all mine other letters, among which I made mention of this necessity, that I should likewise have none answer to this. As I have determined myself to a truth in the chief matters, so I eschew to use simulation in bye-matters. My mind, I thank God, was never so quiet, as it hath been since my coming hither, which hath relieved my body much; but the body hath need of other relief, which cannot be had as I am kept by commandment. These seven weeks, saving one day, 44 I have been here under such strait keeping, 45 as I have spoken with no man. And thus me seemeth I see my matter perplexed: Your grace will meddle with nothing done before your coming home; and those of the council that sent me hither, can by themselves do nothing, now your grace is coming home; upon which consideration I sue to none of them, and perceive that your grace, to whom I sue, for some respect forbeareth to make me answer: for such a paraphrase I make of your grace’s silence, wherein I go as near as I think the truth, as Erasmus in his Paraphrase some times, wherein he taketh upon him to guess the cause of Christ’s doings. I thank God my mind can take no hurt, how vehement soever these temptations be. But when a certain sect of philosophers, called Stoics, contemned in their learning stoutly the grief and disease of the body, they were fain a little to shrink, when the gout or any disease nipped them: and now my stomach nippeth me, which I have favored as much as any man in England, and have laden it as light either with meat or drink of many years, and specially since my coming, as any other. And after I saw I could get no answer from your grace for a physician, I have left off such study as I used, and given myself to continual walking for exercise; and, with hope of relief, have delayed any further suit in that matter till now. And now I sue enforced, which I do most humbly, with request that imprisonment — being to me that was never in prison before, of itself tedious — be not with special commandment made more grievous, unless I were charged with other offense than I am yet charged with, or in my conscience can be. For me seemeth I have deserved thanks of your grace and the realm, for the disclosing of the faults of the Paraphrase, wherein I have written some specialties, but not all; and have such to show, as I may term that book at one word, ‘abomination,’ both for the malice and untruth of much matter out of Erasmus’s pen, and also the arrogant ignorance of the translator into English, considering the book should be authorized by a king, and, by the injunctions, charge the realm for buying rather above twenty thousand pound than under; whereof I have made account by estimate of the number of buyers, and the price of the whole books. The translator showeth himself ignorant, both in Latin and English; a man far unmeet to meddle with such a matter, and not without malice on his part; whereby your grace may take an argument, what moved them that counselled your grace to authorize such a book in the realm. As for my lord of Canterbury’s Homily of Salvation, [it] hath as many faults, as I have been weeks in prison, which be seven, besides the general, that the matter maketh a trouble without necessity, and is handled contrary to the teaching of the parliament. Finally, In the two books the matter I have to show is some part so dangerous, as (after I knew it as I know it) the concealment thereof were a great fault, if I did not utter it. As for the manner of mine enterprise to utter it, I know not how to have fashioned it better, than to write to the council in your absence, and on my knees to declare some part of it, when I came to them receiving their determination of imprisonment. I humbly departed from them hither without grudge, and remain here without grudge to any one of them, for they showed no fashion of any evil mind towards me. And I have learned in the civil law, that the deed of a number, is no one man’s act; with this also, the authority is to be honored: which rule I observe in thought, word, and deed. After which sort I remain, with such suits as I have made to your grace hitherto, and with this also that I add, enforced for the relief of my body (how little soever I do, and have cause to set by it); which I most humbly desire your grace to consider, and to send me some answer by this bearer. And I shall pray Almighty God for the preservation of your grace’s felicity. Your grace’s humble bead-man, S.W. CERTAIN ADDITIONS AFTER THESE LETTERS ABOVE SPECIFIED, WITH NOTES AND SOLUTIONS ANSWERING TO THE SAME. Thus have we set out to thee, gentle and studious reader, an extract of certain letters of bishop Gardiner: not of all that he wrote, but of such as could come to our hands. Neither of these also that we have, for any good stuff, or any great profit therein contained, or that they did clear him or his cause any thing, for the which he was most worthily condemned. For if there did or might appear any such thing in all his writings, that might clear the ill-favored doings of that man, be thou sure, such as were then secret about him, and yet his well-willers (their names I leave untouched), having his writings, and being able to show them, as I am privy they are, would not so conceal them in covert as they do, being thereto both provoked and occasioned by us, if they had seen any thing in them meet to relieve the person, or to remedy his matter. Wherefore think not for any such effect these his vain-glorious letters to be brought in here of us; but only that thou mightest hereby collect and understand by those his aforesaid epistles and articles following, not only the whole course and story almost of all his proceedings from time to time, but also mightest see the nature and inward condition of the man, how vain-glorious, full-stuft and puft up with arrogancy, and drowned in his own conceit he was; much like to the person, or rather he himself, described in the Latin comedy, Miles Thraso Gloriosus; having nothing in his mouth but emperors, kings, councillors, protectors, advisements, direction: as though all direction of realms and princes did flow out of his brain, like as it is in the poet’s fables, that Minerva did spring out of the head of Jupiter. And yet, if this vainglorious conceit had been alone in him, less matter had been against him. Now his subtle practices, and pretensed purposes, and dissimuling conveyance, did not only augment, but also exceed all his other evils, as in the letters above specified is notorious and evident to be seen; wherein though he durst not apertly gainsay that which he inwardly misliked, yet how covertly doth he insinuate himself to the lord protector, under pretense of giving counsel, to bring that to pass which was for his purpose! that is, that no innovation or alteration might be made of religion during all the king’s minority, but that all things might stand as king Henry left them, and that is the chiefest butt, in all letters, whereto he driveth, using commonly this argument, which, as it is easy to recite, so neither is it hard to answer to; although in the notes before we have answered, already sufficiently. THE SUM AND CONCLUSION OF ALL WINCHESTER’S DRIFT IN HIS EPISTLES BEFORE. “That is chiefy to be feared and avoided of the lord protector, and now specially in the king’s minority, that may both bring danger to him, and trouble to the realm: — “Innovation of religion from that state, in which king Henry left it, may be and is like to be dangerous to himself, and cause trouble to the realm. “Ergo, Innovation of religion, from the state that the king left it in, is in no wise to be attempted.” THE ANSWER. To answer first to the vocable Innovation, which he stumbleth so greatly upon — this I say, that innovation is properly used, where a thing is brought in anew, which was not before. Forsomuch therefore as in this alteration there is no new religion brought in, but only the old religion of the primitive church revived; therefore here is to be thought not so much an innovation, as a renovation or reformation rather of religion, which reformation is ofttimes so necessary in commonweals, that, without the same, all runneth to confusion. Secondly, I answer to the argument (which I do deny as a “fallax,” for there is “fallacia accidentis;” where it is said, that reformation of religion gendereth danger to the protector, and trouble to the realm), First, what will come, that is uncertain: and, God be hallowed! yet no danger hath come to England for the reformation of religion. And though there did, yet the cause thereof is not to be imputed to religion reformed: for sincere and true doctrine of its own nature worketh quiet, peace, and tranquillity, with all good order. And if the contrary happen, that is incident by other causes, as by the malice of Satan, and wicked adversaries; not by reason of the doctrine of true religion. So, after the preaching of Christ and his apostles, dissension followed in commonweals betwixt father and son, brother and brother, etc.; but that is not to be ascribed to them, but to others. As concerning the faults found in the Paraphrase of Erasmus, 46 this I answer and say, that this bishop belike had overwatched himself in this matter. For if it be true, which he himself affirmeth, that he never read that book before, and now he never slept till he himself read it; it happened, peradventure, that in the overmuch watching of himself, and swift reading of the book, his judgment was asleep, whilst his eyes were open in reading the same. Likewise touching the Book of Homilies, especially the Homily of Salvation, wherewith he findeth himself so much grieved with the archbishop; seeing he bringeth forth no proofs, I have nothing to answer. In the mean season, this I have to think, that if he had been so cunning in the knowledge of his own salvation, as he was in the destruction and vexation of Christ’s members, he would never so rage against that homily. Touching the examination of Anne Askew, if it be misreported by Master Bale, why doth not he note the places, which they be, and wherein? And if he had, or were able so to do, yet, seeing the examination was of her own penning, which Master Bale did follow, let every christian reader judge, whether is more to be credited of these two — she that was persecuted, or he that was the persecutor. And where he speaketh so much of quiet and tranquillity; this I answer, that quiet and tranquillity in weals public, so long as they are joined with right reformed religion, be much to be embraced. But, when it is otherwise, that is, where true religion lacketh his right, there let the second table give plaee to the first. He thwarteth, also, and wrangleth much against players, printers, preachers. And no marvel why: for he seeth these three things to be set up of God, as a triple bulwark against the triple crown of the pope, to bring him down; as, God be praised, they have done meetly well already. As touching the article of free justification by faith, which he cannot abide, forasmuch as we have sufficiently declared it in the notes before, we shall refer the reader now also unto the same. And moreover, because in one of his letters 47 mention is made of a certain letter sent unto Master Ridley, because we will defraud thee, gentle reader, of nothing that cometh to our hands, here hast thou the copy thereof, in effect as followeth: THE COPY OF THE LETTER OF STEPHEN GARDINER SENT TO MASTER RIDLEY. In the Letters above mentioned; containing Matter and Objections against a certain Sermon of the said Master Ridley, made at the Court. Master Ridley, after right hearty commendations: It chanced me, upon Wednesday last past, to be present at your sermon in the court, wherein I heard you confirm the doctrine in religion, set forth by our late sovereign lord and master, whose soul God pardon! admonishing your audience that ye would specially travail in the confutation of the bishop of Rome’s pretended authority in government and usurped power, and in pardons, whereby he hath abused himself in heaven and earth. Which two matters I note to be plain, and here without controversy. 48 In the other two ye spake of, touching images and ceremonies, and as ye touched it, specially for holy water to drive away devils; for that you declared yourself always desirous to set forth the mere truth, with great desire of unity, as ye professed; not extending any your asseveration beyond your knowledge, but always adding such like words, ‘as far as ye had read,’ and, ‘if any man could show you further, ye would hear him,’ (wherein you were much to be commended) — upon these considerations, and for the desire I have to unity, I have thought myself bound to communicate to you that which I have read in the matter of images and holy water; to the intent you may by yourself consider it, and so weigh, before that ye will speak in those two points, as ye may (retaining your own principles) affirm still that ye would affirm, and may indeed be affirmed and maintained; wherein I have seen others forget themselves. First, I send unto you herewith (which I am sure ye have read), what Eusebius 49 writeth of images: 50 whereby appeareth that images have been of great antiquity in Christ’s church. And to say we may have images, or to call on them when they represent Christ or his saints, be over gross opinions to enter into your learned head, whatsoever the unlearned would tattle: for you know the text of the old law, ‘Non facies tibi sculptile,’ 51 forbiddeth no more images now, than another text forbiddeth to us puddings. And if ‘omnia’ be ‘munda mundis’ to the belly, there can be no cause why they should be of themselves ‘impura’ to the eye, wherein ye can say much more. And then, when we have images, to call them idols, is a like fault, in fond folly, as if a man would call ‘regem’ a tyrant, and then bring in old writers to prove that ‘tyrannus’ signified once a king, like as ‘ idolum’ signified once an image: but like as ‘tyrannus’ was by consent of men appropriated to signify a usurper of that dignity, and an untrue king, so hath ‘ idolum’ been likewise appropriate to signify a false representation, and a false image: insomuch as there was a solemn anathematization of all those that would call an image an idol; as he were worthy to be hanged that would call the king our master (God save him!) our true just king, a tyrant; and yet in talk he might show, that a tyrant signified sometimes a king: but speech is regarded in its present signification, which I doubt not ye can consider right well. I verily think, that for the having of images ye will say enough, and that also, when we have them, we should not despise them in Speech, to call them idols,52 nor despise them with deeds, to mangle them or cut them; but at the least suffer them to stand untorn. Wherein Luther (that pulled away all other regard to them) strove stoutly, and obtained, as I have seen in divers of the churches in Germany of his reformation, that they should (as they do) still stand. All the matter to be feared is excess in worshipping, wherein the church of Rome hath been very precise; and especially Gregory, writing to the bishop of Marseilles: which is contained in the chapter ‘De Consecratione,’ dist. 3, as followeth: ‘Perlatum ad nos fuerat, quod inconsiderato zelo succensus, sanctorum imagines sub hac quasi excusatione, ne adorari debuissent, confregeris. Et quidem eas adorari te vetuisse, omnino laudamus: fregisse vero reprehendimus. Dic frater, a quo factum esse sacerdote aliquando auditum est, quod fecisti? * * * * *Aliud est enim picturam adorare: aliud per picturam historiam, quid sit adorandum, addiscere. Nam quod legentibus scriptura, hoc idiotis praestat pictura cernentibus, quia in ipsa etiam ignorantes vident, quid sequi debeant: in ipsa legunt, qui literas nesciunt. Unde et praecipue gentibus pro leetione pictura est.’ Herein is forbidden adoration, and then, in the Sixth Synod, was declared what manner of adoration is forbidden; that is to say, godly adoration to it being a creature, as is contained in the chapter ‘Venerabiles imagines,’ in the same distinction, in this wise. ‘Venerabiles imagines Christiani non Deos appellant, neque serviunt els ut Diis, neque spem salutis ponunt in eis, neque ab eis expectant futurum judi-cium: sed ad memoriam et recordationem primitivorum venerantur eas, et adorant; sed non serviunt eis cultu Divino, nec alicui creaturae.’ 55 By which doctrine all idolatry is plainly excluded in evident words; 56 so as we cannot say, that the worshipping of images had its beginning by popery; for Gregory forbade it, unless we shall call that synod popery, because there were so many bishops. And yet there is forbidden ‘cultus divinus;’ and agreeth with our aforesaid doctrine, by which we may creep before the cross on Good Friday; wherein we have the image of the crucifix in honor, and use it in a worshipful place, and so earnestly look on it, and conceive that it signifieth, as we kneel 57 and creep before it, whilst it lieth there, and whilst that remembrance is in exercise: with which cross nevertheless the sexton, when he goeth for a cross, will not be afraid to be homely, and hold it under his gown whilst he drinketh a pot of ale; a point of homeliness that might be left, but yet it declareth that he esteemed no divinity in the image. But ever since I was born, a poor parishioner, a layman, durst be so bold, at a shift (if he were also churchwarden), to sell to the use of the church at length, and his own in the mean time, the silver cross on Easter Monday, that was erected unto on Good Friday. In specialties there have been special abuses; but, generally, images have been taken for images, with an office to signify a holy remembrance of Christ and his saints,58 And as the sound of speech uttered by a lively image, and representing to the understanding, by the sense of hearing, godly matter, doth stir up the mind, and therewith the body, to consent in outward gesture of worshipful regard to that sound: 59 so doth the object of the image, by the sight, work like effect in man, within and without; wherein is verily worshipped that we understand, and yet reverence and worship also showed to that whereby we attain that understanding; and is to us in the place of an instrument; so as it hath no worship of itself, but remaineth in its nature of stone or timber, silver, copper, or gold. But when it is in office, and worketh a godly remembrance in us, by representation of the thing signified unto us, then we use it worshipfully and honorably, as many do the priest at mass, whom they little regard all the day after. And me thinketh ever, that like as it is an over gross error to take an image for God, or to worship it with godly honor,61 so, to grant that we may not have images of Christ, and that we may do no worship before them, or not use them worshipfully, it is inexplicable. For it is one kind of worship, to place them worshipfully: so as if a man place an image in the church, or hang it about his neck (as all 62 use to do the image of the cross, and the knights of the order of St. George), 63 this is some piece of worship. And if we may not contemn the images of Christ and his saints, when we have them (for that were villany), nor neglect them (for that were to have them without use, which were inconvenient, ‘quia nec natura nec arte quicquam fit frustra,’) we must have them in estimation and reputation; which is not without some honor and worship; and at the least in the place where we conveniently use them (as in the church), as where they serve us, rather than we them. And because their service is worshipful, 64 they be so regarded accordingly for that time of service, and therefore they be called ‘venerabiles imagines,’ and be worshipfully ordered; before whom we kneel, and bow, and cense, not at that the images be, but at that the images signify, which, in our kneeling, bowing, and censing we knowledge to understand and read in that fashion of contract writing, wherein is wrap. peal up a great many of sentences, suddenly opened with one sudden sight, to him that hath been exercised in reading of them. And me seemeth, after the faith of Christ received and known, and thoroughly purged from heresics, if by chance there were offered a choice, either to retain painting and graying and forbear writing, or, choosing writing, to forbear both the other gifts; it would be a problem, seeing if graving were taken away we could have no printing. And therefore they that press so much the words of ‘Non facies tibi sculptlie,’ ever, me thinketh, they condemn printed books; the original whereof is of graving to make 65 ‘matrices literarum.’ ‘Sed hoc est furiosum, et sunt tamen qui putant palmarium.’ And therefore now it is Englished, ‘Thou shalt make no graven images, lest thou worship them:’ which, I hear, is newly written in the new church, I know not the name, but not far from the Old Jewry 19 . But to the matter of images, wherein I have discoursed at large, I think, if ye consider (as I doubt not but that ye will) the doctrine set forth by our late sovereign lord, ye shall in the matter see the truth set forth by such as had that committed unto them under his highness, amongst whom I was not, nor was I privy unto it till it was done. And yet the clause in the book, for discussion of ‘the Lord,’ and ‘our Lord,’ hath made many think otherwise. But I take our Lord to witness, I was not; and that declaration of ‘our Lord’ was his highness’s own device, ex se. For he saw the fond Englishing of ‘the Lord,’ dissevered in speech, whom our Lord had congregated. And this I add, lest, giving authority to that book, I should seem to vaunt myself. Now will I speak somewhat of holy water,66 wherein I send unto you the four and thirtieth chapter in the ninth book of the History Tripartite, where Marcellus the bishop bade Equitius his deacon to cast abroad water, by him first hallowed, wherewith to drive away the devil. And it is noted how the devil could not abide the virtue of the water, but vanished away. And for my part, it seemeth the history may be true; for we be assured by Scripture, that in the name of God the church is able and strong to cast out devils, according to the gospel, ‘In nomine meo daemonia ejicient,’ etc.: so as if the water were away, by only calling on the name of God, that mastery may be wrought. And the virtue of the effect being only attributed to the name of God, the question should be only, whether the creature of water may have the office to convey the effect of the holiness of the invocation of God’s name. And first in Christ, the skirt of his garment had such an office to minister health to the woman, and spittle and clay to the blind; and St. Peter’s shadow, and St. Paul’s handkerchiefs. And, leaving old stories, here at home the special gift of curation, ministered by the kings of this realm (not of their own strength, but by invocation of the name of God), hath been used to be distributed in rings of gold and silver. And I think effectually therein the metal hath only an office, and the strength is in the name of God, wherein all is wrought. And Eliseus put his staff in like office. And why the whole church might not put water in like office, to convey abroad the invocation of God’s name, there is no Scripture to the contrary: but there is Scripture how other inferior creatures have been promoted to like dignity; and much Scripture, how water hath been used in like and greater service. And the story I send unto you showeth how water hath been used in the same service, to drive away devils. In which matter if any shall say, he believeth not the story, and he is not bound to believe it, being no Scripture; that man is not to be reasoned with, for the effect of the king’s cramp rings. And yet, for such effect as they have wrought, when I was in France, I have been myself much honored; and of all sorts entreated to have them, with offer of as much for them, as they were double worth. Some will say, ‘What are rings to holy water?’ Marry thus I say, If the metal of gold and silver may do service to carry abroad the invocation of the name of God effectually for one purpose, water, may also serve to carry abroad, the invocation of the name of God, wherewith to drive away devils. 67 Hereto will be said, ‘Non valet argumenturn a posse ad esse:’ but the story saith, ‘The water did that service;’ and other strangers say and affirm by experience, ‘The king’s majesty’s rings have done the service.’ And our late master continued all his life the exercise of that gift of God, and used silver and gold to do that service, to carry abroad the strength of the invocation of the name of God by him; and he used it amongst us that served him in it, when he had thoroughly heard and seen what might be said in the matter: and yet he had no Scripture especially for it, that spake of rings of silver or gold, no more than is for the ashes ministered a little before ye last preached. And as our young sovereign lord hath received them reverently, so I trust he shall be advertised, ‘ne negligat gratiam Dei in dono curationum,’ but follow his father therein; also not doubting but God will hear him, as he hath heard his father and other his progenitors kings of this realm; to whose dignity God addeth this prerogative, as he doth also to inferior ministers of his church, in the effect of their prayer, when it pleaseth him. A man might find some youngling, percase, that would say, how worldly, wily, witty bishops, have inveigled simple kings heretofore, and, to confirm their blessings, have also devised how kings should bless, also, and so have authority to maintain where truth failed; and I have had it objected to me, that I used to prove one piece of mine argument ever by a king, as when I reasoned thus: If ye allow nothing but Scripture, what say you to the king’s rings? but they be allowed; ergo, somewhat is to be allowed besides Scripture. And another: If images be forbidden, why doth the king wear St. George on his breast? 68 But he weareth St. George on his breast: ergo, images be not forbidden. If saints be not to be worshipped, why keep we St. George’s feast? 69 But we keep St. George’s feast: ergo, etc. And in this matter of holy water, if the strength of the invocation of the name of God, to drive away the devils, cannot be distributed by water, why can it be distributed in silver to drive away diseases, and the dangerous disease of the falling evil? But the rings hallowed by the holy church may do so: ergo, the water hallowed by the church may do like service. These were sore arguments in his time, and I trust be also yet; and may be conveniently used, to such as would never make an end of talk, but rake up every thing that their dull sight cannot penetrate, wherein me thought ye spake effectually, when ye said, ‘Men must receive the determination of the particular church, and obey where God’s law repugneth not expressly.’ And in this effect to drive away devils, that prayer and invocation of the church may do it, Scripture maintaineth evidently; and the same Scripture doth authorize us so to pray, and encourageth us to it — so as if, in discussion of holy water, we attribute all the effect of the holiness which proceedeth from God by invocation of the church, and take water only for a servant to carry abroad holiness; there can be no superstition, where men regard only prayer, which Scripture authorizeth. And if we shall say that the water cannot do such service, we shall be convinced, in that it doth a greater service in our baptism by God’s special ordinance 70 — so as we cannot say, that water cannot, or is not apt to do this service; only the stay is, to have a precise place in the New Testament, to say, ‘Use water thus in this service, as we do in holy water;’ which me thinketh needeth not, where all is ordered to be well used by us: and when the whole church agreed upon such a use, or any particular church, or the common minister of it, and by the exorcism ordered for it, the thing to be used, purged, there can be but slender matter to improve that custom, wherein God is only honored, and the power of his name set forth; whereunto all things bow and give place, all natural operation set apart and secluded. And when any man hath denied that water may do serwce, because Scripture appointeth it not, that ‘because’ driveth away much of the rest which the church useth, and especially our cramp-rings. For if water may not serve to carry abroad the effects of God’s grace,71 obtained by invocation from God, by the common prayer of the church, how can the metal of silver or gold carry abroad the effect of the king’s invocation in the cramp-rings? which manner of reasoning ‘ad hominem,’ Christ used with the Jews, when he said, ‘Si ego in Beelzebub ejicio daemonia, filii vestri, in quo ejiciunt?’ And that by our own principles we should be enforced to say, that our cramp-rings 72 be superstitious (where truth enforceth us not so to do), it were a marvellous punishment. ‘Si caeci essemus’ as Christ saith, ‘peccatum non haberemus, sed videmus;’ and this realm hath learning in it, and you a good portion thereof; according whereunto I doubt not but you will weigh this matter, ‘non ad popularem trutinam, sed artificis stateram:’ I mean, that artificer which teacheth the church our mother (as ye fully declared it), and ordered our mother to give nourishment unto us. In which point, speaking of the church, although ye touched an unknown church to us, and known to God only, yet you declared the union of that church in the permixt church, which God ordereth men to complain unto, and to hear again; wherein the absurdity is taken away of them that would have no church known, but every man believe as he were inwardly taught himself; whereupon followeth the old proverb, Soi< me>n tau~ta dokou~nt ejsti Your loving friend, Stephen Winchester.
As I have set forth here, gentle reader, the cavilling letter of Winchester against Master Ridley’s sermon, so am I right sorry, that I have not likewise the answer of the said Ridley again to join withal. For I understand, that not only Master Ridley, but also Master Barlow, bishop of St. David’s (for Winchester wrote against them both), had written and sent immediately their answers to the same, refuting the frivolous and unsavory reasons of this popish prelate, as may well appear by a parcel additional of a letter sent by the lord protector to the said bishop in these words: ‘And because we have begun to write to you, we are put in remembrance of a certain letter or book which you wrote unto us against the bishop of St. David’s sermon 77 , and Dr. Ridley’s 77 , to the which answer being immediately made, it was by negligence of us forgotten to be sent. Now we both send you that, and also the answer which the bishop of St. David’s wrote to the same book of yours.’
NINETEEN ARTICLES20 AND POSITIONS MINISTERED AND OBJECTED, EACH OF THEM JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY, TO THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER; AS FOLLOWETH. The First Article.
In primis, ‘That the king’s majesty justly and rightfully is, and by the laws of God ought to be, supreme head in earth of the church of England, and also of Ireland; and so is by the clergy of this realm in their convocation, and by act of parliament, justly, and according to the laws of God, recognised.’
This first article the bishop of Winchester granteth.
The Second Article. Item, ‘That his majesty, as supreme head of the said churches, hath full power and authority to make and set forth laws, injunctions, and ordinances, for and concerning religion, and orders of the said churches; for the increase of virtue, and repressing of all errors, heresics, and other enormities and abuses.’
To this second article he answereth affirmatively.
The Third Article. Item, ‘That all and every his grace’s subjects are bound, by the law of God, to obey all his majesty’s said laws, injunctions, and proceedings concerning religion, and orders in the said church.’
To the third article, the said bishop answereth affirmatively, and granteth it.
The Fourth Article. Item, ‘That you Stephen bishop of Winchester have sworn obedience unto his majesty, as supreme head of this church of England, and also of Ireland.’
To the fourth article, the said bishop answereth affirmatively, and granteth it.
The Fifth Article. Item, ‘ That all and every his grace’s subjects, that disobey any his majesty’s said laws, injunctions, ordinances, and proceedings already set forth and published, or hereafter to be set forth and published, ought worthily to be punished, according to his ecclesiastical law used within this his realm.’
To this fifth article, the said bishop answereth affirmatively, and granteth it.
The Sixth Article. Item, ‘That you the said bishop, as well in the king’s majesty’s late visitation within your diocese, as at sundry times, have been complained upon, and sundry informations made against you for your doings, sayings, and preachings, against sundry injunctions, orders, and other proceedings of his majesty, set forth for reformation of errors, superstitions, and other abuses in religion.’ Winchester : — ‘This article toucheth other men’s acts; who, or how they have complained and informed, I cannot thoroughly tell; for, at the time of the king’s majesty’s visitation, I was in the Fleet, and the morrow after Twelfth-day I was delivered at Hamptoncourt, my lord of Somerset, and my lord of Canterbury then being in council, with many other councillors; and was delivered by these words: The king’s majesty hath granted a general pardon, — and by the benefit thereof I was discharged. Whereunto I answered, that I was learned never to refuse the king’s majesty’s pardon, and in strength as that was; and I would and did humbly thank his majesty there-for. ‘And then they began with me in an article of learning, touching justification, whereunto they willed me to say my mind; adding therewith, that because other learned men had agreed to a form delivered unto me, I should not think I could alter it: which I received of them, and promised the Thursday after to repair to my lord of Somerset’s house at Sheen, with my mind written: which I did, and, at that day seven night following, appearing before him and others of the council, was committed to my house for prisoner, because I refused to subscribe to the form of words and sentences that others had agreed unto, as they said. In which time of imprisonment in my house, the bishop of Rochester, then being, was sent to me, and after Master Smith, and then Master Cecil; to which Master Cecil, when I had by leansing resolved my mind in the matter, I delivered it; and he, delivering it to my lord’s grace, wrote me, in his name, thanks for it. And then it was within the time of Lent, ere I was discharged of that trouble; and so went down to Winchester, as a man clearly out of all travail of business. ‘And within fourteen days after that, or thereabouts, began other travail with me, upon a request made by my lord of Somerset to surrender a college in Cambridge: and divers letters were written between his grace and me in it; wherein I might perceive the secretary, with his pen, took occasion to prick me more than, I trusted, my lord’s grace himself would have done. And by this trouble was I deduced to an end. Then, shortly after, I received letters to come to the council, and by reason I alleged my disease, I was respited by other letters; and three days before Whitsuntide received yet other letters to come: by which it might seem unto me, that it was not of all believed that I was diseased. And therefore with all expedition, when I could not ride, I came in a horse-litter; and, according to my duty, presented myself to my lords of the council, who all then entertained me secretly among them before the matters were objected unto me, as if I had been in the same place with them, that I was in our late sovereign lord’s days.
Afterwards my lord of Somerset’s grace charged me with these matters following, and in this form, having the articles written in a paper: ‘First, with disobedience; that I came not at his sending for.
Whereunto I answered, that I had his letters of license to stay till I might come conveniently. And upon these last letters I came incontinently in a horse-litter. ‘Then it was objected, that I bare palms, and crept to the cross.
Whereunto I answered, that they were misinformed; and I trusted they would not think I durst deny it, if I had done it, because ceremonies had such circumstances, as I might easily be reproved if it were otherwise. ‘Then it was objected, that at Easter I had a solemn sepulcher in the church, and such other ceremonies. I answered, that I had even as many as the king’s majesty’s proclamations commanded me: declaring plainly, that I thought it not expedient to make any alteration, wherein to offend the king’s majesty’s proclamation; adding, how he that followeth as he is commanded, is very obedient. ‘It was then objected unto me, that I went about to defame two of the king’s majesty’s chaplains, sent down to be canons of the church of Winchester. Whereunto I answered, declaring the fact truly as it was, which I am yet able to justify. — After this matter thus oft objected and answered, I was commanded to go apart, and being called in again, my lord of Somerset’s grace, looking upon a bill of articles, said, I had preached how the apostles went from the presence of the council, of the council, of the council; which matter I denied, adding, that it was not my fashion of preaching, so to play in iteration of words. ‘After that, it was objected unto me for preaching of the sacrament, to say, The body of Christ was really present; being a fault to use the word really, not comprised in the Scripture. Whereunto I answered, that I did not use the word really, which needeth not.
For, as I once heard my lord of Canterbury reason against one Lambert, in the presence of the king’s majesty that dead is; the words of the Scripture, This is my body that shall be betrayed for you, do plainly and lively express the very presence; and so did I set it forth to the people in my diocese. ‘And this is the effect of all that was said against me at my being at the council, as I can remember. To whom I declared how much I esteemed obedience, and told them, I had taught in my diocese how the whole life of a christian man consisteth in suffering properly; and therefore we may not do our own will, but the will of God: and among men, we must either suffer the rulers’ will, or their power; their will to order us, and their power to punish us. After declaration whereof, my lord of Somerset said, Ye must tarry in the town. Whereunto I answered, I would be contented at their commandment or pleasure to tarry; but, seeing I was no offender, I desired them I might not tarry as an offender; and for declaration thereof, that I might have some house in the country about London, to remove unto for a shift; in devising whereof, I stuck much to borrow Esher. My lord of Somerset said, If he had any, in faith he would lend me one. And in the end, my lord of Somerset desired me to write what my mind was in ceremonies, and to send it unto him; and with that departed. ‘Thus I have truly opened after what sort I have been complained on, that hath certainly come to my knowledge: truth it is, that one Philpot in Westminster, whom I accounted altered in his wits (as I have heard), devised tales of me, the specialties whereof I never was called to answer unto. Players and minstrels also railed on me, and others made ballads and rhymes of me; but never man had just cause to complain of any my sayings, doings, or preachings, or to my knowledge did, otherwise than afore. And if any man shall put me in remembrance of any other complaint that might in my absence be made of me, if I have heard it, I will grant so. But well assured I am, I was never complained on, and called to make answer to the complaint, but this one time in all my whole life, by any man of any degree. Once the lord Cromwell (God pardon his soul and forgive him!) caused one day and a half to be spent in a matter between sir Francis Bryan and me; which was ended, and I declared an honest man; which the king’s majesty that dead is (God pardon his soul!) set forth with his familiarity to me incontinently.
And this is all the trouble that I have had in my life, saving the sending to the Fleet, being occasioned by my own letter to the council, upon a zeal that I had, which they allowed not; and finally, this sending of me to the Tower, which was without calling me before the council, to hear what I could say. I am loth to be forsworn, and therefore I recount all the complaints in my whole hfe made against me, whereunto I have been made privy.’
The Seventh Article. Item, ‘That after and upon occasion of those and many other complaints and informations, you have been sundry times admonished, commanded, and enjoined to conform yourself, as to your duty appertaineth.’ Winchester :‘To this seventh article I answer, I was never called afore the council by way of outward complaint and information, but only once in all my whole life; which was at my last coming to London. Whereunto I answered as afore, and have told the form and process of speech to serve for furniture of answer to this and that article: for other than I have before written, I remember not to have done or suffered by the higher powers in all my whole life, till my coming into the Tower (without that I have had any bye admonitions, as a man faulty or negligent at any time, that I remember not), for the observation 22 of anything already made or set forth by the king’s majesty that now is; but have kept, and caused to be kept to my power, the king’s majesty’s acts, statutes, injunctions, and proclamations, inviolably; having for that purpose such a chancellor, as in orders and ordinances hath been always himself diligent and precise for the time I might have knowledge of his doings.’
The Eighth Article 24 . Item, ‘That after the premises, and for that, those former admonitions and commandments notwithstanding, you did still show yourself not conformable; and for that also others by your example were much animated, and thereby occasion of much unquietness ministered among the people, you were called before the king’s majesty’s council in the month of June, in the second year of his majesty’s reign, 79 and by them, on his majesty’s behalf, commanded to preach a sermon before his majesty; and therein to declare the justness and godliness of his majesty’s father, in his proceedings upon certain matters partly mentioned in certain articles to you delivered in writing, and partly otherwise declared unto you. The effect whereof was touching the usurped power and authority of the bishop of Rome, that the same was justly and godly taken away in this realm, and other the king’s majesty’s dominions; touching the just suppressing and taking away of monasteries, religious houses, pilgrimages, relics, shrines, and images, the superstitious going about of St. Nicholas bishop 23 , of St. Edmund, St. Katharine, St. Clement, and such like; and just taking away of chantries, abbeys, and colleges, hallowing of caudles, water, ashes, palms, holy bread, beads, creeping to the cross, and such like. Also, touching the setting-forth of the king’s majesty’s authority in his young years, to be as great as if his highness were of many more years. That auricular confession is indifferent, and of no necessity by the law of God: and touching the procession, and Common Prayer in English.’ Winchester :‘This article, being of so many parts as it is, some true, some otherwise, must be answered by division of it into divers members, to divide the one from the other, granting that which is true, denying that which is otherwise, and opening that which is ambiguous, avoiding that which is captious; so as, according to my oath, I may open directly and plainly the truth, with sincerity of conscience. The motion of preaching was made unto me in mine own house by Master Cecil, upon the duke of Somerset’s behalf, after I had been before the council, as I have before said; from which council I departed (as before is rehearsed) as no offender; and therefore when Master Cecil spake to me of preaching before the king’s majesty, with request to write my sermon before, I denied that manner of preaching, because I said it was to preach like an offender, and I was none, but departed from the council otherwise, as I have before showed. And the said Master Cecil did not say to me that I was moved to preach, because I was not conformable; for I had at that time no manner of variance with the council, but was in all conformity with them, for any thing that I know, as I will answer afore God. ‘As for evil example to any man, I could none give, for I never offended law, statute, or proclamation in this realm, nor did ever any act to the impairing of due obedience to the king’s majesty in all my whole life; but by observation of them, and letting innovations, have done as much as in me lay to maintain obedience. ‘After Master Cecil had spoken to me of preaching, and delivered two papers containing the matters whereupon I should entreat, because I refused to give my sermon in writing (which was to me, like an offender), or to read those papers of another man’s device, as the conception and sincere manner of uttering of mine own conscience (which me thought then and since, and yet, a marvellous unreasonable matter, touching both my conscience and honesty); I was then fetched to the duke of Somerset’s grace’s chamber, and came in at a back door to himself alone, saving he took to him as witness (he said) the lord now of Wiltshire, then great master; and after many words, he showed me certain articles subscribed by lawyers, what a bishop might command, and what the king might command, and what pain to the disobeyer. To whom I said plainly and truly, how those lawyers’ subscription could not serve, in this case, to command me to utter to the people for mine own device in words, that which is not indeed so; and if! might speak with these lawyers (I said), his grace should, soon perceive them to agree with. me. My lord said, I should speak with no man, and I should do as I was bidden, or do worse; and bade me advise me till dinner was done. And then was I conveyed by the lord great master to his chamber, and there left alone to dine, as was indeed honorably prepared. But I took myself to be in the nature of a prisoner, and a restrained man. ‘And about two of the clock at afternoon, came unto me Master Thomas Smith, then secretary, unto whom I complained of the unreasonableness of the matter, and showed him certain particularities; who said it was not meant so precisely, but to speak of the matters. To whom I said, I was content to speak of the matters, and then if I spake not according to the truth, of them, there should be enough to bear witness to my condemnation; and if I spake the truth, then they had their desire. And I said further, I thought I might with my conscience say, so as men ought and should be content and satisfied. And further, if I thought that in my manner of the uttering of those matters I should offend the council, I had rather deny to speak of the thing, and begin the contention secretly with them, than to begin with the pulpit, and so bring myself in further trouble than needed; and therefore, if they would have me preach, I would preach as of myself, and of these matters, so as I thought they should be content. ‘Whereupon I was brought up to my lord of Somerset’s chamber, and there the matter ended thus: that my lord of Somerset said, he would require no writing of me, but remit it to me, so I spake of the matters in the papers delivered me by Master Cecil. I told him I would speak of them, saving for children’s toys, of going about of St. Nicholas, and St. Clement. If that be now gone, quoth I, and forgotten, if I be too busy in rehearsal of them, they will say I cumber their heads with ceremonies, and thus they will defame me.
When ceremonies were plenty, they will say, I did nothing but preach on them; and now they be gone, I babble of them still. I said, I would touch the chief points, adding, that I would speak of other matters also; and with that, being put to my liberty to choose the day, departed: and otherwise I was not spoken with concerning preaching, saving after Master Cecil came unto me, whereof I shall speak anon. ‘And concerning the matters to be spoken of, all such things as be here rehearsed, be named in the papers delivered unto me, although not altogether after this sort; saving the setting forth of the king’s majesty’s authority in his minority, whereof there is no word in those papers, nor was there ever any promise made of me to speak of it. Truth it is, that after I had signified the day when I would preach, Master Cecil came unto me, making the chief message to know the day when I would preach: to whom I had sent word before, that it should be St. Peter’s day, because metbought the gospel served well for that purpose. And in process of communication, he told me, that he liked gaily well a word that I had said in another communication: how a king was as much a king at one year of age, as at a hundred years of age; and if I touched it, he thought it would be well taken. I told him again, every man knew that; and then opened of myself the matter further. And at his next repair unto me, which was the Monday before I preached, the said Master Cecil brought me papers of the king’s majesty’s hand, showing me how the king’s highness used to note every notable sentence, and specially if it touched a king; and therefore (quoth he) if ye speak of a king, ye must join counsel withal.
Whereunto! made no answer, but shifted to other matter, without making him any promise or denial, because I would neither bind myself, nor trouble myself to discuss that matter: for albeit it is godly and wisely done of every prince to use counsel, yet, speaking of a king’s power by Scripture, I cannot by express Scripture limit the king’s power by counsel And hearing blindly by report some secret matter, that I will not speak of here, I thought not to meddle with it at all in the pulpit; and yet, to the effect to have our sovereign lord now obeyed, of which mind I was ever, I pointed to our sovereign lord there in presence, and said, He was only to be obeyed; and, I would have but one king; and other words to that purpose. But, for any promise to be made by me, I utterly deny it, and tell plainly the cause why I spake not otherwise of it.
There was also, in the papers delivered unto me, occasion given me to speak of the mass, because of masses satisfactory, as some understand them. And also there was occasion to speak of the sacrament of the altar, because of the proclamation passed of the same; which to be true, I shall justify by the said papers.’
The Ninth Article. Item, ‘That you, receiving the same, and promising to declare the same in a sermon by you made before his majesty for that purpose, on the Feast of St. Peter, in the said second year of his reign, 81 did then and there contemptuously and disobediently omit to declare and set forth many of the said matters; and of divers other of the said articles you spake and uttered your mind in such doubtful sort, as the justness and godliness of his majesty’s father’s and his proceedings was not set forth according to the commandment given unto you, and your own promise, to the great offense of the hearers, and manifest contempt of his majesty, and dangerous example of others.’ Winchester :‘Touching that promise, I answer as afore; and as touching omission of that I should have spoken of, by contempt or disobedience, I answer by mine oath, I did not omit any thing (if I did omit it) by contempt or disobedience; for I ever minded to satisfy the promise, to speak of all matters in those papers according to my former declaration. And if I did percase omit any thing (whereof I can make now no assurance, it being two years and a half past since I preached), but if I did omit any thing, he who knew my travail in the matter, would not marvel, being troubled with a letter sent from the duke of Somerset, whereof I shall speak after; so as from four of the clock on Thursday, till I had done my sermon on the Friday, I did neither drink, eat, nor sleep: so careful was I to pass over the travail of preaching without all slander of the truth, and with satisfaction of my promise, and discharge of my duty to God, and the king’s most excellent majesty. Wherein, whether any thing were omitted or not, I could have answered more precisely than I can now, if. according to my most instant suit, and the suit of my servants, the matter had been heard while it was in fresh memory. But, because omission may be by infirmity of nature, in which oblivion is a pain of our original sin, in which case it is no mortal offense, if a man being put in remembrance will purge it; I therefore, according to the true testimony of mine own conscience, dare the more boldly deny all contempt and disobedience, having for my declaration a general sentence spoken in my sermon, that I agreed with the upper part in their laws, orders, and commandments, or such like words, and found fault only in the lower part. By which sentence it appeared, how I allowed in the whole that was past hitherto, and only dissented from the doings of them that attempt innovations, of their own presumption. And furthermore I say, that that saying ‘omission’ here objected unto me, if it were true, as I know it not to be, may happen two ways, one way by infirmity of nature, another way of purpose. Charity of a christian man permitteth not to determine the worst of that which is doubtful and ambiguous to both parties: as touching doubtfulness objected, I take God to record, I minded to speak simply, and to be on the king’s majesty’s side only, and not to go invisible in the world with ambiguities, esteeming him, etc. The worst man of all, is he that will make himself a lock of words 82 and speech, which is known not to be my fashion, nor do I think this life worth that dissimulation; and how can that be a doubtful speech in him, that professeth to agree with the king’s laws, injunctions, and statutes, which I did expressly? ‘There be that call in doubt whatsoever serveth not their appetite.
It is not in the speaker to satisfy the hearer that will doubt, where doubt is not. The sum of my teaching was, that all visible things be ordered to serve us, which we may in convenient service use. And when we serve them, that is an abuse, and may then, at the rulers’ leasure, unless Scripture appointeth a special use of them, be corrected in that use, or taken away for reformation. And this is a plain teaching that hath no doubt in it, but a yea and a nay on both sides, without a mean to make a doubt. And if any that doubteth cometh unto me, I will resolve him the doubt as I can. And if I promised to speak plainly, or am commanded to speak plainly, and cannot, then is my fault to promise only in the nature of folly and ignorance, whereunto I resort not for a shift; whereof indeed I profess the knowledge but to show how sometimes, to my hinderance, I am noted learned, that can speak plainly and yet speak doubtfully; other-whiles am rejected, as one that understandeth not the matter at all. As touching contempt, there can be none manifest that proceedeth of a privy promise: if I had broken it, I intended not, but intended to take it, as appeareth by my general sentence, to agree with the superiors, and only find fault in the inferior subjects, who daily transgress the king’s majesty’s proclamations, and others, whereof I spake then.’
The Tenth Article. Item, ‘That you, being also commanded, on his majesty’s, behalf, for the avoiding of tumult, and, for other great conslderations, inhibited to treat of any matter in controversy concerning the mass, and of the communion (titan commonly called ‘The Sacrament of the Altar),’ did, contrary to the said commandment and inhibition, declare divers your judgments and opinions in the same, in the manifest contempt of his highness’s said inhibition, to the great offense of the hearers, and disturbance of the common quiet and unity of the realm.’
To the tenth article Winchester answered thus: — ‘The Wednesday at afternoon next before the Friday when I preached, Master Cecil came to me, and having in all his other accesses spoken no word thereof, did then utter and advise me from the duke of Somerset, that I should not speak of the sacrament, or of the mass, whereby, he said, I should avoid trouble. And when he saw me not to take it well, I mean, quoth he, doubtful matters. I asked him what? he said, transubstantiation. I told him, he wist not what transubstantiation meant. I will preach, quoth I, the very presence of Christ’s most precious body and blood in the sacrament, which is the catholic faith, and no doubtful matter, nor yet in controversy, saving that certain unlearned speak of it they wot not what. And among the matters, quoth I, whereof I have promised to speak, I must by special words speak of the sacrament, and of the mass also. And when I shall so speak of them, I will not forbear to utter my faith and true belief therein, which I think necessary for the king’s majesty to know; and therefore, if I wist to be hanged when I came down, I would speak it. Which plain zeal of my conscience, grounded upon God’s commandment to do his message truly, I would not hide, but utter so as my lord should, if he would not have it spoken of, not let me to come there as he might have done: whereas else, if I had had a deceitful purpose, I might have accepted the advice, and without any color of trouble, have refused to follow it, as a thing grounded upon wealth only, as it was then uttered. ‘With this my answer, Master Cecil departed, and upon the Thursday, which was the next day following, and the evening before I preached, between three and four at afternoon, I received a letter signed with the hand of the duke of Somerset, the copy whereof I am ready to exhibit; and took it then, and esteem it so now, to contain no effectual inhibition, whereunto I might by God’s law, or the king’s majesty’s laws, with discharge of my conscience and duty obey; although the said letters had been (as they were not) in such terms framed, as had precisely forbidden me (as they did not) but only to speak of matters in controversy of the sacrament; which indeed I did not, but only uttered a truth to my conscience most certainly persuaded of the most holy sacrament, necessary to be known to the king’s majesty, and to be uttered by me admitted to that place of preaching, from whence God commandeth his truth to be uttered; which (in this nature of truth, the undue estimation and use whereof St. Paul threateneth with temporal death), may in no wise be omitted. 83 So, as I was and am persuaded the right estimation of the sacrament to be, to acknowledge the very presence of the same most precious body and blood present in the sacrament to feed us, that was given to redeem us; if I showed not my sovereign lord the truth thereof, I for my part suffer him wittingly to fall into that extreme danger of body, which St. Paul threateneth, whose person I am bound by. nature, by special oaths, and by God’s laws, to preserve to my power; as I will do, and must do, by all ways and means. And if the king’s majesty doth vouchsafe to teach his people not to obey his commandment, where God commandeth the contrary, I might not take my lord of Somerset’s letter for an inhibition to hold my peace, when God biddeth me to speak, as he doth when the wolf cometh, and not to hide myself in silence, which is the most shameful running away of all. I have much matter to allege against the letter, why I should not credit it, written in his name alone, against a common letter (as I took it) written by him and the council, and published in print the first day of the said month, which maintaineth my preaching of the sacrament and mass, according to the proclamation and injunctions, the violation of which public letters had been a disorder and contempt; whereas I neither offended in the one nor the other. ‘And as for tumult, none could reasonably be feared of any thing spoken agreeable to the king’s majesty’s laws, as there did follow none; nor the people, nor any man did offer my person any wrong, or make tumult against me, notwithstanding players, jesters, rhymers, ballad-makers, did signify me to be of the true catholic faith, which I, according to my duty, declared to the king’s majesty, from whom I may hide no truth that I think expedient for him to know. And as the name of God cannot be used of any creature against God, no more can the king’s name be used of any subject against his highness. Wherefore, seeing the abuse of this holy sacrament hath in it a danger assured by Scripture, of body and soul; whosoever is persuaded in the catholic faith, as I am, findeth himself so burdened to utter that unto his majesty, as no worldly loss can let him to do his duty in that behalf, and much less my lord’s private letters written without other of the council’s hands.’
The Eleventh Article. Item, ‘That after the premises, viz. in the month of May or June, or one of them, in the third year of his highness’s reign, 84 his majesty sent eftsoons unto you, to know your conformity towards his said reformations, and specially touching the book of Common Prayer then lately set forth by his majesty; whereunto you at the same time refused to show yourself conformable.’
To the eleventh article, for answer and declaration thereof, Winchester said, ‘The next day at afternoon after I had preached, when I looked for no such matter, came to my house the right worshipful sir Anthony Wingfield, and sir Ralph Sadler, knights, accompanied with a great number of the guard, and used themselves, for their part, according to their worships, and, I doubt not, as they were appointed. And sir Ralph Sadler began thus with me: My lord, said he, ye preached yesterday obedience, but ye did not obey yourself; and went forth with his message very soberly, as he can, and discreetly. I asked him, wherein I obeyed not. He said, touching my lord of Somerset’s letter. Master Sadler, quoth I, I pray you say unto my lord’s grace, I would he never made mention of that letter, for the love I bare him. And yet, quoth I, I have not broken that letter; and I was minded, quoth I, to have written to my lord upon the receipt of it, and lo, quoth I, ye may see how I began: — and showed him (because we were then in my study) the beginning of my letter, and reasoned with him for the declaration of myself, and told him therewith, I will not spend, quoth I, many words with you, for I cannot alter this determination. And yet in good faith, quoth I, my manner to you, and this declaration, may have this effect, that I be gently handled in the prison; and for that purpose, I pray you, make suit on my behalf. ‘Master Whigfield laid his hand on my shoulder, and arrested me in the king’s name for disobedience. I asked him, whither I should?
They said, to the Tower. Finally, I desired them, that I might be spoken with shortly, and heard what I could say for myself; and prayed them to be suitors in it: and so they said they would. After that I was once in the Tower, until it was within six days of one whole year, I could hear no manner of word, message, comfort, or relief; saving once when I was sick, and methought some extremity towards me, my chaplain had leave to come to me once: and then denied again, being answered, that my fever was but a tertian; which my said chaplain told me when he came to me at the Easter following; and there being with me from the morning until night on Easter-day, departed, and for no suit could I ever have him since.
To Master Lieutenant I made divers suits to provoke the duke of Somerset’s grace to hear me, and, if I might have the liberty of an Englishman, I would plainly declare I had neither offended law, statute, act, proclamation, nor his own letter neither: but all would not help. And I shall report me to Master Lieutenant, whether in all this time I maligned, grudged, or used any unseemly words; ever demanding justice, and to be heard according to justice. ‘When I had been thus in the Tower one whole year within six days or seven, as I remember, came to the Tower the lord chancellor of England, now being the lord treasurer, and Master secretary Peter, who, calling me unto them, as I remember entered thus: They said, they had brought with them a book passed by the parliament, which they would I should look on, and say my mind to it; and upon my conformity in it, my lord of Somerset would be suitor to the king’s majesty for mercy to be ministered to me.
Whereunto I answered that I trusted, if I might be heard, the king’s majesty’s justice would relieve me, which I had long sued for, and could not be heard. And to sue for mercy, quoth I, when I have not in my conscience offended, and also to sue out of this place, where asking of mercy implieth a further suspicion than I would be for all the world touched in, were not expedient; and therefore, quoth I, ‘Not guilty’ is and hath been continually allowed a good plea for a prisoner. ‘Then my lord said, Why, quoth he, were ye not commanded to preach of the king’s authority in his young age, and did not? I told him I was not commanded. Is not, quoth he, that article in the papers ye had delivered you? I assured him no. ‘And after communication of the king’s majesty’s authority, wherein was no disagreement; then my lord chancellor said, I had disobeyed my lord’s grace’s letter. — I told him. I thought not, and if the matter came to judgment, it should appear. And then I said to him, My lord, how many open injunctions under seal and in open court have been broken in this realm, the punishment whereof hath not been handled after this sort? and yet I would stand in defense, that I have not broken his letter: weighing the words of his letter, wherein I reasoned with Master secretary Peter what a controversy was, and, some part, what I could say further. But whatsoever I can say, quoth I, you must judge it, and, for the passion of God, do it; and then let me sue for mercy, when the nature of the offense is known, if I will have it. But when I am, quoth I, declared an offender, I will with humility of suffering make amends to the king’s majesty, so far as I am able; for I should never offend him, and much less in his young age. ‘My lord chancellor then showed me the beginning of the act for Common Prayer, how dangerous it was to break the order of it. I told him that it was true; and therefore, if I came abroad, I would beware of it. But it is, quoth I, after in the act, how no man should be troubled for this act, unless he were first indicted: and therefore, quoth I, I may not be kept in prison for this act. Ah, quoth he, I perceive ye know the law well enough. I told him my chaplain had brought it unto me the afternoon before. Then they required me to look on the book, and to say my mind in it. I answered, that I thought not meet to yield myself a scholar to go to school in prison, and then slander myself, as though I redeemed my faults with my conscience. As touching the law which I know, I will honor it like a subject; and if I keep it not, [will willingly suffer the pain of it. And what more conformity I should show, I cannot tell, for mine offences be past, if there be any. If I have not suffered enough, I will suffer more — if upon examination I be found faulty; and as for this new law, if I keep it not, punish me likewise. ‘Then my lord chancellor asked me, whether I would not desire the king’s majesty to be my good lord. At which words I said, Alas, my lord! quoth I, do ye think that I have so forgotten myself? My duty, quoth I, requireth so; and I will on my knees desire him to be my good lord and my lord protector also, quoth 1. That is well said, quoth my lord chancellor. And what will ye say further, quoth my lord chancellor? In good faith, quoth I, this: that I thought when I had preached, that I had not offended at all, and think so still; and had it not been for the article of the supremacy, I would have rather feigned myself sick, than be occasion of this that hath followed: but, going to the pulpit, I must needs say as I said.
Well, quoth my lord chancellor, let us go to our purpose again. Ye will, quoth he, desire the king’s majesty to be your good lord, and the lord protector also; and ye say, ye thought not to have offended. All this I will say, quoth 1. And ye will, quoth my lord chancellor, submit yourself to be ordered by the lord protector.
Nay, quoth I, by the law; for my lord protector, quoth I, hath scourged me over sore this year, to put my matter in his hands now. And in the latter point I varied with my lord chancellor, when I would not refer my order to my lord protector, but to the law; and staying at this point they were content to grant me of their gentleness, to make their suit to procure me to be heard, and to obtain me liberty to go in the gallery, and that I should hear of one of them within two days following. I desired them to remember that I refused not the book by way of contempt, nor in any evil manner, but that I was loth to yield myself a scholar in the Tower, and to be seen to redeem my faults, if I had any, with my conscience. My body, I said, should serve my conscience, but not contrariwise. And this is the truth upon my conscience and oath, that was done and said at their coming. There was more said to the purposes aforesaid. And I bind not myself to the precise form of words, but to the substance of the matter and fashion of the entreating. So near as I can remember, I have truly discharged mine oath. But I heard no more of my matter in one whole year after almost, within fourteen days, notwithstanding two letters written by me to the council, of most humble request to be heard according to justice. And then, at the end of two years almost, came unto me the duke of Somerset, with others of the council; which matter, because it is left out here, I shall not touch, but prepare it in a matter apart, for declaration of my behavior at all times.’
The Twelfth Article. Item, ‘That after that, viz. the 9th day of July, in the fourth year of his majesty’s reign, 85 his highness sent unto you his grace’s letters, with a certain submission and articles, whereunto his grace willed and commanded you to subscribe. To the which submission you contemptuously refused to subscribe.’
To the twelfth article, for answer thereunto, Winchester granted, that about the time mentioned in this article, the lord treasurer, the earl of Warwick, lord great master, sir William Harbert, and Master secretary Peter, came to the Tower, and called him before them, and delivered unto him the king’s majesty’s letters — ‘which I have to show,’ said he, ‘and received them at the hands of the lord treasurer upon my knees, kissed them as my duty was, and still upon my knees read them, whereas they gently required me to take more ease, and go apart with them, and consider them. Which after that I had thoroughly read, I much lamented that I should be commanded to say of myself as was there written, and to say otherwise of myself than my conscience will suffer me, and, where I trust my deeds will not condemn me, there to condemn myself with my tongue. I should sooner, quoth I to them, by commandment, I think, if ye would bid me, tumble myself desperately into the Thames. ‘My lord of Warwick, seeing me in that agony, said, What say ye, my lord, quoth he, to the other articles? I answered, that I was loth to disobey where I might obey, and not wrest my conscience, destroying the comfort of it, as to say untruly of myself. Well, quoth my lord of Warwick, will ye subscribe to the other articles? I told him I would: but then, quoth I, the article that toucheth me must be put out. 86 I was answered, that needeth not, for I might write on the outside what I would say unto it. And then my lord of Warwick entertained me very gently, and would needs, whiles I should write, have me sit down by him; and when he saw me make somewhat strange so to do, he pulled me nearer him, and Said, we had ere this sat together, and trusted we should do so again. And then having pen and ink given me, I wrote, as I remember, on the article that touched me these words, — I cannot with my conscience say this of myself, — or such like words. And there followed an article of the king’s majesty’s primacy, and I began to write on the side of that, and had made an I , onward, as may appear by the articles; and they would not have me do so, but write only my name after their articles; which I did. Whereat, because they showed themselves pleased and content, I was bold to tell them merrily, that by this means I had placed my subscription above them all; and thereupon it pleased them to entertain me much to my comfort. ‘And I was bold to recount unto them merry tales of my misery in prison, which they seemed content to hear. And then I told them also (desiring them not to be miscontent with that I should say), when I remembered each of them alone, I could not think otherwise but they were my good lords; and yet when they met together, I felt no remedy at their hands. I looked, quoth I, when my lord of Somerset was here, to go out within two days; and made my farewell feast in the Tower and all; since which time there is a month past, or thereabout; and I agreed with them, and now agree with you, and I may fortune to he forgotten. My lord treasurer said, Nay, I should hear from them the next day. And so by their special commandment I came out of the chamber after them, that they might be seen to depart as my good lords; and so was done.
By which process appeareth, how there was in me no contempt, as is said, in this article; but such a subscription made as they were content to suffer me to make; which I took in my conscience for a whole satisfaction of the king’s majesty’s letters, which I desire [it] may be deemed accordingly. And one thing was said unto me further: that others would have put in many more articles; but they would have no more but those.’
The Thirteenth Article. Item, ‘That you, having eftsoons certain of the king’s majesty’s honorable council sent unto you the 12th of July, in the said fourth year, with the said submission, and being on his majesty’s behalf required and commanded to consider again, and better, [of] the said submission, and to subscribe the same, stood in justification of yourself, and would in no wise subscribe thereunto.’
To the thirteenth article Winchester said, ‘The next day after the being in the Tower of the said lord treasurer, the earl of Warwick, and others, came unto me sir William Harbert and Master secretary Peter, to devise with me how to make some acknowledging of my fault, as they said, because the other form liked me not. Whereunto I said, I knew myself innocent, and to enter with you to entreat of a device to impair my innocency in any the least point, either by words or writings, it can have no policy in it. For although I did more esteem liberty of body, than the defamation of myself, yet, quoth I, when I had so done with you, I were not so assured by you to come out. For when I were by [my] own pen 87 once made a naughty man, then were I not the more sure to come out, but had locked myself the more surer in; and a small pleasure were it to me to have my body at liberty, by your procurement, and to have my conscience in perpetual prison by mine own act. Many more words there were, and persuasions on their parts; which caused me to require of them, for the passion of God, that my matter might take an end by justice. And so they departed, there being no contempt or faction of disobedience showed on my behalf, but only allegation for my defense of mine own innocency in the best manner I could devise, as I trust they will testify.’
The Fourteenth Article. Item . ‘That after all this, viz. the 14th day of July, in the said fourth year, the king’s majesty sent yet again unto you certain of his majesty’s honorable council, with another submission, and divers other articles, willing and commanding you to subscribe your name thereunto: which to do, you utterly refused.’
To the fourteenth article Winchester said, ‘On the Monday in the morning following came the bishop of London, sir William Harbert, master secretary Peter, and another whom I know not, who brought with them a paper, with certain articles written in it, which they required me to subscribe. Whereupon I most instantly required, that my matter might be tried by justice, which although it were more grievous, yet it hath a commodity with it, that it endeth certainly the matter. And I could never yet come to my assured stay, and therefore refused to meddle with any more articles, or to trouble myself with the reading of them; and yet they desired me instantly to read them, that I was content, and did read, and, to show my perfect obedient mind, offered incontinently upon my delivery out of prison to make answer to them all; such as I would abide by, and suffer pain for, if I have deserved it. I would indeed gladly have been in hand with my lord of London; but he said he came not to dispute, and said, It was the hand of God that I was thus in prison, because I had so troubled other men in my time. Finally, my request was, that they should in this form make my answer to my lords of the council, as followeth: That I most humbly thank them for their good will to deliver me by the way of mercy; but, because in respect of mine own innocent conscience I had rather have justice, I desired them, seeing both was in the king’s majesty’s hands, that I might have it; which if it happened to me more grievous, I will impute it to myself, and evermore thank them for their good will. And so departed I with them, as I trust they will testify, and no misbehavior or misdemeanor to have been used on my behalf.’
The Fifteenth Article. Item, ‘That after all this, viz. the 19th day of July, in the said fourth year, you, being personally called before the king’s majesty’s privy council, and having the said submission and articles openly and distinctly read unto you, and required to subscribe the same, refused, for unjust considerations by you alleged, to subscribe the same.’ Winchester :‘To the fifteenth article I grant, that upon a Saturday at afternoon, even at such time of the day as they were at evensong in the chapel of the court, I was brought thither; and at my coming the lords of the council said, they were all my judges by special commission, and intended to proceed thus with me: that I should subscribe certain articles which were then read; and I must directly make answer, whether I would subscribe them or no. I answered on my knees in this wise: For the passion of God, my lords, be my good lords, and let me be tried by justice, whether I be faulty or no: and as for these articles, as soon as ye deliver me to my liberty, I would make answer to them, whether I would subscribe them or no. Then they having [no] further to say, I answered, These articles are of divers sorts; some be laws, which I may not qualify; some be no laws, but learning and fact, which may have divers understandings; and a subscription to them without telling what I mean, were over dangerous. And therefore I offered, for the more declaration of mine obedience to all their requests, that if they would deliver me the articles into the prison with me, I would shortly make them particular answer; and suffer the pains of the law, that by my answer I might incur into. Whereupon I was commanded to go apart, and they sent unto me the lord treasurer, and master secretary Peter, who communed with me of a mean way, and that liked not the lords. And then I was called forth again, and my absolute subscription required again: and I again made offer to answer particularly; for I could not with my conscience subscribe them as they were, absolutely. And these my considerations I trust to be just, seeing no man for any commandments ought to offend his conscience, as I must have done in that case.’
The Sixteenth Article. Item, ‘That for your sundry and manifold contempts and disobediences in this behalf used, the fruits of your bishopric were then, by special commission of his majesty, justly and lawfully sequestered.’ Winchester :‘To the sixteenth article I answer, I deny contempts and disobedience of parts 25 , and say, that my doings cannot so be termed, because it is taught in this realm for a doctrine of obedience, that if a king command that which is contrary to the commandment of God, the subject may not do as he is commanded, but humbly stand to his conscience; which is my case, who could not with my conscience do as I was required. 88 And as touching the fact of decree, there was indeed a decree read, having words so placed and framed as though I were such an offender; which matter I deny. And in that decree was mention made of sequestration of fruits; but whether the former words were of the present tense, or else to be sequestered, I cannot precisely tell, but do refer that to the tenor of the decree.’
The Seventeenth Article. Item, ‘That after this, you had intimation and peremptory monition, with communication, that you should, within three months next following the said intimation, reconcile and submit yourself, under pain of deprivation.’ Winchester :‘To the seventeenth article I answer, that iu the same decree of sequestration at the same time read, I kneeling from the beginning of the decree to the latter end, I remember there was an intimation, and three months spoken of, and expressed also, how at every month’s end I should have pen and ink offered to write, if I would yet subscribe; and, as I understand, it was upon the pain of proceeding further. And I do not remember that I heard the word ‘deprivation,’ but therein I refer me to the acts of the sentence; which when it was read, I desired it might be testified what mine offer was, to answer all those articles particularly, even remaining in prison. And this done, I made suit for some of my servants abroad to resort to me to the Tower, partly for my comfort, partly for my necessary business; which could not be obtained. And yet to provoke it, I said to my lord of Warwick, how for agreeing with my lord of Somerset, I had some commodity; and for agreeing with him, had nothing; and therefore would needs by intercession press him, that I might by this means have some of my servants resorting unto me. He answered very gently. And then one said, I should within two or three days have somebody come to me. And then I was dismissed, with commandment to the lieutenant, to let me have the same liberty I had, but no more.’
The Eighteenth Article. Item, ‘That the said three months are now fully expired and run.’ Winchester :‘To the eighteenth article I say, there is almost six months passed in time and number of days, but not one month past to the effect of the law, nor ten days neither, because I have been so kept in prison, that I could not seek for remedy in form abovesaid; nor was there at every month, after the form of the sentence, offered me pen and ink, and liberty given me to consult and deliberate with other learned men and friends, what were best to do, or to send unto them. And furthermore, the very eighth day after the decree given, I protested before my servants, whom I had only commodity to use as witnesses of the nullity of the decree, for the evident and apparent matter in it; but if it were in law, I appealed to the king’s, majesty, because my request, was not admitted, to have the copy of the articles to answer them particularly, and because it is excessive correction, to sequester my fruits and keep me in prison: with other cases to be deduced where I might have opportunity. Which appellation I protested to intimate as soon as I could come to any presence meet there-for, as I did in this assembly at my last repair; desiring, therewith the benefit ‘restitutionis in integrum,’ because of mine imprisonment; and therefore do answer this matter with protestation of that appeal, and utterly deny all manner of contempt.’
The Nineteenth Article. Item, ‘That you have not hitherto, according to the said intimation and monition, submitted, reconciled, nor reformed yourself, but contemptuously yet still remain in your first disobedience.’ Winchester :‘To the nineteenth article I say, that I have been all this while in prison so kept, as no man could have access to counsel with me, nor any means to write or send to any man, having made continual suit to master lieutenant and master marshal, under whose custody I am here, and to make suit in my name to the lords of the council, that I might come to hearing, or else be bailed upon surety; which I could not obtain, and so have remained, under the benefit of my said appeal to the king’s majesty made, as I might for the time; which I eftsoons desire I may have liberty to prosecute. ‘And whereas, answering to these articles for declaration of the integrity of my conscience, I use in the same places general words, I protest I mean not by those words to set forth myself otherwise more arrogantly than as my direct intent (which excludeth malice) and purpose move me to say, and as my conscience beareth witness unto me at this time; and therefore will say therein with St.
Paul, Nihili mihi conscius sum, sed non in hoc justificatus sum.
Wherefore if any especially be objected unto me, wherein, by ignorance or oversight and negligence, any offense of mine may appear against the king’s majesty’s laws, statutes, and injunctions, I shall desire and protest that it be not prejudicial to mine answer for this present ‘Credo’ (as lawyers in civil matters use that term) to be true; that is to say, such as, without any alteration in my conscience, presently I may of myself say in affirmation or denial, as afore is answered. And whereas I spake of commandment to be made to me against God’s law, I protest not to touch my sovereign lord’s honor therein, which my duty is by all means to preserve, but that the commandment given resolveth to be against God’s law on my part, in the obedience to be given; because I may not answer or say otherwise but ‘est, est,’ ‘non, non;’ so as my words and heart may agree together, or else I should offend God’s law; which my sovereign, if he knew my conscience, would not command me.’ ‘Now 89 that we have set forth and declared the matters and articles propounded and objected against the bishop, with his answer and purgations unto the same, wherein, though he utter many words to the most advantage of his excuse, yet he could not so excuse himself, but that much fault, and matter of great complaint and most worthy accusation, did remain in him: it remaineth, consequently, to set forth the process of his doings, and such complaints and accusations, wherewith he was worthily charged withal, as in the copy here following doth appear. * THE COPY OF A WRIT OR EVIDENCE TOUCHING THE ORDER AND MANNER OF THE MISDEMEANOR OF WINCHESTER, WITH DECLARATION OF THE FAULTS WHEREWITH HE WAS JUSTLY CHARGED; COPIED OUT OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS. Whereas the king’s majesty, by the advice of the lord protector and the rest of his highness’s privy council, thinking requisite, for sundry urgent considerations, to have a general visitation throughout the whole reahn, did, about ten months past, address forth commissions; and, by the advice of sundry bishops, and other the best learned men of the realm, appointed certain orders or injunctions to be generally observed; which, being such as in some part touched the reformation of many abuses, and in other parts concerned the good governance and quiet of the realm, were (as reason would) of all men of all sorts obediently received, and reverently observed and executed, saving only of the bishop of Winchester, who, as well by conference with others as by open protestations and letters also, showed such a wilful disobedience therein, as, if it had not been quickly espied, might have bred much unquietness and trouble: — upon the knowledge thereof he, being sent for, and his lewd proceedings laid to his charge, in the presence of the whole council so used himself (as well in denying to receive the said orders and injunctions, as otherwise), as he was thought worthy most sharp punishment; and yet, considering the place he had been in, he was only sequestered to the Fleet, where, after he had remained a certain time, as much at his ease as if he had been at his own house, upon his promise of conformity, he was both set at liberty again, and also licensed to repair to and remain in his diocese at his pleasure. Where when he was, forgetting his duty, and what promise he had made, he began forthwith to set forth such matters as bred again more strife, variance, and contention, in that one small city and shire, than was almost in the whole realm after. Besides that, the lord protector’s grace and the council were informed, that to withstand such as he thought to have been sent from his grace and their lordships into those parts, he had caused all his servants to be secrefiy armed and harnessed; and moreover, when such preachers as, being men of godly life and learning, were sent into that diocese by his grace and their lordships to preach the word of God, and appointed to preach, the bishop, to disappoint and disgrace them, and to hinder his majesty’s proceedings, did occupy the pulpit himself, not fearing in his sermon to warn the people to beware of such new preachers, and to embrace none other doctrine but that which he had taught them (than the which words none could have been spoken more perilous and seditious). Whereupon, being eftsoons sent for, and their grace and lordships objecting to him many particular matters wherewith they had just cause to charge him, they did in the end, upon his second promise, leave him at liberty, only willing him to remain at his house at London, because they thought it most meet to sequester him from his diocese for a time. And, being come to his house, he began afresh to ruffle and meddle in matters wherein he had neither commission nor authority; part whereof touched the king’s majesty. Whereof being yet once again admonished by his grace and their lordships, he did not only promise to conform himself in all things like a good subject, but also, because he understood that he was diversely reported of, and many were also offended with him, he offered to declare to the world his conformity; and promised, in an open sermon so to open his mind in sundry articles agreed upon, that such as had been offended should have no more cause to be offended, but well satisfied in all things. Declaring further, that as his own conscience was well satisfied, and liked well the king’s proceedings within this realm, so would he utter his conscience abroad, to the satisfaction and good quiet of others. And yet, all this notwithstanding, at the day appointed, he did not only most arrogantly and disobediently, and that in the presence of his majesty, his grace, and their lordships, and of such an audience as the like whereof hath not lightly been seen, speak of certain matters contrary to an express commandment given to him on his majesty’s behalf both by mouth and by letters, but also, in the rest of the articles whereunto he had agreed before, used such a manner of utterance as was very like, even there presently, to have stirred a great tumult; and, in certain great matters touching the policy of the realm, handled himself so colourably, as therein he showed himself an open great offender, and a very seditious man. Forsomuch as these his proceedings were of such sort, as, being suffered to escape unpunished, might breed innumerable inconveniences, and that the clemencies showed to him afore, by his grace and their lordships, did work in him no good effect, but rather a pride and boldness to demean himself more and more disobediently against his majesty’s and his grace’s proceedings; it was determined by his grace and their lordships, that he should be committed to the Tower, and be conveyed thither by sir Anthony Wingfield; and that at the time of his committing, sir Ralph Sadler, and William Hunnings, clerk of the council, should seal up the doors of such places in his house as they should think meet: all which was done accordingly.
By this evidence above mentioned, first here is of the reader to be noted, how lewdly and disobediently the said Stephen Gardiner misused himself in the king’s general visitation, in denying to receive such orders and injunctions, as for the which he justly deserved much more severe punishment, albeit the king, with his uncle the lord protector, more gently proceeding with him, were contented only to make him taste the Fleet; in the which house, as his durance was not long, so his entreating and ordering was very easy. Out of the which Fleet, divers and sundry letters he wrote to the lord protector and others of the council; certain also to the archbishop of Canterbury, and some to Master Ridley bishop of London, as is above specified. * HERE FOLLOWETH THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE COUNCIL’S PROCEEDINGS WITH THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER, TAKEN OUT OF THE REGISTER26 . ‘Greenwich,91 June 8, 1550. ‘Considering the long imprisonment that the bishop of Winchester hath sustained, it was now thought time he should be spoken withal; and agreed by the council 27 , that if he repented his former obstinacy, and would henceforth apply himself to advance the king’s majesty’s proceedings, his highness, in this case, would be his good lord and remit all his errors passed. Otherwise his majesty was resolved to proceed against him as his obstinacy and contempt required. For the declaration whereof the duke of Somerset, the lord treasurer, the lord privy seal, the lord great chamberlain, and master secretary Peter, were appointed the next day to repair unto him.’ * After these things thus passed, certain of the council, by the king’s appointment, had sundry days and times access to him in the Tower, to persuade with him; which were these, the duke of Somerset, the lord treasurer, the lord privy seal, the lord great chamberlain, and master secretary Peter, who repaired to him the ninth day of June 28 . *’Greenwich, June 10, 1550. ‘Report was made by the duke of Somerset and the rest, sent to the bishop of Winchester, that he desired of them 29 to see the king’s book of proceedings; upon the sight whereof he would make a full answer, seeming to be willing in all things to conform himself thereunto, and promising, that in case any thing offended his conscience, he would open it to none but to the council.
Whereupon it was agreed, the book should be sent him to see his answer, that his case might be resolved upon 30 ; and that, for the mean time, he should have the liberty of the gallery and garden in the Tower, when the duke of Norfolk were absent.’ * The king was lying at Greenwich at this time. *‘Greenwich, June 13, 1550. ‘This day the lieutenant of the Tower, who before was appointed to deliver the king’s book unto the bishop of Winchester, declared unto the council, that the bishop, having perused it, said unto him, he could make no direct answer unless he were at liberty; and so being, he would say his conscience. Whereupon the lords and others that had been with him the other day, were appointed to go to him again to receive a direct answer, that the council thereupon might determine further order for him.’ ‘At Westminster, July 8, 1550. ‘This day the bishop of Winchester’s case was renewed upon the report of the lords that had been with him, that his answers were ever doubtful, refusing while he were in prison to make any direct answer. Wherefore it was determined, that he should be directly examined, whether he would sincerely conform himself unto the king’s majesty’s proceedings, or not. For. which, purpose it was agreed, that particular articles should be drawn, to see whether he would subscribe them or not; and a letter also directed unto him from the king’s highness, with which the lord treasurer, the lord great master, the master of the horse, and master secretary Peter, should repair unto him; the tenor of which letter hereafter ensueth.’ * A LETTER SENT TO THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER, SIGNED BY THE KING, AND SUBSCRIBED BY THE COUNCIL.
It is not, we think, unknown unto you, with what clemency and favor we, by the advice of our council, caused you to be heard and used, upon the sundry complaints and informations that were made to us and our said council of your disordered doings and words, both at the time of our late visitation, and otherwise. Which notwithstanding, considering that the favor, both then and many other times ministered unto you, wrought rather an insolent wilfulness in yourself, than any obedient conformity, such as would have beseemed a man of your vocation, we could not but use some demonstration of justice towards you, as well for such notorious and apparent contempts, and other inobediences as, after and contrary to our commandment, were openly known in you, as also for some example and terror of such others as by your example seemed to take courage to mutter and grudge against our most godly proceedings, whereof great discord and inconvenience at that time might have ensued. For the avoiding whereof, and for your just deservings, you were by our said council committed to ward: where albeit we have suffered you to remain a long space, sending unto you in the mean time, at sundry times, divers of the noblemen, and others of our privy council, and travailing by them with clemency and favor to have reduced you to the knowledge of your duty; yet in all this time have you neither acknowledged your faults, nor made any such submission as might have beseemed you, nor yet showed any appearance either of repentance, or of any good conformity to our godly proceedings. Wherewith albeit we both have good cause to be offended, and might also justly, by the order of our laws, cause your former doings to be reformed and punished to the example of others; yet, for that we would both the world and yourself also should know that we delight more in clemency, than in the straight administration of justice, we have vouchsafed, not only to address unto you these our letters, but also to send eftsoons unto you four of our privy council with certain articles, which being by us with the advice of our said council considered, we think requisite, for sundry considerations, to be subscribed by you; and therefore will and command you to subscribe the said articles, upon pain of incurring such punishment and penalties as by our laws may be put upon you for not doing the same.
Given at our palace of Westminster, the eighth day of July, the fourth year of our reign. * THIS92 LETTER, SIGNED BY THE KING’S MAJESTY, WAS ALSO SUBSCRIBED BY THE WHOLE COUNCIL. ‘Westminster, the 10th of July, 1550. ‘The lord treasurer, lord great master, the master of the horse, and master secretary Peter, made report unto the council, that they had not only delivered to the bishop of Winchester the king’s majesty’s letter, but also the articles appointed; unto all which articles he subscribed with his own hand, saving to the first, whereunto he wrote his answer in the margin, as hereafter appeareth.’ * With the beforementioned letter, addressed from the king and his council, these articles, also, were delivered to the bishop of Winchester, here following:
THE COPY OF THE ARTICLES, SIX IN NUMBER.
Whereas I, Stephen bishop of Winchester 33 , have been suspected as one too much favoring the bishop of Rome’s authority, decrees, and ordinances, and as one that did not approve or allow the king’s majesty’s proceedings in alteration of certain rites in religion, and was convented 32 before the king’s highness’s council, and admonished thereof; and having certain things appointed for me to do and preach for my declaration, have not done that as I ought to do, although I promised to do the same; whereby I have not only incurred the king’s majesty’s indignation, but also divers of his highness’s subjects have by my example taken encouragement (as his grace’s council is certainly informed) to repine at his majesty’s most godly proceedings: I am right sorry therefore, and acknowledge myself condignly to have been punished; and do most heartily thank his majesty, that of his great clemency it hath pleased his highness to deal with me, not according to rigor but mercy. And to the intent it may appear to the world, how little I do repine at his highness’s doings, which be in religion most godly, and to the commonwealth most prudente 34 , I do affirm and say freely of mine own will, without any compulsion, as ensueth. 1. First, That by the law of God and the authority of Scripture, the king’s majesty and his successors are the supreme heads of the churches of England, and also of Ireland. 2. Item, That the appointing of holy-days and fasting-days, as Lent, Ember-days, or any such like, or to dispense therewith, is in the king’s majesty’s authority and power: and his highness, as supreme head of the said churches of England and Ireland, and governor thereof, may appoint the manner and time of the holy-days and fasting-days, or dispense therewith, as to his wisdom shall seem most convenient for the honor of God, and the wealth of this realm. 3. Item, That the king’s majesty hath most christianly and godly set forth, by and with the consent of the whole parliament, a devout and christian book of service of the church, to be frequented in the church, which book is to be accepted and allowed of all bishops, pastors, curates, and all ministers ecclesiastical of the realm of England, and so of them to be declared and commended in all places where they shall fortune to preach or speak to the people of it, that it is a godly and christian book and order, and to be allowed, accepted, and observed of all the king’s majesty’s true subjects. 4. I do acknowledge the king’s majesty that now is, (whose life God long preserve!) to be my sovereign lord, and supreme head under Christ to me as a bishop of this realm, and natural subject to his majesty, and now in this his young and tender age to be my full and entire king; and that I, and all other his highness’s subjects, are bound to obey all his majesty’s proclamations, statutes, laws, and commandments, made, promulgate, and set forth in this his highness’s young age, as well as though his highness were at this present thirty or forty years old. 5. Item, I confess and acknowledge, that the statute commonly called The Statute of the Six Articles, for just causes and grounds, is by authority of parliament repealed and disannulled. 6. Item, That his majesty and his successors have authority in the said churches of England, and also of Ireland, to alter, reform, correct, and amend all errors and abuses, and all rites and ceremonies ecclesiastical, as shall seem from time to time to his highness and his successors most convenient for the edification of his people; so that the same alteration be not contrary or repugnant to the Scripture and law of God.
Subscribed by Stephen Winchester, with the testimonial hands of the council to the same. To 94 these articles afore specified although Winchester with his own hand did subscribe, granting and consenting to the supremacy of the king as well then being, as of his successors to come; yet because he stuck so much in the first point touching his submission, and would in no case subscribe to the same, but only made his answer in the margin (as is above noted), it was therefore thought good to the king, that the master of the horse and master secretary Peter should, repair unto him again with the same request of submission, exhorting him to look better upon it; and in case the words seemed too sore, then to refer it unto himself, in what sort and with what words he should devise to submit him, that, upon the acknowledgment of his fault, the king’s highness might extend his mercy and liberality towards him as it was determined: which was the eleventh day of July, the year above said.
When the master of the horse and secretary Peter had been with him in the Tower according to their commission, returning from him again, they declared unto the king and his council how precisely the said bishop stood in justification of himself, that he had never offended the king’s majesty: wherefore he utterly refused to make any submission at all. For the more surety of which denial, it was agreed, that a new book of articles should be devised, wherewith the said master of the horse, and master secretary Peter, should repair unto him again; and for the more authentic proceeding with him, they should have with them a divine, and a temporal lawyer, which were the bishop of London, and master Goodrick.
THE COPY OF THE LAST ARTICLES SENT TO THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER.
Whereas I, Stephen bishop of Winchester, have been suspected as one that did not approve or allow the king’s majesty’s proceedings in alteration of certain rites in religion, and was convented before the king’s highness’s council, and admonished thereof, and having certain things appointed for me to do and preach for my declaration, have not done therein as I ought to do, whereby I have deserved his majesty’s displeasure, I am right sorry therefore. And to the intent it may appear to the world how little I do repine at his highness doings, which be in religion most godly, and to the commonwealth most profitable, I do affirm as followeth: 1. That the late king, of most famous memory, king Henry the Eighth, our late sovereign lord, justly, and of good reason and ground, hath taken away and caused to be suppressed and defaced, all monasteries and religious houses, and all conventicles and convents of monks, friars, nuns, canons, bon-hommes, and other persons called religious; and that the same being so dissolved, the persons therein bound and professed to obedience to a person, place, habit, and other superstitious rites and ceremonies, upon that dissolution and order appointed by the king’s majesty’s authority as supreme head of the church, are clearly released and acquitted of those vows and professions, and at their full liberty, as though those unwitty and superstitious vows had never been made. 2. Item, That any person may lawfully marry, without any dispensation from the bishop of Rome, or any other man, with any person whom it is not prohibited to contract matrimony with, by the law Levitical. 3. Item, That the vowing and going on pilgrimage to images, or the bones or relics of any saints, hath been superstitiously used, and cause of much wickedness and idolatry, and therefore justly abolished by the late said king, of famous memory; and the images and relics so abused have been, for great and godly considerations, defaced and destroyed. 4. Item, That the counterfeiting of St. Nicholas, St. Clement, St.
Katharine, and St. Edmund, by children, heretofore brought into the church, was a mere mockery and foolishness, and therefore justly abolished and taken away. 5. Item, It is convenient and godly, that the Scripture of the Old Testament and New, that is, The Whole Bible, be had in English and published, to be read of every man, and that whosoever doth repel and dehort men from reading thereof, doth evil and damnably. 6. Item, That the said late king, of just ground and reason, did receive into his hands the authority and disposition of chantries and such livings as were given for the maintenance of private masses, and did well change divers of them to other uses. 7. Also, the king’s majesty that now is, by the advice and consent of the parliament, did, upon just ground and reason, suppress, abolish, and take away the said chantries, and such other livings as were used and occupied for maintenance of private masses, and masses satisfactory for the souls of them that are dead, or finding of obits, lights, or other like things. The mass that was wont to be said of priests was full of abuses, and had very few things of Christ’s institution, besides the Epistle, Gospel, the Lord’s Prayer, and the words of the Lord’s Supper; the rest, for the more part, were invented and devised by bishops of Rome, and by other men of the same sort, and therefore justly taken away by the statutes and laws of this realm; and the communion which is placed instead thereof is very godly, and agreeable to the Scriptures. 8. Item, That it is most convenient and fit, and according to the first institution, that all christian men should receive the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ in both the kinds, that is, in bread and wine. 9. And the mass, wherein only the priest receiveth, and the others do but look on, is but the invention of man, and the ordinance of the bishop of Rome’s church, not agreeable to Scripture. 10. Item, That upon good and godly considerations it is ordered in the said book and order, that the sacrament should not be lifted up and showed to the people to be adored; but to be with godly devotion received, as it was first instituted. 11. Item, That it is well, politically, and godly done, that the king’s majesty, by act of parliament, hath commanded all images which have stood in churches and chapels, to be clearly abolished and defaced; lest hereafter, at any time, they should give occasion of idolatry, or be abused, as many of them heretofore have been, with pilgrimages, and such idolatrous worshipping. 12. And also that, for like godly and good considerations, by the same authority of parliament, all mass-books, cowchers, grails, and other books of the service in Latin, heretofore used, should be abolished and defaced, as well for certain superstitions in them contained, as also to avoid dissension; and that the said service in the church should be, through the whole realm, in one uniform conformity, and no occasion through those old books to the contrary. 13. That bishops, priests, and deacons, have no commandment of the law of God, either to vow chastity, or to abstain continually from marriage. 14. Item, That all canons, constitutions, laws positive, and ordinances of man, which do prohibit or forbid marriage to any bishop, priest, or deacon, be justly, and upon godly grounds and considerations, taken away and abolished by authority of parliament. 15. The Homilies lately commanded and set forth by the king’s majesty, to be read in the congregations of England, are godly and wholesome, and do teach such doctrine as ought to be embraced of all men. 16. The Book set forth by the king’s majesty, by authority of parliament, containing the form and manner of making and consecrating of archbishops, bishops, priests, and deacons, is godly, and in no point contrary to the wholesome doctrine of the gospel; and therefore ought to be received and approved of all the faithful members of the church of England, and, namely, the ministers of God’s word, and by them commended to the people. 17. That the orders of sub-deacon, Benet and Colet, and such others as were commonly called ‘millores ordines,’ be not necessary by the word of God to be reckoned in the church, and be justly left out in the said Book of Orders. 18. That the holy Scriptures contain sufficiently all doctrine required of necessity for eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ; and that nothing is to be taught as required of necessity to eternal salvation, but that which may be concluded and proved by the holy Scriptures. 19. That upon good and godly considerations it was and is commanded by the king’s majesty’s injunctions, that the Paraphrase of Erasmus in English should be set up in some convenient place in every parish church of this realm, where the parishioners may most commodiously resort to read the same. 20. And because these articles aforesaid, do contain only such matters as be already published and openly set forth by the king’s majesty’s authority, by the advice of his highness’s council, for many great and godly considerations; and amongst others, for the common tranquillity and unity of the realm; his majesty’s pleasure, by the advice aforesaid, is that you is, that you, the bishop of Winchester, shall not only affirm these articles with subscription of your hand, but also declare and profess yourself well contented, willing and ready to publish and preach the same at such times and places, and before such audience, as to his majesty from time to time shall seem convenient and requisite; upon pain of incurring such penalties and punishments as, for not doing the same, may, by his majesty’s laws, be inflicted upon you. * The 95 end of these Articles. ‘At Westminster, the 15th of July, 1550. ‘ Report 36 was made by the Master of the Horse and Master Secretary Peter that they, with the bishop of London and Master Goodrick, had been with the bishop of Winchester, and offered him the foresaid articles according to the council’s order: whereunto the same bishop of Winchester made answer, that first, to the article of submission he would in no wise consent; affirming, as he had done before, that he had never offended the king’s majesty in any such sort as should give him cause thus to submit himself; praying earnestly to be brought to his trial; wherein he refused the king’s mercy, and desired nothing but justice. And for the rest of the articles, he answered, that after he were past his trial in this first point, and were at liberty, then it should appear what he would do in them: it not being (as he said) reasonable, that he should subscribe them in prison.’ ‘Whereupon it was agreed that he should be sent for before the whole council and peremptorily examined once again, whether he would stand at this point or no. Which if he did, then to denounce unto him the sequestration of his benefice and consequently the Intimation, in case he were not reformed within three months; as in the day of his appearance shall appear.’ ‘At Westminster, the 19th July, 1550. ‘This day the council had access unto the king’s majesty for divers causes, but specially for the bishop of Winchester’s matter; who, this day, was therefore appointed to be before the council: and there having declared unto his highness the circumstances of their proceedings with the bishop, his majesty commanded that if he would this day also stand to his wonted obstinacy, the council should then proceed to the immediate sequestration of his bishopric and consequently to the intimation. Upon this the bishop of Winchester was brought before the council, and there the articles before mentioned read unto him distinctly and with good deliberation: whereunto he refused either to subscribe or consent, and thereupon was both the Sequestration and Intimation read unto him, in form following:’ — ‘Whereas the king’s majesty, our most gracious sovereign, lord, hath at divers times set sundry of us to travail with you, to the intent you, acknowledging your bounden duty, should, as a good and obedient subject, have conformed yourself to that uniformity in matters of religion, which is already openly set forth, both by acts of parliament, and otherwise by his majesty’s authority; and hath also of late, by certain of his majesty’s council, sent unto you certain articles, with express commandment that you should affirm them with subscription of your hand, and also declare and profess yourself well contented, willing, and ready, to publish and preach the same to others, at such time and place, and before such audience as to his majesty should, from time to time, beseeme requisite; because you did at that time expressly refuse to do as you were commanded, to the great contempt of his highness’s most dread commandment, and dangerous example of others; we, having special commission from his majesty to hear and determine your manifold contempts and disobediences, do eftsoons ask and demand of you, whether you will obey and do his majesty’s said commandment or not.’ — ‘Whereunto he answered that in all things that his majesty would lawfully command him, he was willing and most ready to obey; but forasmuch as there were divers things required of him that his conscience would not bear, therefore he prayed them to have him excused. — And thereupon master secretary Peter by the council’s order proceeded with these words.’ — * THE WORDS OF THE SEQUESTRATION, WITH THE INTIMATION TO THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER.
Forasmuch as the king’s majesty, our most gracious sovereign lord, under-standeth, and it is also manifestly known and notorious unto us, that the clemency and long sufferance of his majesty, worketh not in you that good effect of humbleness and conformity, that is requisite in a good subject; and for that your first disobediences, contempts, and other misbehaviors, for the which you were by his majesty’s authority justly committed to ward, have, sithens your said committing, daily more and more increased in you, in such sort as a great slander and offense is thereof risen in many parts of the realm, whereby much slander, dissension, trouble and unquietness hath risen, and more is very like to ensue, if your foresaid offences (being, as they be, openly known) should pass unpunished: we let you wit, that having special and express commission and commandment from his majesty, as well for your contumacies and contempts so long continued, and yet daily more increasing, as also for the exchuing of the slander and offense of the people, which by your said ill demeanours are risen; and for that also the church of Winchester may be in the mean time provided of a good minister, that may and will see all things done and quietly executed according to the laws and common orders of this realm; and for sundry other great and urgent causes: we do, by these presents, sequester all the fruits, revenues, lands, and possessions of your bishopric of Winchester; and discern, deem, and judge the same to becommitted to the several receipt, collection, and custody, of such person or persons, as his majesty shall appoint for that purpose. And because your former disobediences and contempts, so long continued, so many times doubled, renewed, and aggravated, do manifestly declare you to be a person without all hope of recovery, and plainly incorrigible; we eftsoons admonish and require you to obey his majesty’s said commandment, and that you do declare yourself, by subscription of your hand, both willing and well contented to accept, allow, preach and teach to others, the said articles, and all such other matters as be or shall be set forth by his majesty’s authority of supreme head of this church of England, on this side and within the term of three months; whereof we appoint one month for the first monition, one month for the second monition and warning, and one month for the third and peremptory monition.
Within which time as you may yet declare your conformity, and shall have paper, pens, and ink, when you will call for them for that purpose; so if you wilfuly forbear and refuse to declare yourself obedient and conformable as is aforesaid, we intimate unto you, that his majesty, who, like a good governor, desireth to keep both his commonwealth quiet, and to purge the same of ill men (especially ministers), intendeth to proceed against you as an incorrigible person, and unmeet minister of this church, to deprivation of your said bishopric. ‘Nevertheless, upon divers good considerations, and specially in hope he might within his time be yet reconciled, it was agreed, that the said bishop’s house and servants should be maintained in their present estate, until the time of this Intimation should expire, and the matter for the mean time to be kept secret.’
After this sequestration, the said bishop was convented unto Lambeth before the archbishop of Canterbury, and other the king’s commissioners, by virtue of the king’s special letters sent unto the said commissioners; to wit, the archbishop of Canterbury, Nicholas bishop of London, Thomas bishop of Ely, Henry bishop of Lincoln, secretary Peter, sir James Hales knight; Dr. Leyson and Dr. Oliver, lawyers, and John Goshold 96 esquire, etc., before them, and by them, to be examined. * But, 97 forasmuch as among other divers and sundry crimes and accusations, deduced against this bishop, the especial and chiefest matter wherewith he was charged, depended upon his sermon made before the king’s majesty, in not satisfying and discharging his duty therein partly in omitting that which he was required to do, partly in speaking of those things, which he was forbid to entreat of — it shall not be out of the order of the story, here to recite the whole tenor and effect of his sermon, as it was penned and exhibited to the commissioners at his examination, with the copy also of the lord protector’s letter, sent unto him before he should preach.
THE TENOR AND COPY OF A LETTER SENT TO THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER, FROM THE DUKE OF SOMERSET AND THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS.
Touching such points as the Bishop of Winchester should entreat of in his Sermon. On the twenty-eighth of June, 1548. To our loving lord the bishop of Winchester.
We commend us unto you: We sent unto you yesterday our servant William Cecil, to signify unto you our pleasure, and advise that you should, in this your next sermon, forbear to entreat upon those principal questions which remain amongst the number of learned men in this realm as yet in controversy, concerning the Sacrament of the Altar and the Mass; as well for that your private argument or determination therein might offend the people, naturally expecting decisions of litigious causes, and thereby discord and tumult arise, the occasions whereof we must necessarily prevent and take away, as also for that the questions and controversies rest at this present in consultation; and, with the pleasure of God, shall be in small time, by public doctrine and authority, quietly and truly determined. This message we send unto you, not thinking but your own wisdom had considered so much in an apparent manner; or, at the least, upon our remembrance, ye would understand it, and follow it with good will: consulting thereby your own quiet in avoiding offense, as observing our pleasure in avoiding contention. Your answer hereunto our said servant hath declared unto us in this manner: ‘Ye can in no wise forbear to speak of the sacrament, neither of the mass;’ this last, being the chief foundation, as you say, of our religion; and that without it, we cannot know that Christ is our sacrifice. The other being so spoken of by many, that if you should not speak your mind thereof, what ye think, you know what other men would think of you. In the end, concluding generally, that ye will speak the truth; and that ye doubt not but we shall be therewith content; adding also, as our said servant reporteth unto us, that you would not wish that we ourselves should meddle, or have to do in these matters of religion; but that the care thereof were committed to the bishops, unto whom the blame, if any should be deserved, might well be imputed. To this your answer:, if it so be, we reply very shortly, signifying unto you our express pleasure and commandment, on our sovereign lord the king’s majesty’s behalf, charging you, by the authority of the same, to abstain in your said sermon from treating of any matter in controversy concerning the said sacrament and the mass; and only to bestow your speech in the expert explication of the articles prescribed unto you, and in other wholesome matters of obedience of the people, and good conversation in living; the same matter being both large enough for a long sermon, and not unnecessary for the time: and the treating of the other, which we forbid you, not meet in your private sermon to be had, but necessarily reserved for a public consultation, and at this present utterly to be forborne for the common quiet. This is our express pleasure, wherein we know how reasonably we may command you, and you, we think, know how willingly ye ought to obey us.
For our intermeddling with these causes of religion, understand you, that we account it no small part of our charge, under the king’s majesty, to bring his people from ignorance to knowledge, and from superstition to true religion; esteeming that the chiefest foundation to build obedience upon; and, where there is a full consent of other the bishops and learned men in a truth, not to suffer you, or a few other wilful heads, to disorder all the rest. And although we presume not to determine articles of religion by ourself, yet from God we knowledge it, we be desirous to defend and advance the truth determined or revealed. And so consequently we will not fail but withstand the disturbers thereof. So fare you well.
From Sion, the 28th of June, anno 1548.
Your loving friend, Edward Somerset.
Here followeth the sum and effect of the sermon which Gardiner bishop of Winchester preached before the king’s majesty, collected by Master Udall, and exhibited up to the commissioners in the time of the examination of the said bishop.
THE SERMON OF STEPHEN GARDINER, BISHOP OF WINCHESTER, PREACHED BEFORE THE KING. Most honorable audience! I purpose, by the grace of God, to declare some part of the gospel that is accustomably used to be read in the church as this day. And for because that without the special grace of God, neither I can speak any thing to your edifying, nor ye receive the same accordingly, I shall desire you all, that we may jointly pray altogether for the assistance of his grace; in which prayer I commend to Almighty God, your most excellent majesty our sovereign lord, king of England, France and Ireland, and of the church of England and Ireland, next and immediately under God, here on earth the supreme head; queen Katherine dowager; my lady Mary’s grace, my lady Elizabeth’s grace, your majesty’s most dear sisters; my lord protector’s grace, with all others of your most honorable council; the spiritualty and temporalty. And I shall desire you to commend unto God with your prayer, the souls departed unto God in Christ’s faith; and among these most specially, for our late sovereign lord king Henry the Eighth, your majesty’s most noble father. For these, and for grace necessary, I shall desire you to say a Pater-noster [and so forth].
The gospel beginneth, ‘Cum venisset Jesus in partes Caesareae Philippi,’ etc. When Jesus was come into the parts of Cesarea, a city that Philippus builder, he asked his disciples and said: Whom do men say that the Son of man is? They said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist; some that thou art Elias; some that thou art Jeremy, or one of the prophets. He said to them: But whom say ye that I am? Then answered Simon Peter and said, Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God, etc.’
I cannot have time, I think, to speak of the gospel thoroughly, for other matters that I have here now to say; but I shall note unto you such things as I may. And first, of the diversity of opinions concerning Christ, which were among the people variable, but among his (that is, the disciples of Christ’s school) there was no variety. They agreed altogether in one truth, and among them was no variety. For when Peter had, for all the rest, and in the name of all the rest, made his answer, that Christ was the Son of God, they all, with one consent, confessed that he had spoken the truth. Yet these opinions of Christ that the people had of him, though they were sundry, yet were they honorable, and not slanderous; for to say that Christ was Elias, and John the Baptist, was honorable: for some thought him so to be, because he did frankly, sharply, and openly, rebuke vice. They that called him Jeremy, had an honorable opinion of him, and thought him so to be, because of his great learning which they perceived in him; and marvelled where he had it. And they that said he was one of the prophets, had an honorable opinion of him, and favored him, and thought well of him. But there was another sort of people that spake evil of him, and slandered him and railed on him, saying that he was a glutton, and a drinker of wine; that he had a devil in him; that he was a deceiver of the people; that he was a carpenter’s son (as though he were the worse for his father’s craft). But of these he asked not any question; for among these, none agreed with the other. Wherein ye shall note, that man of his own power and strength can nothing do.
For nothing that good is, he can do of his own invention or device, but erreth and faileth, when he is left to his own invention. He erreth in his imagination. So proud is man, and so stout of his own courage, that he deviseth nothing well, whensoever he is left to himself without God. And then, never do any such agree in any truth, but wander and err in all that they do: as men of law, if they be asked their opinion in any point touching the law, ye shall not have two of them agree in opinion in any point touching the law; ye shall not have two of them agree in opinion one with the other.
If there be two or three of them asked their opinion in any matter, if they should answer all one thing, they fear lest they should be supposed and thought to have no learning. Therefore, be they never so many of them, they will not agree in their answers, but devise each man a sundry answer in any thing that they are asked. The philosophers that were not of Christ’s school, erred every one in their vain opinions, and no one of them agreeth with the other. Yea, men of simplicity, though they mean well, yet being out of Christ’s school, they agree not, but vary in their opinions; as these simple people here spoken of, because they were not perfect disciples of Christ’s school, they varied, and agreed not in their opinion of Christ, though they thought well of him.
Some said he was John, some Elias, some Jeremy, but none made the right answer. He that answered here, was Simon the son of Jonas; and he said, ‘Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.’
Where ye shall note the properties that were in Peter, he was called Simon, which is obedience, and Jonas is a dove; so that in him that is of Christ’s school, must be these two properties, obedience and simplicity. He must be humble and innocent as a dove, that will be of Christ’s school. Pride is a let of Christ’s school; for, as the wise man sayeth, ‘God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace unto the humble and meek.’ And according to the same doth Christ in the gospel say: ‘O Father! I confess unto thee (that is: I laud and magnify thee), for that thou hast hidden these things from the wise, and hast opened them unto the little ones. Whereupon sayeth St.
Augustine, that the gifts of learning, and knowledge of sciences, are no let to Christ’s school, but a furtherance thereunto, if they be well applied, and used as they ought to be. But he that is proud, and feedeth himself with his own conceit and opinion of himself, and abuseth the gifts of God, applying his learning and knowledge to the satisfying and following of his own fantasy, is no right disciple of Christ, but falleth into error. ‘Dicentes se sapientes esse, stulti facti sunt:’ ‘When they said and affirmed themselves to be wise, they were made fools.’ The philosophers had every one a sect of his own, and had many gay sentences for the commendations of their opinions; and every man thought his own opinion to be best. But because they applied all to their own pride and glory, and not to the honor of God, nor humbled themselves as they ought to have done, but followed their own fancy, they erred and fell out of the way, and were not of Christ’s school. And all that have gone out of Christ’s school, pride hath brought them out of it; and such as have not entered, have kept themselves out of it with pride likewise. Therefore all such as will be scholars of Christ’s school and discipline, must be humble and meek: otherwise, ‘dicentes se sapientes esse, stulti facti sunt.’ He that cannot learn this lesson of Peter, and humbly confess with Peter, that Christ is the Son of the living God, is no scholar of Christ’s school, be he otherwise never so well learned, never so well seen in other sciences.
But now concerning the answer of Peter: Matthew here in this place saith, — he answered, ‘Tu es Christus filius Dei vivi:’ St.
Luke saith, he answered, ‘Tu es Christus Dei:’ and St. Mark saith, he answered, ‘Tu es Christus.’ — But, in all that, is no variety; for to say ‘Christus filius Dei vivi,’ and to say, ‘Christus Dei,’ and to say, ‘Christus,’ is, in effect, all one, and no diversity in it. For Christus alone is the whole, and he that confesseth thoroughly Christ, is thoroughly a christian man, and doth then therein confess him to be the Lord and Savior of the world.
But now we must consider what Christ is. Christ was 100 * sent to be our mes-sias, our savior, hee was sent to be our byshop and also our sacri*fice. He was sent from the Trinity, to be our Mediator between God and us, and to reconcile us to the favor of God the Father. He was the bishop that offered for our sins, and the sacrifice that was offered. And as he is our bishop, so is he our mean to pacify God for us, for that was the office of a bishop, ‘to sacrifice for the sins of the people, and to make intercession for the people.’ And as he was our sacrifice, so was he our reconciliation to God again. But we ‘must confess and believe him thoroughly, I say, for as he was our bishop then, so is it he that still keepeth us in favor with God. And like as his sacrifice then made, was sufficient for us, to deliver us from our sins, and to bring us in favor with God, so, to continue us in the same favor of God, he ordained a perpetual remembrance of himself. He ordained himself, for a memory of himself, at his Last Supper, when he instituted the sacrament of the altar. Not for another redemption, as though the first had not been sufficient, nor as though the world needed a new redemption from sin; but that we might thoroughly remember his passion, he instituted this sacrament by his most holy word; saying, — ‘This is my body:’ which word is sufficient to prove the sacrament, and maketh sufficiently for the substance thereof. And this daily sacrifice he instituted to be continued amongst christian men, not for need of another redemption or satisfaction for the sins of the world (for that was sufficiently performed by his sacrifice of his body and blood, done upon the cross), neither that he be now our bishop, for need of any further sacrifice to be made for sin; but to continue us in the remembrance of his passion suffered for us; to make us strong in believing the fruit of his passion; to make us diligent in thanksgiving, for the benefit of his passion; to establish our faith, and to make it strong in acknowledging the efficacy of his death and passion, suffered for us. And this is the true understanding of the Mass: not for another redemption, but that we may be strong in believing the benefit of Christ’s death and bloodshedding for us upon the cross.
And this it is that we must believe of Christ, and believe it thoroughly: and therefore, by your patience, as Peter made his confession, so will I make confession. Wherein, by your majesty’s leave and sufferance, I will plainly declare what I think of the state of the church of England at this day; how I like it, and what I think of it. Where I said of the mass, that it was a sacrifice ordained to make us the more strong in the faith and remembrance of Christ’s passion, and for commending unto God the souls of such as be dead in Christ, 101 (for these two things are the special causes, why the Mass was instituted), the parliament very well ordained mass to be kept; and because we should be the more strong in the faith and devotion towards God, it was well done of the parliament, for moving the people more and more with devotion, to ordain that this sacrament should be received in both kinds. Therefore I say, that the act of parliament for receiving of the sacrament of the altar in both kinds, was well made. I said, also, that the proclamation which was made, that no man should unreverently speak of the sacrament, or otherwise speak of it than Scripture teacbeth them, was well made: for this proclamation stoppeth the mouths of all such as will unreverently speak of the sacrament. For in Scripture is there nothing to be found that maketh any thing against the sacrament, but all maketh with it. Wherefore if they were the children of obedience, they would not use any unreverent talk against the sacrament, nor blaspheme the holy sacrament; for no word of the Scripture maketh any thing against it.
But here it may be said unto me, ‘Why, sir, is this your opinion? It is good: you speak plainly in this matter, and halt nothing, but declare your mind plainly without any coloring or covert speaking. — The act for the dissolving and suppressing of the chantries seemeth to make against the mass, how like you that act? What say you of it? or what would you say of it, if you were alone? I will speak what I think of it. I will use no colorable or covert words. I will not use a devised speech for a time, and afterward go from it again. — If chantries were abused by applying the mass, for the satisfaction of sin, or to bring men to heaven, or to take away sin, or to make men, of wicked, just, I like the act well; and they might well be dissolved: for the mass was not instituted for any such purpose. Yet, nevertheless, for them that were in them (I speak now as in the cause of the poor), it were well done that they were provided of livings. The act doth graciously provide for them, during their lives, and I doubt not but that your majesty and the lords of your most honorable council have willed and taken order, that they should be well looked unto. But yet how shall they be used at the hands of under-officers? God knoweth, full hardly, I fear. But as for the chantries themselves, if there were any such abuse in them concerning the mass, it is no matter if they be taken away. King Henry the Eighth, a noble and wise prince, not without a great pain, maintained the mass; and yet in his doctrine it was confessed, that masses of ‘Scala coeli,’ were not to be used nor allowed, because they did pervert the right use and institution of the mass. For when men add unto the mass an opinion of satisfaction, or of a new redemption, then do they put it to another use than it was ordained for. I, that allow mass so well, and I, that allow praying for the dead (as indeed the dead are of christian charity to be prayed for), yet can agree with the realm in that matter of putting down chantries. But yet ye would say unto me, ‘There be fewer masses by putting away the chantries.’ So were there when abbeys were dissolved: so be there when ye unite many churches in one. But this is no injury nor prejudice to the mass. It consisteth not in the number, nor in the multitude, but in the thing itself; so that the decay of the masses by taking away of the chantries, is answered by the abbeys: but yet I would have it considered for the persons that are in them, I speak of the poor men’s livings.
I have now declared what I think of the act of parliament, made for the receiving of the sacrament of the body and blood of our Savior Jesus Christ in both kinds. Ye have my mind and opinion, concerning the proclamation that came forth for the same act; and I have showed my mind therein, even plainly as I think. And I have ever been agreeable to this precinct. I have oftentimes reasoned in it. I have spoken and also written in it, both beyond the seas, and on this side the seas. My books be abroad, which I cannot unwrite again. I was ever of this opinion, that it might be received in both kinds: and it was a constitution provincial scarce two hundred years ago, made by Peckham, the archbishop of Canterbury, that it should be received in both kinds; at leastwise, ‘in ecclesiis majoribus,’ that is, in the greater churches; for in the smaller churches it was not thought to be so expedient. Thus have I ever thought of this matter. I have never been of other mind, nor I have not changed my conscience; but I have obeyed and followed the order of the realm: and I prayed you to obey orders as I have obeyed, that we may all be the children of obedience.
Now I will return to the text. When Simon had answered, ‘Tu es Christus, filius Dei vivi,’ ‘Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God,’ then Christ said unto him: ‘Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona; for flesh and blood hath not opened that unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say unto thee, that thou art Peter; and upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.’ ‘Blessed, art thou,’ said he, ‘for flesh and blood hath not opened that unto thee. For otherwise, in Luke, Andrew told of Christ and said: ‘I have found the Messias, which is Christ.’
But that is not enough. He that shall confess Christ, must have an inward teaching, and must be spiritually taught by the Father of heaven; for Andrew’s confession were nothing but a carnal confession, and such a one as any other might have made, by natural reason. But the confession of Peter was above the reason of man; for Christ was there a very man, and Peter’s eyes told him, that he was a man and nothing else. But he was inwardly taught by the Father of heaven, and had a secret knowledge given him from heaven, not by flesh and blood (that is to say, by man’s reason), but inwardly, by the Father of heaven. And seeing this was above reason, it is a marvellous thing, that reason should be used to impugn faith. It is a precinct of carnal men, and such as use gross reason. But Peter had another lesson inwardly taught him; and, because he conned his lesson, Christ gave him a new name, — for ‘Petros’ is a stone, a new name of a christian man: ‘For upon this confession of thy faith here, I will build my church;’ that is: ‘I will stablish all those which I intend to gather unto thee;’ ‘et demones non prevalebunt adversus earn;’ that is: ‘and the devils shall not prevail against it.’ For he that with a good heart and sure faith confesseth this, he is sure from all peril: this world nor Satan can do him no harm.
But now for a farther declaration. It is a marvellous thing, that upon these words the bishop of Rome should found his supremacy; for whether it be ‘super petram’ or ‘Petrum,’ all is one matter. It maketh nothing at all for our purpose to make a foundation of any such supremacy. For otherwise, when Peter spake carnally to Christ (as in the same chapter a little following), Satan was his name: where Christ said, ‘Go after me, Satan.’ So that the name of Peter is no foundation for the supremacy; but, as it is said in Scripture, ‘Fundati estis super fundamentum apostolorum et prophetarum;’ that is, by participation (for godly participation giveth names of things), he might be called ‘the head of the church’ as the head of the river is called the head; because he was the first that made this confession of Christ: which is not an argument for dignity, but for the quality, that was in the man — for the first man is not evermore the best. The head man of a quest is not always the best man in the quest; but is chosen to be the head man for some other quality that is in him. Virtue may allure many, so that the inferior person in dignity may be the better in place; as the king sometimes chooseth a mean man to be of his council, of whom he hath a good opinion; yet is the king the king still. And in some case the king of England might send to Rome; and, if the bishop of Rome were a man of such wisdom, virtue, and learning, that he were abler in matters of controversy concerning religion, to set a unity in the church of England, the king might well enough send unto him for his counsel and help; and yet should not in so doing give the bishop of Rome any superiority over the king. For if a king be sick, he will have the best physician; if he hath war, he will have the best captain; and yet are not those the superiors, but the inferiors. A schoolmaster is a subject, a physician is a subject, a captain is a subject, councillors are subjects; yet do these order and direct the king. Wherefore, leaving the bishop of Rome, this I say, to declare of what opinion I am. I do not now speak what I could say. I have spoken beyond the seas; I have written; my books be abroad; but this is not the place here. I say that this place maketh nothing for the bishop of Rome, but for Christ only; for none can put ‘aliud fundamentum nisi id quod positum est, qui est Christus Jesus.’
But now to go forth declaring my mind; in my time hath come many alterations. First a great alteration it wast to renounce the bishop of Rome’s authority; and I was one that stood in it. A great alteration it was that abbeys were dissolved. A great alteration it was that images were pulled down. And to all these did I condescend, and yet I have been counted a maintainer of superstition; and I have been called a master of ceremonies and of outward things; and I have been noted to take that religion which consisteth in outward things, as though he were a right Christian that fulfilled the outward ceremonies.
I promised to declare my conscience, and so will I; and how I have esteemed ceremonies; and that I have never been of other opinion than I am, concerning ceremonies. ‘And mine opinion I have gathered of Augustine and Jerome, ancient fathers and doctors of the church. Ceremonies serve to move men to serve God; and as long as they be used for that purpose, they may be well used in the church. But when man maketh himself servant to them, and not them to serve him, then be our ceremonies brought to an abuse. If by overmuch familiarity of them, men abuse them, they do evil: for we must not serve creatures, but God. We had monkery, nunnery, friary, of a wondrous number; much variety of garments, variety of devices in dwelling, many sundry orders and fashions in moving of the body. These things were first ordained to admonish them to their duty to God, to labor for the necessity of the poor, to spare from their own bellies to the poor; and therefore was their fare ordained and prepared. And because they abused these things, and set them in a higher place than they ought to do (not taking monition thereby, the better to serve God, but esteeming perfection to consist in them), they were dissolved; their houses and garments were taken away. But one thing king Henry would not take away; that was, the vow of chastity. The vow of obedience, he converted to himself: the vow of chastity he willed still to remain with them.
We had many images whereto pilgrimages were done, and many tombs that men used to visit; by reason whereof they fell in a fancy of idolatry and superstition, above the things that the image might have been taken for; and because it had not the use that it was ordained for, it was left. When men put the images in a higher place than they served for, then were they taken clean away. As give a child a gay book to learn upon, and then if he gaze upon the gorgeousness of his book, and learn not his lesson according to the intent that the book was given him for, the book is taken away from him again. So the images, when men devised and fell to have them in higher place and estimation than they were first set up in the church for, then they might be taken away. And I was never of other mind, nor ever had other opinion of it.
Divers things there be in the church, which be in the liberty of the ruler, to order as he seeth cause; and he that is ruler, may either let it stand, or else may cause it to be taken away. There be two manner of reformations we have had, of both sorts. There be things in the church, the which if they be abused, may not be taken away; as for baptism, if it be abused, there may not another thing be put in the place of it, but the thing must be reformed and brought to the right use again. Also preaching, if it be abused, may not be taken away, but must be reformed and brought to the right use. But there be other things used in the church, in which the rulers have liberty either to reform them, or to take them away. We have had many images, which be now all taken away, for it was in the liberty of the rulers, for the abuse of them; either to reform them or to take them away: and because it was an easier way to take them away than to bring them to the right use that they were ordained for, they were all clean taken away; and so they might be. — ‘Yea, sir,’ will ye say, ‘but ye have maintained and defended them; and have preached against such persons as despised them.’ It is truth: I have preached against the despisers of them, and have said, that images might be suffered and used in the church, as laymen’s books. Yet I never otherwise defended them, but to be used for such purpose as they were first set up in the church for. But now that men be waxed wanton, they are clean taken away; wherein our religion is no more touched than when books were taken away for abusing of them. There was an order taken for books not to be used, wherein some might have said, ‘The books are good, and I know how to use them: I may therefore use them well enough. I will therefore use them, though they be forbidden.’ But if thou have any charity, thou oughtest to be contented rather to have them all taken away, than to declare thyself of another opinion than thou oughtest to have.
As touching ceremonies, I esteem them all as Paul esteemeth them — things indifferent; where he saith, ‘Regnum Dei non est esca et potus.’ So of ceremonies. Nevertheless, we have time, place, and number: as a certain number of psalms to be said at times, which may be used without superstition. But these things must serve us, and not we serve them. Yet if an order be set in them by such as have power, we must follow it; and we must obey the rulers that appoint such time, place, and number to be kept. Ye may not say, ‘ If the time will not serve me, then I will come an hour after.’ No, sir, ye must keep this time and this hour; because it is so appointed by the rulers: not for the things, but for the order that is set. I have been ever of this opinion. We had palms and candles taken away; which things may indifferently have either of the two reformations above said. When they were in places, they should have put men in remembrance of their duty and devotion towards God: but, because they were abused, they were and might be taken away. But the religion of Christ is not in these exercises; and therefore in taking away of them, the religion of Christ is nothing touched nor hindered; but men must in such things be conformable, not for the ceremony, but for obedience’ sake. St. Paul saith, that we should rebuke every brother that walketh inordinately. I have told you my opinion (and my conscience telleth me that I have spoken plainly), that ye may know what I am; and that ye may not be deceived in me, nor be slandered in me, nor make any further search to know my heart. I like well the communion, because it provoketh men more and more to devotion. I like well the proclamation, because it stoppeth the mouths of all such as unreverently speak or rail against the sacrament. I like well the rest of the king’s majesty’s proceedings concerning the sacrament.
I have now told you what I like; but shall I speak nothing of that I mislike? ye will then say, I speak not plainly. I will therefore show my conscience plainly. I mislike that preachers which preach by the king’s license, and those readers which, by the king’s permission and sufferance, do read open lectures, do openly and blasphemously talk against the Mass, and against the Sacrament.
And to whom may I liken such readers and preachers? I may liken them unto posts; for the proverb says, that posts ‘do bear truth in their letters, and lies in their mouths.’ And so do they. And to speak so against the sacrament, it is the most marvellous matter that ever I saw or heard of. I would wish, therefore, that there were a stay and an order in this behalf; and that there might be but one order or ruler: for as the poet saith (I may use the verse of a poet well enough, for so cloth Paul of the great poet), Oujc ajgaqo Well, what misliketh me else? It misliketh me that priests and men that vowed chastity, should openly marry and avow it openly; which is a thing that since the beginning of the church hath not been seen in any time, that men that have been admitted to any ecclesiastical administration, should marry. We read of married priests, that is to say, of married men chosen to be priests and ministers in the church; and in Epiphanius we read, that some such, for necessity, were winked at. But, that men being priests already, should marry, was never yet seen in Christ’s church from the beginning of the apostles’ time. I have written in it, and studied for it, and the very same places that are therein alleged to maintain the marriage of priests, being diligently read, shall plainly confound them, that maintain to marry your priests — or at the furthest, within two lines after.
Thus have I showed my opinion in orders proceeding from the inferiors, and in orders proceeding from the higher powers; and thus I have, as I trust, plainly declared myself, without any covering or counterfeiting. And I beseech your most excellent majesty to esteem and take me as I am; and not to be slandered in me; for I have told you the plain truth as it is, and I have opened my conscience unto you. I have not played the post with you, to carry truth in my letters, and lies in my mouth; for I would not for all the world make a lie in this place: but I have disclosed the plain truth as it lieth in my mind. And thus I commit your most excellent majesty, and all your most honorable councillors, with the rest of the devout audience here present, unto God. To whom be all honor, laud, and glory, world without end!
Thus, having comprised the sum and chief purpose of his sermon, with such other matters above written, as appertain to the better opening and understanding of the corrupt and blind ignorance of this bishop, with his dissembling and double-face doings in matters of religion, now it remaineth that we should proceed to the process of his examinations, before the king’s commissioners, with the full handling of his cause in such order and process as things were done from time to time, as here following is to be seen. THE FIRST SESSION.
THE FIRST SESSION OR ACTION AGAINST GARDINER BISHOP OF WINCHESTER Was holden in the Great Hall of the Manor of Lambeth, by the King’s Majesty’s Commissioners; that is to say, Thomas archbishop of Canterbury, Nicholas bishop of London, Thomas bishop of Ely, Henry bishop of Lincoln, sir William Peter, one of the king’s secretaries, sir James Hales knight; Griffin Leyson, John Oliver, doctors of law; Thomas Gosnold esquire; Thomas Argall and William Say, notaries and actuaries in that matter assigned, the 15th of December 38 , A.D. 1550: at which day and place, Master John Lewis, on the behalf of the King’s Majesty, presented certain letters of commission under the great seal of England, the tenor whereof ensueth.
Edward the Sixth, by the grace of God king of England, France, and Ireland; defender of the faith, and of the church of England and Ireland in earth the supreme head: To the most reverend father in God our right trusty and right well-beloved councillor Thomas archbishop of Canterbury, the right reverend fathers in God our right trusty and right well-beloved councillors Nicholas bishop of London, Thomas bishop of Ely, and Henry bishop of Lincoln; our trusty and right well-beloved councillors, sir William Peter knight, one of our two principal secretaries, sir James Hales knight, one of our justices of Common Pleas; Griffith Leyson, John Oliver, doctors of the law; Richard Goodrick and John Gosnold esquires, greeting.
Whereas Stephen, bishop of Winchester, showing himself not conformable to our godly proceedings touching the reformations of sundry abuses in religion within this our realm — and for that amongst the multitude of our subjects not yet well persuaded therein, his examples, sayings, preachings, and doings, are very much hurt to the quiet furtherance, and humble receipt, of our said reformations and proceedings — was, for these and other great and urgent considerations, by our council, with our express consent and assent, willed, required, and commanded in our name, to preach and set forth there, in open sermon before us, sundry matters before that time justly ordered and reformed as well by our father of most noble memory, as by authority of parliament, and otherwise, by the advice of sundry learned men of our clergy; and whereas the said Stephen, bishop of Winchester, was at the same time, for the avoiding of occasion of our subjects, by our said council on our behalf straightly charged and commanded not to speak of certain other matters unfit in respect of the time to be then spoken of, who, forgetting his bounden duty of allegiance to us, did nevertheless openly, in our own hearing, and in the presence of our council, and a great number of our subjects, disobey the said commandments given to him, to the danger and evil example of all others, and great contempt of us, our crown, and dignity royal: for the which contempt, the same being notorious, the said bishop was then, by our authority, committed to our Tower of London, where, notwithstanding sundry sendings unto him, he hath ever since continued in this form of disobedience, and utterly and expressly refused to acknowledge the same, and besides that, by other ways and means increased in continuance and disobedience; for the which, after many occasions, and clemency minis-tered unto him, perceiving no hope of reconciling or conformity, we have further proceeded to the sequestration of the fruits and possessions of his bishopric; and given, eftsoons, straight commandment to obey and conform himself within the space of three months, upon pain of deprivation of the said bishopric, as by the record of our council, amongst other things, fully appeareth:
Forasmuch as the said bishop — these our advertisements, monitions, and other the premises notwithstanding — doth yet still remain (as we be informed) in his former disobedience, and thereby declareth himself to be a person incorrigible, without any hope of recovery, we let you wit, that like as hitherto, by the space of these two years or more, we have suffered, and forborne to reform his offences with just punishment, upon hope of amendment, using and causing to be used (of our princely clemency, and certain knowledge) only such decrees and lenity in proceeding, as is aforesaid: so, seeing now and well perceiving by experience, that our long sufferance and great clemency hath been and is of him totally abused, and he thereby not only grown to a more wilfulness, but others also, by his example, much animated to follow like disobedience, we can no longer suffer his aforesaid misdemeanors and contempts to pass or remain unreformed: and therefore let you wit, that, knowing your gravity’s learning, approved wisdoms, and circumspections, we, of our mere motion, certain knowledge, and by the advice of our council, have appointed, and by these presents do name and appoint, nine, eight, seven, six, five, or four of you (whereof you the archbishop of Canterbury, the bishop of London, the bishop of Ely, the bishop of Lincoln, sir William Peter, sir James Hales, or one of you, to be always one) to be our commissioners, substitutes, and delegates special; giving you nine, eight, seven, six, five, or four of you (whereof you the archbishop of Canterbury, the bishop of London, the bishop of Ely, the bishop of Lincoln, sir William Peter, sir James Hales, or one of you, to be always one), ample commission, and full power, jurisdiction, and authority, not only to call before you at such days, times, and places, as often as to you it shall be thought convenient, the said bishop of Winchester, and all others, whatsoever they be, whom ye shall think good or necessary to be called for the examination, trial, proof, and full determination of this matter or any part thereof; but also to require all and every such process, writings, and escripts, as have passed and been done in this matter as is aforesaid, to be brought in and exhibited before you. And finding the said bishop either to continue in his former contempt, or that he hath not conformed him according to our pleasure and the monitions given by our council by commission from us; or if he, being called before you, shall, eftsoons, refuse to conform himself, according to our said commandments and monitions, our pleasure is, that you shall proceed against him to deprivation of his bishopric, and removing of him from the same, and further do, and cause to be done in the premises and in all matters and causes annexed, incident or depending upon the same or any part thereof, all and every such thing or things as to our laws either ecclesiastical or temporal, statutes, ordinances, equity, and reason, shall appertain, and to your good wisdoms may seem just and reasonable; causing that that shall be decreed, judged, and determined by you or four of you, as is aforesaid, to be inviolably and firmly observed: in the examinations, process, and final determinations of which matter our pleasure is that ye shall proceed ‘ex officio mero, mixto, vel promoto, omni appellatione remota summarie et de plano, absque omni strepitu et figura judicii, ac sola veritate inspecta:’ willing that that which, by any four of you, is or shall be begun, shall and may from time to time be continued and ended, by any the same, or any other four or more of you; so as you the archbishop of Canterbury, the bishop of London, the bishop of Ely, the bishop of Lincoln, sir William Peter, or sir James Hales, or one of you, be one. And such persons as you shall send for, or command to appear before you concerning this matter, if they appear not, or, appearing, do not obey the precepts, we give you full and ample authority to punish them and compel them, by such ways and means as to you or four of you, as is aforesaid, shall seem convenient; commanding and straightly charging all and singular mayors, sheriffs, bailiffs, and other our ministers and subjects whatsoever, to be aiding and assisting unto you in the doings of the premises. In witness whereof, to this our present commission, signed with our hand, we have cruised our great seal of England to be annexed and put unto.
Given at our palace at Westminster the 12th day of December, and the fourth year of our reign. Edward Somerset, William Paget, William Wiltshire, Thomas Cheney, John Warwick, Anthony Wingfield, John Bedford, Thomas Darcy, William North, William Harbert, Henry Dorset, William Tirrell, Edward Clinton, Edward North.
Thomas Wentworth, This commission being openly read, the archbishop with the rest of the said commissioners (for the honor and reverence due to the king’s majesty) took the charge and burden of the said commission upon them; and decreed to proceed according to the form and effect thereof. And thereupon his grace, by consent of the rest, then and there assigned William Say and Thomas Argall, jointly and severally, to be registrars and actuaries of that cause, and assigned Master David Clapham and Master John Lewis, proctors of the Arches, jointly and severally to be necessary promoters of their office in that behalf. Which done, the said promoters assiged, taking upon them the said office, and promoting the office of the said commissioners, ministered unto him certain positions and articles. Whereupon they required the bishop of Winchester, then and there personally present, to be sworn faithfully and truly to make answer; and therewith the said bishop of Winchester requiring and obtaining leave to speak, declared in manner following: ‘That forasmuch as he perceived himself to be called to answer to justice, he did most humbly thank the king’s majesty, that it had pleased his grace to be his good and gracious lord therein, and most humbly did acknowledge his majesty to be his natural sovereign lord; and that he had [obeyed], and always would obey, his majesty’s authority and jurisdiction, and be subject thereunto. And that forasmuch as his grace had been pleased to grant him to use his lawful remedy and defense in this behalf, therefore he, there and then, openly protested, that by any thing then spoken, or to be thenceforth spoken, or then done or to be done, or by his then personal appearance, he intended not to consent unto the said judges, nor to admit their jurisdiction any otherwise, nor further, than by the law he was bound to do; nor to renounce any privilege which he might or ought in this behalf to use. but to use the same to his most advantage, and all other lawful defense meet and convenient to and for him, as well by way of recusation of the same judges, or excepting against their commission, as otherwise: which his said protestation he willed and required to be inserted in these acts, and in all other acts thenceforth to be sped and done in this matter.’
And under the same his protestation he required a copy, as well of the said commission, as also of these Acts; which copies the judges did decree unto him. And this done, the archbishop, by consent of the rest, then and there did onerate the said bishop of Winchester with a corporal oath, upon the holy evangelists by him touched and kissed, to make a true and faithful answer to the said positions and articles, and every part of them, in writing, by the Thursday next following, between the hours of nine and ten before noon, in that place; and delivered a copy of the said positions and articles, willing the lieutenant of the Tower to let him have papers, pen, and ink, to make and conceive his said answers, and other his protestations and lawful defenses in that behalf; the same bishop, under his form of protestation giving the same oath, as far as the law did bind him, and requiring to have counsel appointed him; which the archbishop, and the rest of the commissioners, did decree unto him, such as he should name.
This done, the said promoters produced sir Anthony Wingfield comptroller of the king’s majesty’s honorable household, sir William Cecil secretary, sir Ralph Sadler, sir Edward North, Dr. Coxe, almoner, sir Thomas North, sir George Blage, sir Thomas Smith, sir Thomas Challoner, sir John Cheke, Master Dr. Ayre, Master Dr. Robert Record, Master Nicholas Udall, and Thomas Watson, witnesses upon the articles by them ministered as before. Which witnesses, and every one of them, the archbishop, with the consent of his colleagues aforesaid, did admit, and with a corporal oath in form of law did onerate, to say and depose the whole and plain truth that they knew, in and upon the contents of ‘the said articles; and monished them and every one of them, to come to be examined accordingly: the said bishop of Winchester, under his said former protestation, dissenting to the said production, admission, and swearing; and protesting to say, as well against the persons of the said witnesses, as their sayings, so far as the same did or should make against them; and asking a time to minister interrogatories against them: to whom it was assigned to minister the said interrogatories by the Thursday immediately following.
As touching the depositions of the witnesses above named, ye shall have them, with all other attestations of the witnesses, as well of nobility as of others produced and examined in this matter (both against the said bishop, and with him), in the twentieth Act of this ‘process, where publication of the most part of them was required and granted. After this, the archbishop, with the consent of his colleagues aforesaid, at the petition of the said promoters, continued the cause, in the state it was, unto the Thursday following, between the hours of nine and ten in the forenoon in that place.
THE SECOND SESSION.
THE SECOND SESSION OR ACT AGAINST GARDINER BISHOP OF WINCHESTER, WAS HELD AT LAMBETH, ON THURSDAY THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER.
The said 18th day of December, in the fore-named place, between the hours as above prefixed, before the archbishop of Canterbury and the rest of the commissioners, assembled as they were the last session, in the presence of William Say and Thomas Argall actuaries, there was there presented to them a ‘letter sent to them from the Privy Council, the tenor whereof is this: ‘After our right hearty commendation unto your good lordships: It is come to our knowledge by report of [persons of] good credit which were present at Lambeth at your last session in the bishop of Winchester’s cause, that the said bishop did earnestly affirm in open court before your lordships, and in the hearing of a great multitude of people, that we had made a full end with him at the Tower, for all the matters for which he was then committed, in such sort as he verily thought never to have heard any more thereof: which report seemed to us very strange, and so much toucheth the honor of the king’s majesty, to have him called to justice now for a matter determined, and our fidelities to his majesty, to have ended the same cause without commission; that although the said bishop seem to defend his cause with untruths, yet can we not suffer him to seek his credit by his overbold affirmation, amongst a multitude of so false and untrue matters; and, therefore, we have thought it necessary, upon our fidelities and honors [to declare], that his said tale of our ending the matter with him, is false and untrue: for neither did we make any end of his matter, neither had we any commission from the king’s majesty so to do; but only to hear and confer with him for his obedience, and thereof to make report. And whereas he saith our end was such, that he thought never to have heard thereof again, if he meant to remember truths, as in this behalf he hath devised untruths, he then can tell what we said to him, requiring more liberty, that we had no commission to grant him that, or to take any order with him, but only to commune with him.
We be sorry to see him make so evil a beginning at the first day, as to lay the first foundation of his defense, upon so false and manifest an untruth; and would wish his audacity and unshamefacedness were used in allegation of truths; for this way, as the proverb saith, ‘it doth but feed the winds.’ Forgetfulness is oftentimes borne with as a man’s excusation, but impudent avowal of falseness, was never tolerable. Wherefore, besides that we would admonish him hereof, because his false report was openly made, and arrogantly against the truth told him maintained, we pray you to cause this our declaration to be manifested in like manner; that the truth may appear, and thereby the said bishop may be taught to forbear further false allegations: and, at the least, if he will help his cause no otherwise, yet to consider whom he shall touch with his untruth. For although the king’s majesty is well pleased he shall there before you, use his defense, and have good justice, yet must he think it is not granted him to become so liberal a talker out of the matter, as his natural property and condition moveth him, nor within the matter to become so arrogant, as his sayings should be believed against other men’s proofs: which two things if he should amend, we will be most glad of it, and charitably wish him a mild spirit, to remember he standeth in judgment for contempt against his sovereign lord the king’s majesty. And so we bid your lordships most heartily well to fare. From Westminster the 17th day of December, 1550.
Your good lords’ assured loving friends, Edward Somerset, John Bedford, William Wiltshire, William North.
This letter, after they had read it to themselves, they commanded to be openly read; the said bishop of Winchester, under his former protestations, requiring that he might be heard speak before that they would so openly read: for that as he said he had matter to say, that should move the judges not to have it openly read. Which request of the said bishop, because they granted him not, but willed the same letter to be openly read, as it was, by the actuary, who was William Say; and after, by the judges decreed, to remain among the acts: the said bishop upon the said reading, declared among other things to them, that they should have respect to all indifferently, and regard no letters or particular advertisements, but to have “solum Deum prae oculis:” under his former protestation protesting also, for that he could not be heard speak as before.
After this, the said bishop, declaring that he had used all the diligence he could possibly, to make ready his answers — which for the prolixity of them, and lack of a clerk, and shortness of time [he had not been able to complete] — yet, to declare his diligence in this behalf, under his said protestations, exhibited his said answers; being, as he said, the first original of his own hand-writing, which he required and offered to read openly himself. And because of the length of them, the judges were contented, that the said actuaries should exemplify them, and after collation and conference made between the said original and copy, with the said bishop in the Tower, by the said actuaries, the said original to be delivered him again. 104 Thus his answers being exhibited, the commissioners did grant, (as is said) not only to re-deliver them to him, but also granted to the said bishop to alter and reform his said fonner answers, in case they should not have been fully and truly made according to his mind; and the same being fully made, to exhibit on Tuesday next in the place and at the hours aforesaid.
Then the said bishop,under his former protestations, gave in certain interrogatories against the witnesses sworn at the last session, requiring them to be interrogated upon them accordingly. The tenor of which interrogatories are these, as followeth:
INTERROGATORIES MINISTERED BY WINCHESTER AGAINST HIS WITNESSES.
Inprimis: Whether they heard the bishop of Winchester say, in the end of his sermon made before the king’s majesty, that he agreeth thoroughly with the rulers and higher estate of the realm; but all the fault he found was in the lower part, or such like words to that sense?
Whether the bishop of Winchester did not say unto him 39 , when he came with sir Anthony Wingfield, that he thought so to have made his sermon, as none of the council should have found fault with it?
Whether the said bishop of Winchester required the same sir Ralph Sadler to show the lord of Somerset’s grace, that, by his advice, he should never speak of the letter he sent unto the said bishops?
These his interrogatories being thus laid in, the judges granted him, at his request, a longer day, to minister more interrogatories, if he were so disposed, against as many of the said witnesses as remained about the city, and that they should not depart thence between that and the next session.
Then the said bishop, under protestation as afore, required a copy of the sentence of sequestration and intimation made against him in the last summer, and likewise to have a clerk, and some temporal counsel. And the judges granted him to have a clerk to be with him and his counsel, so long as his counsel remained there, and willed him to send them the names of such temporal counsel as he would have, and he should have answer therein as was meet. There was also, by the said bishop, under his said protestation, exhibited a letter missive, directed from the council to Dr.
Standish, Dr. Jeffrey, and Dr. Lewis, advocates of the Arches, and to Dockrel and Clark, proctors of the same; the tenor whereof ensueth in these words:
LETTER MISSIVE TO DRS. STANDISH AND JEFFREY, ETC.
To our loving Friends Dr. Standish and Dr. Jeffrey, Advocates of the Court of the Arches, and Docktel and Clark, Proctors of the same.
After our hearty commendations: Whereas the bishop of Winchester (having counsel granted unto him by our very good lord the archbishop of Canterbury, and other the king’s majesty’s commissioners, as we be informed,) caused you to be required to be a counsel with him: these be to advertise you the king’s majesty is pleased to, and by these our letters doth, license you, not only to be counsel with him, but also to repair to the Tower from time to time, for conference with him for his defense in this matter. And this his majesty is pleased, notwithstanding one of you is his majesty’s chaplain. Fare you well.
From Westminster, this present Tuesday, in December, 1550.
Your friends, Edward Somerset, W. Northt’.
William Wiltshire, F. Huntingdon, J. Warwick, E. Clinton, John Bedford, Thomas Cheney.
By the said letter, as ye have heard, they were licensed, as well to be a counsel with the bishop of Winchester in this his suit, as also to repair to the Tower from time to time, for conference with him for his defense in this matter. Which letter, under his said protestations, he required to be registered, and the original to be to him re-delivered; and the same his counsel then present (Dr. Lewis only absent) to be licensed also, by decree of the judges, to be of counsel as afore; at whose desire the said judges decreed according to his request.
THE THIRD SESSION.
The third session or action was sped on Tuesday, the 23rd day of December 40 , A.D. 1550, at the prefixed hours, at Lambeth aforesaid, before the archbishop of Canterbury and the rest of the commissioners (sir James Hales and Master Richard Godricke only absent), in presence of the aforesaid William Say and Thomas Argall, actuaries. At the which day and place, Gardiner bishop of Winchester was assigned to exhibit his full answers to the positions and articles objected, and to minister more interrogations to the witnesses not yet departed: where and at what time, the said bishop of Winchester read an appellation in writing afore the actuaries aforesaid, and required them to make an instrument thereof; the copy of which appellation is as followeth in the note: This being done, the bishop, under his former protestation, and under the protestation not to recede from the benefit of his said appeal, did exhibit his answers to the said positions, being fully made, as he said; and required a copy thereof, and also his first original answer to be re-delivered to him: which was decreed, due collation first made of the said original; the tenor of which his fuller answers, word for word, ensueth:
ANSWER OF THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER TO THE REQUEST OF A MORE FULL ANSWER IN CERTAIN ARTICLES OBJECTED UNTO HIM. ‘The seventh article is not fully answered, where you say, ‘I remember not:’ ‘At any time, that I remember.’ First, for that it is required to make a more full answer to the seventh article, containing such general matter as is referred to two years and a half by-past and gone, than do the words ‘as I remember,’ the said bishop, saith his. answer therein, uttering as much as is presently in his conscience, doth satisfy all law and reason; and that the word ‘credo’ in Latin, whereby all such positions be answered unto, containeth in effect no more virtue and strength, than do the words ‘as I remember’ in English; because no man can. think of himself to be true, that he remembereth not, except as a man may think of himself generally, that (knowing his direct intention ever to do well), may think well of himself, as the said bishop hath, in the latter general clause of his answers, said; where he saith, ‘Credit’ all his affirmations and denials in his said answer to be true, as his conscience now testifieth unto him. And therefore, because he answereth to the said seventh article, that he was never but once called in all his life, and at that time declared the matters wherefore he was called; and how, in the end of that examination, the said bishop answereth, that he so departed as he durst; and did allege for himself that he was no offender, and ought not in that sort to tarry by commandment, it must needs, by the matter contained in his said answer, sufficiently appear, he hath fully answered that article; and that (being such a personage as he is and hath been) he ought not — after vexation in prison so long time (two years and a half) in such manner of solitary keeping as he might reasonably forget that, and the world also — be now thus travailed with, whereby to touch the integrity of his conscience, and, without cause, indirectly to impute to him, as though he had not satisfied his oath: specially considering that the answer of the said bishop hath been willingly made to such articles; as else, by the direct order of the law, he ought not to be compelled to make answer unto: offering, nevertheless, that when by the judges any further specialty shall be objected unto him, he will, and is ready (in such case as the law bindeth him to answer unto it) to make such answer as the law bindeth him unto in that behalf. ‘The eighth wanteth answer to this part; namely, You were called before the king’s majesty’s council, in the month of June, in the second year of his majesty’s reign, and by them, in his highness’s behalf, commanded to preach a sermon before his majesty, and therein to declare the justness and godliness,’ etc.
To the eighth article the said bishop saith that full answer is made, in that the whole process of the fact, as it can come to the said bishop’s remembrance, is plainly told (in what sort that matter of preaching was opened, and where, and with whom) by a clause, that ‘otherwise the said bishop was not spoken with concerning preaching.’ Which preciseness he nevertheless doth understand according to his present memory and conscience, wherein the said bishop can say no more, but as his conscience now testifieth the fact to have been; declaring with whom he was, with whom he spake, and what they said to him; which, as touching the time, he thinketh was done in the month of June; and his being with the duke of Somerset, to have been the Monday sevennight before the said bishop preached: And the determination of the bishop being such as he intended faithfully to speak of the matters in the papers, after his conscience (as he indeed ought to think of himself in general estimation of his own integrity), he did — and it cannot be to him prejudicial to have been commanded to preach, and therefore he mindeth not to make contradiction, or any state of question therein, although he must presently answer as his conscience telleth him, and so doth in his answer to the said article. ‘The ninth is not sufficiently answered, where you said, If I did omit: and, If I did perchance omit any thing, whereof I can make now none assurance: But if I did omit: If it were true, as I know it not to be: and, If I promised to speak plainly: If I had broken it,’ etc.
To the ninth, the said bishop saith his answer to that fact (of two years and a half by-past) of so many divers particularities to be by him touched in special, in a sermon, whereunto he came so troubled as in his said answer is declared, cannot be required to be made now more certain than it is made. And in case of omission (as is here objected), which may be by oblivion, and, considering the said bishop’s intent, if it happened, was so, and no otherwise; no man can affirm precisely what he forgat, if it were true he did forget; for he that forgetteth, in that he forgetteth, knoweth it not, [being] forgotten then. And seeing the said bishop determined to speak of all requisite to be spoken of, according as was answered he would, he may then say, If he forgat, it must be by oblivion, and not of purpose. And it is a position uncertain and dangerous for conscience, whereunto the law bindeth no man to answer, to bring the said bishop’s faith in slander, to answer more precisely to the fact, than is already done. Wherefore all the ‘ifs’ that be made in the bishop’s said answer in that article, be to declare the exclusion of contempt and disobedience, if any thing were indeed omitted, as the said bishop knoweth not any to have been, and without prejudice of granting by implication, what ought not to be granted in fact; which was by oblivion, if it were. And therefore, in all law and reason, the said answer as it was first made, is sufficient and reasonable cause by the said bishop now alleged, why none other should now be made or required of him. ‘To the tenth, concerning that you were commanded and inhibited, on the king’s majesty’s behalf, etc. you answer nothing.’
To the tenth, sufficient answer is made by declaration of the fact as it was; whereupon whether an inhibition and commandment may be grounded and proved, shall appear in the discussion of that letter sent by the duke of Somerset’s grace; which letter the said bishop answereth, in his said answer, to be of no force in his conscience; declaring the reason of the causes why, and more intendeth to declare, by matter specially to be alleged hereafter for the same. And therefore, seeing commandment and inhibition to be terms of law, the force whereof riseth upon estimation of the fact thereupon to be denied, what is commandment and inhibition, as what is none; the said bishop esteemeth himself discharged in law, to tell for answer the mere fact done in that matter — with the sincerity of his conscience, how he esteemed and doth esteem it; and is bound by no law to bring his credit in slander upon a point of law, and either to grant to his prejudice that to be a commandment or inhibition, which, in his conscience, is none, or, by denial, incur danger of slander of his conscience, if others would esteem it a commandment or inhibition; and, therefore, he telleth the fact as it was, of the receipt of the said letter: which letter he is ready to exhibit, as he doth offer in his said answer, for more ample understanding of the said answer. ‘The last hath no answer concerning your submission, reconcilement, and reformation,’ etc. To the last article the said bishop said, that, seeing he denied in his answer all contempt on lns part, he answereth it sufficiently, seeing the cause of reconciliation and reformation, after the judgment of his conscience, failing, the same ought not to be by him offered with prejudice of his innocency, which he is bound to maintain and defend; because, being an honest man, he is somewhat worth to the king his sovereign lord; and having cast his innocency willingly away by the untrue testimony of himself, he is nothing worth to the world nor himself either. As touching ‘submission,’ being an ambiguous word, to justice and mercy, the said bishop would think himself not worthy to live, if he should not submit himself to the king’s majesty’s justice willingly and humbly, which he hath always done, as shall appear hereafter, now doth, and will do during his life. And when, by examination of his cause by justice, the said bishop shall appear in any point faulty, he will humbly submit himself to such punishment as shall be appointed to that fault, if there be any; and, by that means, honor (as his duty is) the king’s majesty and his laws, as every good subject should do. But otherwise, by submission to mercy whereby to imply an offense in himself, whereof the said bishop in his conscience knoweth he is not guilty, and whereof the said bishop is by no order of law convinced, is what the said bishop dare affirm, and is persuaded, the king’s majesty would wittingly require of no man; but will graciously permit every man to be tried and taken as he is. ‘You lack well near (in your answer) to every article and position this clause ‘and otherwise,’ etc. — without which your answer remaineth imperfect and uncertain.’
Finally, as touching the general clause ‘and otherwise,’ etc., seeing this is a special matter, specially used, and handled in such a special form as the said bishop thinketh was never heard of in a special personage, and in a special time; the said bishop desireth, that among so many specialties he be not bound to such a general clause as no law requireth in special terms; and such a clause as needeth not in this matter, nor can serve to any other use, but to bring the faith of the said bishop in slander, answering as he doth upon his oath: in consideration whereof, seeing the said bishop hath to such articles made answer, as by law be is not bound to answer unto — declaring thereby his desire to have the fact opened and known, uttering for his part as much as his conscience testifieth to be truth, and as much as upon these generalities he can call to remembrance — the said bishop (his protestations in the acts repeated and preserved), desireth his answers may be so by you the judges accepted and taken; considering also the said bishop offereth himself ready, as any other specialty, according to law and equity, shall be asked of him, he will be and is always ready to make such answer as the law bindeth him as afore is always said.
These his full answers, as he said, being perused and considered by the commissioners, then the promoters alleged, that the bishop had not fully answered to the seventh 41 , eighth, ninth, and nineteenth positions, referring themselves to the same answers and to the law; and therefore, accusing his contumacy in that behalf, did require him to be pronounced “contumax;’ and in pain thereof to be declared ‘pro confesso,’ upon the same, whereunto he had not fully answered; the said bishop, under his said protestations, saying that he had fully answered, referred himself to the said answers: whereupon the judges had assigned him to make full answer to the said positions, in case his answers already made were not full, the next court day; having first declaration made from the said judges, by St.
John’s day next, wherein it was not fully answered.
Then the said promoters alleged, that there were certain acts, orders, and other processes concerning that matter, making for the proof of the articles by them ministered in that cause, remaining in the books of the registry of the king’s most honorable council, which they desired might there be exhibited. Whereupon Master Armigil Wade, and Master William Thomas, clerks of the said council, by commandment of the said judges did present two books, being, as they affirmed, originals of the said register, with certain copies extracted therefrom, concerning that matter; and, upon a corporal oath to them proffered by the judges, at the promoters’ request they affirmed the same to be the very true and original books of the said register; and forasmuch as the books contained many, secret matters not to be opened abroad, therefore the said judges, at the request of the promoters, decreed collation to be made between the said originals and copies, by the said clerks, and the foresaid actuaries; and that after collation made, as full faith should be given to the said copies as to the originals, as well as if the said bishop were present at the same collations. After which decree, the said bishop, under his said protestations dissenting to the said exhibition, and protesting of the nullity thereof, and of the exhibits, and alleging the same to be but private writings, and not authentic, nor such whereunto faith sufficient in law ought to be given, nevertheless, without prejudice of his said protestation, consented that collation thereof might be made in his absence, reserving power to him to object against the said exhibits, as far as by the law he might in that behalf do, as if he were personally present at the said collation.
After this the judges, at the promoters’ request, published the depositions of the witnesses produced by them (the which witnesses, as heretofore I have declared, ye shall read in the twentieth act of this process), the said bishop, under his said protestation dissenting thereunto, and protesting not to take knowledge or understanding of the said depositions, for that he intended to propose a matter justifiedtory, directly contrary to the articles proposed.
After this the judges, at the promoters’ request, assigned to the said bishop to propose a matter, if he had any, upon Thursday next after the feast of the Epiphany, at the hours and place [specified], the bishop, under his said protestations, dissenting, and asking a copy, as well of the acts, as of the exhibits aforesaid; to whom it was so decreed.
THE FOURTH SESSION The fourth session or act against the bishop of Winchester was before the aforesaid commissioners, sitting in judgment in the hall of the manor at Lambeth, in the presence of William Say and Thomas Argall notaries, the 8th day of January, anno 1551, upon Thursday, before noon.
It was assigned to the bishop of Winchester this day and place, to make full answer to the seventh, eighth, ninth, and nineteenth positions, before not fully answered; and also to propose a matter, if he had any to propose; whereupon the said bishop of Winchester, repeating his former protestations, and under the same, and also such protestations as he said were contained in his matter, did then and there exhibit a matter in writing, which he required to be admitted, and a competent term assigned to him to prove the same, to all the effects of the law, and to all intents, purposes, and effects, contained in his said matter, with compulsory process, and other as shall be requisite for him to have, for proof of the said matter: which matter of his being then and there exhibited, though it be long and tedious here to recite, yet, for the further accomplishment of the whole process, we thought here not to omit it; the words whereof are here as followeth.
A LONG MATTER JUSTIFICATORY, PROPOSED BY THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER.
In the name of God, Amen. — Before you, most reverend father in God, Thomas, by the sufferance of God, archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, and metropolitan, and one of the king’s majesty’s privy council; Nicholas, bishop of London; Thomas, bishop of Ely, and one of the king’s majesty’s privy council; Henry, bishop of Lincoln; sir William Peter, knight, and one of the principal secretaries of the king’s majesty, and one of his majesty’s privy council; sir James Hales, knight, one of the justices of the King’s bench; John Oliver and Griffith Leyson, doctors of the civil law; Richard Godricke and John Goshold, esquires, commissioners or judges (delegate, as it is pretended), in this behalf deputed, either before you, all and every of you, jointly together, or before some of you, such as in this matter shall happen to proceed, Stephen, by God’s permission bishop of Winehester, — first and before all things protesting not to renounce, forsake, or go from, his appellation lately by him made, from a certain decree of sequestration of the fruits of his bishopric, after a certain sort and manner, given and done by certain of the king’s majesty’s privy council, affirming themselves specially appointed or delegated by the king’s majesty in that behalf; and for other griefs, nullities, and unlawful process (their honors always saved) by them made in that behalf, and under all other protestations heretofore by him before you the said commissioners, or some of you, made in this pretensed matter; the same protestations, all and singular, and all manner of benefits and remedies of the law to him always reserved and saved, which he in no wise intendeth to go from, but to use and firmly and wholly to stand to, adhere to, and abide by; which all and singular protestations he repeateth, and for often and oftener repeated hath and will have them, in all and singular his acts, gifts, purposes, intents, petitions, facts, sayings, and doings, of what manner, kinds, effects, or sorts soever they be, now being made or done, or that in any wise hereafter shall happen to be made or done, against certain pretensed articles, capitules, objections, or interrogatories, lately by the commissioners aforesaid, of their office (as is pretended) necessarily promoted against the said bishop, [but] unlawfully purposed and objected; and against all and singular purposes, effects, matters, causes, and things in the same pretensed articles contained, by all and singular ways, forms, means, and effects, best and most effectual, which he best and most effectually ought to do, or may do, and — to all effects and purposes of the law that may and should follow thereafter — saith, allegeth, and, in this writing, purposeth in law articularly, and also jointly and severally, as hereafter followeth.
First , That the said articles and contents in the same, be and ought to be by the law, of no efficacy, virtue, strength, value, or effect; nor ought in any wise to be prejudicial or hurtful to the said bishop of Winchester, for the causes and matters severally and respectively deduced, and expressed in this present article, and in other articles in their course hereafter following. And, among other things, because the said bishop hath been always ready, with his best endeavor, diligence, and industry, according to his bounden duty, to publish, declare, and set forth, as well the supremacy, and supreme authority, of the king’s majesty that now is, and of the most noble prince of famous memory, the king’s majesty’s father that dead is, as the abolishing of the usurped power of the bishop of Rome, and setting-forth of all and singular acts, statutes, laws, injunctions, and proclamations, made and ordained in that behalf, and concerning orders of religion in this his majesty’s church of England; and hath had, hitherto, a very circumspect, learned, and diligent chancellor under him, who hath duly executed, and put in execution, the same accordingly: all which things the said bishop, for his own part, hath likewise always justly, duly, and obediently done, kept, observed, and executed, and for the approving, confirming, and stablishing the said supremacy. And of the usurped power of the bishop of Rome aforesaid, he hath not only openly preached, affirmed, and declared the same, in many and divers his sermons (preaching and teaching always due obedience), but also hath made and set forth a certain book or work concerning the same, as by the contents thereof more plainly appeareth, and hath defended the same in the university of Louvain. And these things were and be true, public, notorious, manifest, and famous. [Proponit conjunctim, divisim, et de quolibet.] 2. Item, That the said bishop, being charged with many and sundry commandments, to be by him done, executed, and observed, in our late sovereign lord’s time that dead is, was never found faulty, nor any fault objected and proved against him; but hath always been, and yet is, a true, painful, and just servant and subject in that behalf, and so commonly had been accepted, taken, reputed, and accounted, among the best sort, and with all sorts of persons, of all degrees, being not his adversaries. or enemies. [Proponit ut supra.] 3. Item, That the said bishop hath been always hitherto, and yet is, esteemed, taken, and reputed, a man just of promise, duly observing the same; and hath not been called or troubled heretofore, by any manner of suit or other vexation in any court of this realm, spiritual or temporal, for any such pretense or occasion as is aforesaid, until the time he was sent to the Tower, the morrow after he preached before the king’s majesty, in his manor or palace called the White Hall at Westminster, being the next day immediately following, and the last day of June, which shall he full three years at the same day next coming; and this was and is true, public, notorious, manifest, and famous. 4. Item, The said bishop was in such reputation and estimation of the councillors of our late sovereign lord that dead is, as being one of his majesty’s privy council till his majesty’s death, that he was, by their good contentment, used in council to have the speech in their name to the ambassadors of Scotland, the French king, and the emperor, within fourteen days, or thereabouts, of the death of our late sovereign lord. 5. Item, That the said bishop, for declaration of his zeal and due affection for the preservation of our sovereign lord that now is, his realm and countries, corntanned with the duke of Somerset thereof, when he had first taken upon him to be protector; and, by his commandment, wrote unto the said duke his mind therein divers and sundry times, as the copies of the letters will declare; which the duke seemed to take in good part, and. accepted the same as by his letters may appear, to the which he referreth himself, as much as they make for him and no otherwise. 6. Item, The said duke, in the conference aforesaid, told the said bishop that he would suffer no innovations in religion, during, the king’s majesty’s young age; which made the bishop more bold to write his mind plainly to the said duke. 7. Item, That the said bishop wrote sundry privy letters to my lord archbishop of Canterbury, rehearsing, what dangerous discords and evil opinions might arise; and specially in the end, the utter denial of the very presence of Christ’s most precious body and blood in the sacrament, with fear that the same evil opinion should be brought in, howsoever the said archbishop defended the contrary. 8. Item, That albeit the said bishop labored as much as he might, by his privy letters to the duke of Somerset, my lord archbishop of Canterbury and in the absence of the same duke to the whole privy council of our sovereign lord, to stay innovations, yet, when the bishop perceived he could, do no good therein, he showed himself so much conformable, that all ranovations made and set forth by the king’s majesty’s commandments, laws, proclamations, or injunctions, were obediently, quietly, and conformably set forth, executed, and willed to be observed in his diocese, without omission of any one part thereof, etc. 9. Item , That at the time of the king’s majesty’s visitation, kept and made in the diocese of Winchester, mentioned in the sixth article of the objections aforesaid, likewise before, and somewhat after the same visitation, the said bishop was in the Fleet, at the commandment of certain of the king’s majesty’s privy council, by reason of a letter sent by him upon zeal that he had, according to his bounden duty, to the same council, in that they allowed not the same; and, in his said absence, the king’s majesty’s visitors were, by his proctors there at Winchester, and likewise in all other places of his diocese, by all the subjects of the same, honorably, quietly, and devoutly received, accepted, and admitted; and the injunctions and orders by them published, were likewise received, admitted, and observed, as well on the behalf of the said bishop, as of the subjects of his diocese, for any thing he knoweth, which things were, and be true, public, notorious, manifest, and famous. 10. Item, That the bishop was delivered out of the prison of the Fleet the morrow after the Twelfth 42 day, in the first year of the reign of the king’s majesty, by his majesty’s general pardon, granted in his parliament kept at Westminster the same year. 11. Item, That about thirteen or fourteen days after the delivery of the said bishop out of the Fleet as is aforesaid, he was committed to prison to his own house in Southwark, for not subscribing to a certain form of articles or doctrine of justification, whereof was no law or lawful determination made; out of which trouble the said bishop was delivered the first Monday in Lent then next following, with thanks from the said duke of Somerset. 12. Item, That albeit the said bishop was committed to his house, as is aforesaid, for his prison, yet afterwards (to wit in the month of February the next following), his answers made to the said articles of justification, were received and admitted by my lord of Somerset; and the said bishop thereupon delivered and discharged thereof, with thanks; and, so discharged, went down to Winchester, as a person delivered from all trouble or travail of business. And this is true, public, notorious, manifest, and famous. 13. Item, The same bishop, within a small time after, first gently required by letters of the duke of Somerset to surrender a college which he yet had and enjoyed in the university of Cambridge, because upon good considerations he refused so to do, was more sharply written unto, in such terms as might declare the displeasure of the said duke, the considerations of the said bishop being nevertheless such in that matter, as the lower house of parliament, kept at Westminster by our sovereign lord’s authority that now is, the second year of his most gracious reign, upon their wisdoms, without any suit of the said bishop, being then in prison in the Tower of London, refused and rejected a bill conceived for the abolishing of the said college, and to be converted into another use, as the duke intended. 14. Item, That the said bishop, after his delivery out of travail, in the month of February, in the second year of our sovereign lord’s reign then being, did, in a sermon made at Farnham, in the way to Winchester, being resident there, exhort the people to obedience in this form; to confirm their wills in the exercise and ceremonies of religion to the superior’s order, and to think that best which they appointed to be done and used, wherein they should show their humility and judgment. 15. Item, The said bishop preached one special sermon at Winchester, the month of April or May in the second year of our sovereign lord’s reign that now is, teaching all the life of a christian man to consist verily in suffering, which was properly when he followed the will of another; in example whereof Christ, said he, came to do the will of his Father; and we must do God’s will, who willeth us to obey the superiors; wherein we must either do the will of the superiors, and suffer that, or suffer willingly the power of the superior to punish us. 16. Item, That the said bishop, receiving letters from the king’s majesty’s council in the month of May, in the second year of his majesty’s reign, to come before them for declaration of his willing obedience in all points, came from Winchester in a horse-litter to London, and so to the council, when he could not ride for disease in his body. And this was and is true, public, notorious, manifest, and famous. 17. Item, Incontinently after the coming of the said bishop to London as aforesaid, he appeared before the said council, and answered to such matter as was objected against him, in such wise as it was then accepted by the council, to his judgment. The said bishop, being required of the same council to tarry and not depart home, showed himself ready to do so, alleging, nevertheless, that he ought not to tarry as an offender, because he was none; and, for the declarance thereof, desired flint he might borrow of them some house in the country to resort thereunto for his commodity. 18. Item, That whereas in the month of June, in the second year of our sovereign lord’s reign, Master Cecil repaired to the said bishop, then at his house in Southwark, from the said duke, to move him to preach and give his sermon in writing, the said bishop, granting to preach, refused to give his sermon in writing, because that were to preach like an offender; whereas the said bishop had not indeed offended. And in that sort, like no offender, had a little before departed from the council, as is before declared. 19. Item, When the said Master Cecil had opened the said duke of Somerset’s pleasure after the sort aforesaid concerning preaching, the said bishop said, he would repair to the same duke of Somerset to make answer himself, and to declare him his mind therein. And because the said duke would not suffer the said bishop then to come to him, the same bishop was fain to send his answer to the duke by his chaplain. 20. Item, That after the said bishop had offered himself, by answer made by his chaplain, contented to preach, the said duke of Somerset sent articles to the said bishop by Master Cecil, first after one sort, single; and afterwards, in another sort, termed, as it liked the divisor, not so circumspectly, advisedly, and effectuously, as the matters thereof required; as may appear by the same which the said Master Cecil would have had the said bishop to rehearse in his sermon word by word, like a lesson made for a child to learn; which the said bishop refused to do. 21. Item, The bishop, seeing he was no offender in any point of those articles delivered him by Master Cecil, thought himself (and so alleged then) not to be used according to justice, to be of the duke so specially and precisely required to speak of these matters after that manner; whereby the said bishop should have partly touched and hurt his own innocence therein, as by the matters and contents of the same articles, and otherwise, if need be, more evidently may and shall appear. 22. Item, That thereupon, sir Thomas Smith, then one of the king’s majesty’s secretaries, or some other, procured a consultation of men learned in the ecclesiastical laws, what a bishop might command, and what the bishop of Rome might command; that by the same consultation the said bishop might be enforced to rehearse in his sermon the said articles devised by others, as his own, and of his own conscience. 23. Item, That the said bishop, being sent for to the said duke, then being at the king’s palace in Westminster, the Monday sevennight before he preached (which preaching was on St. Peter’s day, viz. the 29th of June then next following), for just and lawful causes, and according as he ought to do in that case, refused to preach the said articles as they were then penned or conceived. 24. Item, At the same time the said duke showed unto the said bishop the consultation made of the learned men, to whom the said bishop answered, that if he might speak with those learned men, it should shortly appear that consultation not to touch his case. Whereunto the said duke answered, the said bishop should speak with no learned men, but only have time of deliberation thereupon between that time, and the afternoon of the same day. 25. Item, The said bishop was then, by secret way, conveyed by the lord great master then being, to the said lord great master’s chamber, and there offered to dine alone, like a man restrained and threatened to suffer further trouble. 26. Item, After dinner, the same time, came to the said bishop sir Thomas Smith secretary aforesaid, to reason with the said bishop in that matter; which Master Smith then defended not the manner of speaking of those matters contained in the aforesaid articles to be required of the said bishop, but only of those things there contained. 27. Item, That upon the communication had between the said bishop and sir Thomas Smith, the said bishop was brought to the said duke’s private chamber, and there much familiarity showed by the said duke, and a friendly departure between them; at which time the said duke said, he would require the bishop no writing of his sermon before he made it, but remitted all to the said bishop, so he would speak of those matters contained in the articles or papers delivered unto him by Master Cecil, as aforesaid, 108 except the king’s majesty’s minority whereof neither was nor is any mention made, as by the contents thereof may appear. Whereunto the said bishop said, he would touch the substantial points thereof, and not speak of St. Clement’s nor St.
Nicholas’s going about, nor such small children’s toys, being gone and forgotten; and said merrily, ‘the people would call him a babbler of ceremonies when they were now gone;’ but, of the chief matters of the said articles, he would speak, and of other matters also: and therewith departed without coming to the presence of the council, and without any other commandment than like as was before broughtby Master Cecil from the said duke: and ended, and departed in this familiarity and friendly agreement. 28. Item, That the said bishop reasoned with sir Thomas Smith, then secretary, touching the preaching of the said articles or papers in this wise in effect: If it be intended by this sermon (meaning the sermon aforesaid, to be made before the king’s majesty at Westminster), to defame him the same bishop, that, to keep himself out of trouble and displeasure and to redeem him some secret faults, he speaketh so that all men may know that he meaneth it not, then it may serve to such purpose, to have those articles or papers rehearsed in his sermon. But, if it be intended to have the sermon made for edification, and to have the same bishop thoroughly known, what he thinketh of the state of the church and of the innovations made, it were more expedient to have the said bishop preach of himself; and so should he be known what he were. The said bishop adding, that if he thought not to agree with the council in the speaking of these matters, he had rather begin the contention within, secretly, than in the pulpit. Upon which reasons proceeded the friendly resolution, and the said bishop was left to speak of those matters at liberty as before. 29. Item, That the said bishop, at his repair to his house, showed divers of his chaplains and others the resolution aforesaid, with his determination to speak of such matters (specially the chief of them) so as they ought to be satisfied; and likewise after the sermon aforesaid made account with them, that he had accordingly done in such wise as no man ought to be offended. 30. Item, That in the papers or articles aforesaid, delivered as is above specified to the said bishop by Master Cecil, there is mention of the mass and of the sacrament of the altar to be specially named and spoken of in his sermon; whereby the said bishop esteemed then, and yet doth esteem himself bound to show the catholic faith and true doctrine of them, which some unlearned persons did then (contrary to the king’s majesty’s proclamations and injunctions) impugn. 31. Item, The Wednesday at afternoon next and immediately before the said bishop preached his sermon, which was the Friday then next following, when the said bishop was fully provided what to say in his said sermon, and in what order; the said duke of Somerset sent, by the same Master Cecil, to the said bishop, his private advice not to speak in his sermon of any doubtful matters of the sacrament and the mass.
Whereunto the said bishop answered, he would utter the true catholic faith that hath no doubt; and advised the said duke not to meddle with matters of religion, but to refer it to bishops and to others that could or should understand it: the said bishop expressly declaring, that he must and would utter the catholic faith, if he were suffered to come to that place. 32. Item, That the Thursday, viz. the next morrow then following, between three and four of the clock at afternoon, or thereabouts, was delivered unto the said bishop a letter from the said duke, dated at his house at Sion, subscribed with his own hand only, and without mention of any advice of the king’s majesty’s council, but only of his own pleasure, with commandment in words of maintenance thereof, on the king’s majesty’s behalf, in such manner and sort handled and conveyed, that they ought not to be credited, obeyed, or regarded, but to be bewailed to proceed from one in that estate and degree in the commonwealth; for which respect indeed he vexed the said bishop, who, having no leisure convenient to write or send to the duke, was much troubled how to avoid what was seemed meant by pretense of that letter, being an interruption of the order of such matter as the said bishop had determined to have uttered in that sermon; and the chief care of the said bishop was how to utter the catholic faith of the sacrament of the altar, which might not be omitted, and yet so as the words of the letter (although it were of no force) might be avoided, for the avoiding of all quarrel and contention. 33. Item, That the said bishop, to the intent he might, in that short time, more conveniently devise how to escape without all manner of quarrels, from the time of the receipt of that letter forgat to refresh his body, and did neither eat, drink, nor sleep, till the next day at five o’clock at afternoon, when his sermon was done; and only travailed in mind how to bring in and order what he should utter; all the said bishop’s preparation being interrupted by this advice and letter, delayed, as appeareth of purpose, to so short time before the bishop should preach; which duke knew well the said bishop might, and supposed he would speak, of the sacrament and mass, or else not indeed to have sent his advice in that behalf. 34. Item, That the said bishop (appointed to preach on St. Peter’s day then next following, being the 19th of June aforesaid), in his sermon preaching did declare, set forth, and touch, the effect of all such things, points, articles, and matters, delivered to him by Master Cecil, as by the contents of the same, and other persons of sufficient credit, being present at his sermon aforesaid, and hearing and noting the same, shall more plainly appear. 35. Item, That the said bishop, because he would be well assured to foresee the satisfaction of the agreement aforesaid, that was made as is before specified, touching the matters in the papers or articles, that nothing might be imputed, determined to utter in his sermon, and did there utter, this general clause, or like in effect, viz., ‘that he agreed with the superiors, and found no fault with them, but only the fault was in the lower part, touching their disobedience;’ and there reproved them that brake statutes, injunctions, and proclamations, which general allowance must needs (and doth indeed) comprehend all particularities mentioned in the papers or articles, whereof the bishop was, as before, content and minded to speak. 36. Item, That in the month of June aforesaid, in the which the said bishop first appointed to make his sermon, and received the articles or papers of Master Cecil, and then made his sermon, as is above written, the said bishop, only and at one time, and no more at any time within the said month, did appear, and was personally before the king’s majesty’s privy council, except only one other time he was before the duke of Somerset, and the lord great master as is before rehearsed, and not before the whale council: at which time he was neither willed nor commanded to preach, nor had any articles or papers delivered him, either by the king’s majesty, or by the said privy council, otherwise than afore; as by such persons as were always with him present during that time, shall more plainly appear, if need require. 37. Item, If, in the said letter of the duke of Somerset, any restraint was seemed to be made to the said bishop from entreating of some points of the sacrament of the altar and of the mass, the bishop did indeed refrain from the same points as they were devised in the said letters. And yet he was not bound to obey the same, in any wise, for divers considerations as well before specified, as also among other causes, for that the said letter was the private letter of the said duke only, and had not the subscription of the greater part of the king’s majesty’s privy council, or of any of them; and for that the same letter, if they should apply an absolute prohibition, as they did not, was expressly contrary and repugnant, as well to the former articles or papers, as to a letter printed and sent to all preachers, in the name of the lord protector and the whole council’s names; whereof was no mention made in the said letter. And in case the said letter had been to be obeyed, yet the said bishop did not violate the tenor thereof, because it willed him only to forbear speaking of such points of the sacrament and mass, as were in contention then. But the very presence of Christ’s body in the sacrament and mass was not then, amongst learned men, in any controversy, but, as a true doctrine, received, admitted, published and taught universally, by the obedient subjects in this realm; of which the bishop, in his said sermon, spake and uttered his conscience, and of no matters then in controversy, as by the articles or papers, and by the letter and other proofs (if need be) hereafter more plainly may and shall appear. 38. Item, The said bishop was in such security of mind, upon the clearness of his conscience to have so preached as no quarrel might have been made to him for it (and like mind and opinion was and is reported commonly, of all indifferent persons hearing the same sermon), so that the said bishop suspected not any trouble towards him there-for, till it was showed him sir Anthony Wingfield, with the guard, were arrived at the bishop’s stairs, the Saturday about three or four of the clock at afternoon, being the next day following the sermon aforesaid. 39. Item, At such time as sir Ralph Sadler, accompanying the said sir Anthony Wingfield, showed the said bishop the cause of his sending to the Tower to be disobedience against the letter above spoken of, sent by the said duke; the said bishop alleged he had not offended the words of the letter; and therewith did friendly advise the said duke never to speak of that letter again. And further, the said bishop said, if he might be heard, he would declare he had not offended: wherein he desired them to be suitors, that he might not be forgotten in prison, as he was in the Fleet, but heard with more speed, and be charitably handled in the prison; wherein they promised to be suitors. 40. Item, The said bishop, so from his house conveyed to the Tower, was there kept a secret prisoner, without suffering of any resort to him for his comfort, or himself to come abroad, to take there the air for his relief, one whole year saving six days, or thereabouts; without coming of any of the council or others to talk with him, and declare any particularity of his offense, to have omitted in his sermon, or to have said that, which might not or should not have been said. 41. Item, The said bishop, having only commodity (after his committing to prison to the Tower by the space of one whole year lacking but six days) to speak only with Master lieutenant, continually desired him to sue for the said bishop, that he might have license to write to the said duke of Somerset; which, in one quarter of the year, could not be obtained. 42. Item, That after license obtained to write, the said bishop made humble suit, by his letter, to be heard according to justice; offering himself content to abide that justice would; as may appear by copy of the said letter: whereunto could be obtained no answer. 43. Item, That after eighteen weeks’ imprisonment, the said bishop, to provoke the said duke to hear him speak, delivered to Master lieutenant the said [letter] following, to be delivered to the said duke in this form contained. ‘The bishop of Winchester maketh most instant suit, to have the benefit of the laws of the realm, like an Englishman; and not to be cast in prison without bail or mainprize, without accusation or indictment, without calling to any presence to be charged with any thing; and so to remain these eighteen weeks, and could have no relief to know what is meant with him. As for his sermon, he made it by commandment to preach there; wherein he said nothing but his conscience serveth him to justify his doings therein by God’s law, and the laws of the realm, the king’s proclamation, the king’s commandment, my lord protector’s open letters; and not against his privy letters, the surety of the king’s estate — the quietness of this realm — the discharge of his duty to the king’s majesty — the remembrance of the kindness of the king’s majesty that dead is — the declaration truly to be made of himself, in each of these points. ‘I doubt not to justify my doings if I may be heard, and have the inheritance of an Englishman, to be used by course of law.’ — [Which suit, nevertheless, was not heard or regarded.] 44. Item, The said bishop, complaining divers and sundry times to Master lieutenant of the precise straitness of his keeping, and, without judgment, to be in execution of death, desired him to sue, that he might be heard in justice, and be punished according to the nature of his offense as it were, and not remain in the great temptation of solitariness, able (were it not God’s special help) to make a man work with man’s imaginations the confusion of his wits; showing Master lieutenant, that to the king’s justice and laws he submitted himself as humbly as any subject might do. 45. Item, That in this mean time, the servants of the said bishop made sundry suits to the said duke for the relief of their master, to be heard according to justice; of whom they received comfortable words without fruit or effect. Whereupon they delivered also a bill to the lord chancellor, to be by him opened in parliament, that the said bishop’s cause might be heard there, whiek took no effect, so as (their manifold suits notwithstanding) the said bishop remained in close prison, destitute of all comfort and relief, and without hearing any word from the said duke or council, till it was within six or seven days (or thereabouts) of one whole year. 46. Item, That in the end of one whole year, or thereabouts, after the bishop had remained prisoner (as before) came to the Tower the lord chancellor of England then and now being, the lord treasurer, and Master secretary Peter; and, calling to them the said bishop, said in effect as followeth, viz.: That they had brought with them a book passed by the parliament, which they willed the bishop should look on, and say his mind to it; and, upon his conformity in it (they said), the duke would be a suitor to the king’s majesty, for mercy to be ministered unto him. 47. Item, The said bishop, making his answer to the demands and requests as here next before him proposed, said in effect as followeth:
That he trusted, if he might be heard, the king’s majesty’s justice would relieve him, which (he added) he had long sued for, and could not be heard: saying that to sue for mercy, when he had not offended, and to sue out of that place, being in the said Tower in prison, where asking for mercy implieth further suspicion than he would, for all the world, be touched in, it were not expedient; adding, that ‘not guilty’ is, and hath been, a good plea for a prisoner. 48. Item, The said bishop — then being demanded of the said lord chancellor, if he were not commanded to preach of the king’s authority in his young age, in his sermon aforesaid, made before the king on St.
Peter’s day, and yet did not — did expressly say, he was not commanded; the same lord then replying thereunto, ‘Why! is not,’ quoth he, ‘that article in the papers ye had delivered you?’ the said bishop saying, for answer thereunto, that he assured him not; and so likewise denied the same. 49. Item, Then, after communication between the said lord chancellor and others there then present as is aforesaid, of the king’s majesty’s authority (wherein there was no disagreement, but therein they agreed), then my lord chancellor said to the bishop, he had disobeyed the duke of Somerset’s letter; the bishop saying, that he had not — adding, that if the matter came to judgment, it should appear that he had not disobeyed his grace’s letter. The same bishop, declaring further, told the same lord chancellor, that many open injunctions under seal, and in open court, had been broken in this realm; and yet the punishment thereof had not been handled or executed in such extreme sort as the said bishop was handled: and the said bishop affirmed, that it should appear sufficiently, that he had not broken or disobeyed the said letter, weighing the words of the same. 50. Item, That after some reasoning then by the bishop, with Master secretary Peter, what a controversy was, and some part what the same bishop could say further, the said bishop said to the lord chancellor and others aforesaid then present, ‘Whatsoever I say or can say in this matter, ye must judge it; and, for the passion of God, do it; and let me sue for mercy, if I will have it, when the matter of offense is known:’ adding, that when he were declared an offender, he would, with humility of suffering, make amends to the king’s majesty so far as he were able; saying that he ought never to offend his majesty, and much less in his grace’s young age. 51. Item, That then the said lord chancellor showed to the bishop the beginning of the Act for Common Prayer; how dangerous it was to break the order of it: to whom the bishop answered, that it was true; and therefore, if he came abroad, he would be well ware of it. But the bishop said, it is after, in the act, how that no man should be troubled for that act, unless he were first indicted; and therefore, he said, he ought not to be kept in prison for that act. 52. Item, That done, the said lord chancellor, with the others aforesaid, required the said bishop to look on the Book of Common Prayer then showed him by the lord chancellor, and to say his mind in it. The bishop answered, that he thought it not meet to yield himself a scholar to go to school in prison; and then slander himself, as though he redeemed his faults with his conscience: saying, touching this law (meaning the law and orders in that book, or concerning the same), which he said he knew not, he would honor it like an obedient subject, and, if he kept it not, he would willingly suffer the pain of it. 53. Item, At the same time the said bishop required my lord chancellor, and others aforesaid then present with him in the Tower, to remember that he, the said bishop, refused not the said book by the way of contempt, nor in any evil manner. 54. Item, The said bishop then demanded of my lord chancellor, Whether he would desire the king’s majesty to be his good lord: at which word the said bishop said in effect as followeth, namely: ‘Alas, my lord! do you think that I have so forgotten myself? ’, affirming that his duty required so to do. ‘And I will, on my knees, desire his grace to be my good lord and my lord protector also.’ My lord chancellor — being as appeared well contented with that answer — demanded of the bishop, what he would say further: the same bishop saying, that he would say further, that he thought, when he had preached his sermon aforesaid, he had not offended at all; and that he thought so still. 55. Item, That the said lord chancellor, repeating the bishop’s saying of his humble obedience and conformity aforesaid, demanded of the bishop, if he would submit himself to be ordered. The bishop granting that he would be content to be ordered by the laws, and staying at that point, the said lord chancellor, and others aforesaid, were content to grant the bishop, of their gentleness, to make suit for him, to procure him to be heard, and to obtain for him liberty to go into the gallery, and that he should hear from them within two days following: and yet, in a whole year after, lacking but fourteen days or thereabouts, the said bishop was never spoken withal concerning that matter, notwithstanding he sent two letters, whereof mention is made in the next article following, to the king’s majesty’s council, of most humble request to be heard in that matter according to justice, whereunto he obtained no answer. 56. Item, After committing the said duke to the Tower, the said bishop wrote in two sundry letters to the whole council, with lamentable complaint of his misery, and humble request to be heard according to justice; whereunto he received no answer. 57. Item, After the said bishop had remained in close prison two whole years saving fourteen days or thereabouts, came to the Tower the duke of Somerset, the lord treasurer, the lord privy seal, the lord great chamberlain, and master secretary Peter, and called before them the said bishop, unto whom they said, that they came specially sent to know his conformity: unto whom the said bishop said, he was ever ready to show as much conformity as ever any subject did, which was, to be contented to be ordered by justice, whereunto he submitted himself, and had long sued for it; and desired them, for the passion of God, that he might come to some end of this matter by it, much lamenting unto them the manner of his long detaining in prison, and after that sort, and never could be heard. It was then said, he should not do well to stick so much to the demand of justice, thereby to make the whole council party against him. And after many persuasions to rid himself out of prison other ways, as others had done, he ever answered, there could nothing, in his mind, countervail the displeasure [he should feel, in] saying otherwise than truth of himself. And after many more words it was moved to him, to let all be forgotten that was by-past, and to show them what report they should make of him to the king’s majesty. 58. Item, The said bishop, being demanded how they should make report as is aforesaid, said, as to the king’s majesty, he professed himself an humble and obedient subject, always ready to his duty, to observe all such things as were set forth in his commonwealth; or, if he did not, to suffer the pains appointed to be suffered by the offender. 59. Item, That the sayings of the said bishop should be reported as is aforesaid, was well liked; but they asked him then, whether he would agree to the Book of Common Prayer or no; whereunto he said, ‘he knew it not; but, as soon as he was out of prison, he would, incontinent, show what he thought therein; and, if he liked it, not yield himself willingly to be punished. 60. Item, It was then required, that the said bishop should give answer in prison to the said book: whereunto he said, that in so doing he should slander himself, and be seen to grant for fear, what else he would not; and it should somewhat touch them to be seen, by weariness of prison, to fear him to it. To this reason the duke of Somerset replied thus in effect, namely: ‘If it be worse for the council to have your agreement in prison than out of prison — if the council choose the worse — be you contented.’ And therewith he required the bishop, for his sake, to show so much conformity as to remit it to the council, whether they would have answer in prison, or at the said bishop’s house: whereunto the said bishop condescended. 61. Item, That at the same time there was much other communication, and that it ended in this resolution; with as much gentleness showed on their part to the said bishop, as he could desire. 62. Item, Over the premises, the bishop was bold to tell them, it was a marvellous matter to keep one in such close prison solitary two years — as the said bishop was kept — and then to ask him of a fault; unless it were for murder, felony, or treason. And the said bishop said, it was such a new diet, it would purge a man, even though he had as many other faults than those three, as Job had sores. And so, for that time, the said bishop parted with them. 63. Item, The Saturday following, they repaired to the Tower again, and the lord Chobham with them, and demanded the answer of the said bishop to the book of Common Prayer, which had been sent to the said bishop in the mean season from them: unto whom the said bishop answered in this wise — That book he would not have made after that form, but, as it was, he could with his conscience keep it, and cause others in his diocese to keep it, and diligently see that it should be kept, and the offenders punished. Which answer was well accepted, and the said bishop required to write it; which he desired they would not require of him, because, by so doing, he should seem to grant himself an offender. It was then asked, whether master secretary Peter should write it; wherewith the said bishop was content; who then wrote very faithfully. And then the word was scanned, whether ‘to keep it’ contained every part of it: to take away which doubt, the said bishop was content they should put in, ‘every part of it,’ because he meant so; and theft he would not halt or fail in any part of it that he should promise. 64. Item, The said bishop was required to subscribe what was written; who made request to pardon him thereof, and desired them not to require that which would serve them to no purpose, and yet imply him to be an offender: wherewith they were content. The said bishop then told them why he liked the said book, and noted unto them how, notwithstanding the alteration, yet touching the truth of the very presence of Christ’s most precious body and blood in the sacrament, there was as much spoken in that book as might be desired; and that although the elevation was taken away, yet the alteration, in one special place, was indeed reserved: and showed it them, adding, it must needs be so; affirming also, there was never more spoken for the sacrament than in that book, wherewith might be confuted all that spoke against it, if they would take it for authority. 65. Item, Further the said bishop showed them how he liked the declaration of the cause of the change, in the end of the book; whereby appeared the catholic doctrine not to be touched, but only ceremonies removed; which, the said bishop said, was wisely handled. 66. Item, After the aforesaid communication, the duke of Somerset said, ‘There is another book for making of priests. What say you to that?’ Whereunto the bishop, pulling it out of his bosom, said, it was no matter by their former appointment to be answered in prison: and trusted it not in any force of any law, neither thought it a matter necessary for them that had inheritance to look on, because, in the said bishop’s judgment, it touched the honor and dignity of the king’s person and succession, who, by this order, should never after be anointed, having no Samuel left to execute it; ‘and it is a terrible saying, Cessabit unctio vestra; and the book of Common Prayer admitteth unction with baptism, which the priest, not anointed, cannot minister.’
Whereunto was no reply made, but it was said, that the said bishop should find other faults than that in it. As for that, the bishop said there was matter like all other points of other laws, which either must be kept and observed, or the punishment appointed to be suffered for breach of them: after which sort the said bishop desired he might be admitted to live without any other specialty in his person, but to be taken as another bishop of the realm. 67. Item, When the same bishop saw, that notwithstanding his answer made, and conformity showed as much as was required, and that nevertheless they did not discharge him, then he returned to his former request of justice, to be so discharged by the end thereof: whereunto the lord great chamberlain said, he liked better the saying of the said bishop at their other being there, of the new duty. The bishop said, every end were better to him, than to be thus worn out with lingering in prison: and then it was said, it should not be long now; even within two days. The bishop desired they would send him home that night; whereunto was said, they must speak with the council again, ‘and things must be done as they may be done, and in order:’ whereunto the said bishop, taking his leave, said, there were more respects than were in his time, in the council; and so ended the communication with the said duke and others. 68. Item, That by reason of the communication, agreement, and conformity aforesaid, a common voice, fame, and report, went and was sped through the Tower, the city of London, and the suburbs of the same, and divers other places near to the said city — that the said bishop should, within two days, be at liberty. And upon the said conformity and agreement, the bishop was suffered, by the lieutenant, to make his farewell feast, according as is, and hath been, used and observed there, when any personage of dignity, that hath there remained prisoner any continuance of time (as the bishop had done), is discharged, or granted to be delivered from prison; and by reason of the agreement, and other considerations aforesaid, the bishop only hearkened from day to day for commandment to be discharged of his imprisonment. 69. Item, That three weeks or a month after, or thereabouts, came to the Tower the lord treasurer, the earl of Warwick lord great master, William Hatbert, and master secretary Peter, who, calling to them the said bishop, delivered to him the king’s majesty’s letters, which letters the said bishop received at the hands of the said lord treasurer On his knees, according to his bounden duty and kissed them; and, still on his knees, read them. And after he had thoroughly read them, he much lamented that he should be commanded to say of himself as was there written, whereby to say otherwise of himself than his conscience would suffer him; and, where his deeds would not, as he trusted, condemn him, there to condemn himself with his tongue, he would sooner, he said, by commandment (as he then thought), if they would bid him, tumble himself desperately into the Thames. 70. Item, The lord earl of Warwick then, seeing the bishop in that agony, said to the bishop, ‘What say you, my lord, to the other articles?’ Whereunto the bishop answered, that he was loth to disobey where he might obey, and not hurt his conscience, destroying the comfort of it, as to say untruly of himself. And then, being demanded of the said earl if he would subscribe the other articles, the bishop said, he would subscribe them; but then the article that touched him and his conscience, which was to say untruly of himself, should be put out.
And to that, answer was made, that the same needed not to be put out, for he might write on the side, what he would say unto it. 71. Item, That then the said bishop, being then very gently entertained, namely of the said earl of Warwick, had pen and ink given him, and wrote, to the article that touched him, these words in effect, namely, ‘I cannot with my conscience thus say of myself.’ And there followed an article of the king’s majesty’s supremacy, unto which the bishop began to write on the side of that, and had made an ‘I’ onward, as may appear by the same articles. And because the lords and others of the privy council aforesaid would not have him so do, but to write only his name after the articles, he did so as they willed him, whereat they were right well contented and pleased: the said bishop then merrily saying to them. that by that mean, he had placed his subscription above them all. 72. Item, This done, the said lords and others aforesaid, very gently entertained the said bishop; and after the said bishop had somewhat declared unto them the misery of his imprisonment, he desired them not to be miscontent with what he should say, which was, he said, that when he remembered each one of them alone, he could not think otherwise of them, but they were his good lords; and yet, when they met together, he felt no remedy at their hands; adding, that he looked when my lord of Somerset was there with him at the Tower, to go out with him in two days, and that he had thereupon made his fare well feast in the Tower, and that since that time there was a month past, or thereabouts; saying, ‘I had agreed with them, and now I agree with you [meaning the lords and other of the privy council aforesaid, then, as is aforesaid, being with him in the Tower’]; and yet I may fortune to be forgotten. The lord treasurer said, he should not be forgotten, and that the same bishop should hear from them the next day. And so, by their commandment, the bishop came out of the chamber after them, that they might be seen to depart from the bishop friendly, and his good lords and friends. And so, after that manner they departed; whereby, and by other the premises, it may appear of no contempt or disobedience of the said bishop’s part, as is pretended in the articles laid in the behalf against him; insomuch that then the bishop (by reason of his subscription aforesaid, according to the requests made to him therein, and for other his conformity) took and esteemed verily in his conscience, to have been a whole satisfaction, to the king’s majesty’s letters. 73. Item, That at the same time, among other treaties and communication had betwixt the said lords and others of the council, and the bishop, it was said by some of the same council, that others would have put in many more articles than those which they brought with them, but they would have no more but the same articles aforesaid, which were, by the said bishop, subscribed as is above rehearsed. 74. Item, The next day after the being in the Tower (as is aforesaid) of the lord treasurer, the earl of Warwick, and others, — came unto the bishop aforesaid, sir William Hatbert and master secretary Peter, to devise with him, how he should make some acknowledging of his fault (as they said). Whereunto the bishop answered, that he knew himself innocent, and for him to do anything therein by his words or writing, it could have no policy in it; for, if he did more esteem liberty of body, than defamation of himself, he said — yet, when he had so done with them, he was not assured by them to come out, for and he were, by his own pen, made a naughty man, yet then he were not the more sure to come out, but had locked himself the more surely in; and a small pleasure it were for him, to have his body at liberty by their procurement, and to have his conscience in a perpetual prison by his own act. And after divers other words and persuasions made by the said sir William Hatbert and sir William Peter, the said bishop, having just cause, required them for the passion of God, that his matter might take an end by justice; and so they departed, there being no contempt or disobedience showed on the behalf of the said bishop, but only allegation for his just defense, and declaration of his innocency, in the best manner he could devise. 75. Item, That the Monday next and immediately following, or thereabouts, came to the said bishop, to the Tower, the bishop of London, sir William Harbert, master secretary Peter, and one other person unknown to the bishop, bringing with them a paper, with certain articles written in it, to which they required him to subsbribe.
Whereupon the said bishop most instantly required them, that this matter might be tried by justice, which, although it were some time more grievous, yet it hath a commodity with it, that it endeth certainly the matter. And because he could come to no assured state, he was loth to meddle with any more articles, or trouble himself with them; and yet, because they desired him so instantly, he was content to read them: and so did read them, and (to show still his perfect obedience and obedient mind) offered, that incontinently upon his deliverance out of prison, he would make answer to them all, such as he would abide by, and suffer pain for if he deserved it. Finally, his request was, that they would in this form make his answer to the lords of the council in effect as followeth; namely, That the said bishop most humbly thanketh them for their good will to deliver him by way of mercy; but, because of respect for his innocent conscience, he had rather have justice. He desired them (seeing both were in the king’s majesty’s hands), that he might have it, which, if it happened to be more grievous unto him, he would impute it to himself, and evermore thank them for their good will. And so the bishop and they departed, no manner of misbehavior or evil demeanor in anywise showed on behalf of the said bishop. 76. Item , That upon a Saturday at afternoon, being the 19th day of July last past, at the time of even-song, in the chapel at the court in Westminster, the said bishop being before the lords of the king’s majesty’s privy council, the said lords affirmed, They were all his judges by special commission, and intended to proceed against him: and willed him to subscribe to certain articles which were then read, and that he should directly make answer, whether he would subscribe them or no. To whom the bishop, making humble answer on his knees, said as in effect followeth; namely, ‘For the passion of God I require you to be my good lords, and let me be tried by justice, whether I be in fault or no; and as for these articles, as soon as you deliver me to liberty, I will make answer to them, and abide such pain as the answer deserveth, if it deserve any. 77. Item, That, immediately, the lords of the council aforesaid said to the bishop, that he must answer directly, whether he would subscribe the aforesaid articles or no: the bishop answering to the same in effect as followeth; namely, That the same articles were of divers natures, and that some of them were laws which he might not qualify; some were no laws, but learning and fact, which might have divers understandings, and that a subscription to them without telling and declaring what he meant, were over dangerous; and, therefore, he required a copy of the said articles, and offered, for the more evident declaration of his obedience to all their requests — in effect — that, although he were a prisoner, and not at liberty, yet, if they would deliver him the articles, to have in prison with him, he would shortly make them particular answers, and suffer the pains of the law, that by his answer he should incur, if the same were worthy of any pain. And after this manner he eftsoons offered himself ready to make answer, with all conformity and obedience of his part; which would not be accepted, but that in anywise he should make his absolute subscription incontinently to the said articles, as by the acts and process there then written (to which he referred himself, as much as is need and expedient for him, and none otherwise), and by other proofs, should appear. 78. Item, If any decree of sequestration of the fruits of the bishopric of Winchester was, at the time aforesaid, made by the forenamed councillors of the king’s majesty’s privy council, specially appointed by commission for that purpose, as they pretended, the same sequestration, and all things containing the same — for the causes above respectfully specified, and because therein they exceeded the manner of correction, and other the premises considered, and that the same their pretensed decree was notoriously in that behalf excessive; specially other great and intolerable punishments aforesaid unjustly weighed, and also, in that it was made without knowledge of the cause, and the due order of the laws pretermitted without any cause reasonable, and contrary to the laws, without any proof in that behalf made or had; the said bishop neither confessing any thing whereby they might or ought so to proceed, nor being in anywise thereupon convicted, — was and is (the honor, dignity, and reverence of the said most honorable council always saved) unjust, unlawful, and of no efficacy or effect; and so, by law, ought to be pronounced, taken, and declared. 79. Item, That if in any part of the pretended decree of sequestration — at the time thereof, or immediately after — there were any intimation or monition with commination made to the bishop aforesaid, that he should, within three months next following the said intimation, reconcile and submit himself, with commination to proceed to deprivation if he did not, and that now the same three months be past and expired, as is untruly deduced in the seventeenth and eighteenth articles of the objections aforesaid, yet the same intimation, monition, and commination, for the cause above specified, was and is unjust, unlawful, and, by the law, of no value or efficacy; and also, over and besides the causes aforesaid, in that the said pretensed intimation, monition, and commination, were given and made under manner, form, condition, and effect following, namely, that the bishop, by the space of three months then next ensuing, should have, at every month’s end, pen and ink, to write and see if he would subscribe the said articles; and, of truth, never since that time was there, to that intent and purpose, any pen and ink brought him, neither yet were the said articles or any copy of them delivered to the said bishop, being since continually still in the Tower, nor yet was he at any time since required, willed, or commanded so to do, nor could have the use of a pen or ink within the compass of the said three months, nor come to the presence of the council: and that it is notorious, that the said bishop hath been continually, ever since that time — like as he was before and yet is — a prisoner in the Tower of London. 80. Item, That from the same pretensed sequestration, monition, and commination aforesaid, and from all things concerning the same, the said bishop, within ten days next and immediately following, being in the Tower a prisoner, having no liberty, nor pen, nor ink, nor yet notary, nor other witness there but his own servants, did first, before his said servants, protest of the nullity of the pretensed sequestration, intimation, monition, and cornruination; and did appeal and intimate the same to my lord of Canterbury, and other the commissioners aforesaid in this matter, at Lambeth. And, within ten days next and immediately after that, he had council assigned him; and that, according to the counsel of such of the laws as were appointed to him, he caused an appellation querele, allegation, and protestation, to be conceived and made in due form and order of law, and did appeal before a notary or two and a multitude of witnesses, my lord of Canterbury and other commissioners being then present, and healing the same thoroughly read: whereupon he required the said notary to make him one or sundry instruments in that behalf, and all that were there present to bear witness and testify the same. And this is true, public, notorious, manifest, and famous. 81. Item, That the said bishop did, in the mean time, sue to master lieutenant, and to master marshal, to obtain hearing of the council, or to be put to bail: whereunto the bishop could never get answer, or know what should be done with him, till the instant time after seven of the clock in the morning, when he must incontinently be led to answer at Lambeth, before the lord archbishop of Canterbury and other judges appointed to proceed in this pretensed matter of deprivation. 82. Item, That a continual humble suit for ministration of justice can be, by no law or reason, accounted or taken for any obstinacy, contempt, refusal, disobedience, or any point of fault; but as a declaration of the demanders’ confidence and trust in the superiors’ equity and indifferency, much to their honor and estimation; and much more than by demanding of mercy before judgment, which, in him that hath a clear conscience in the fault pretensed, implieth a mistrust and diffidence in the administration of justice: which opinion the said bishop cannot conceive, nor thinketh meet to be persuaded of the superiors; and, therefore, hath continually made that request and suit for justice. 83. Item, That forasmuch as in the act of Parliament, Of the uniformity and service of the administration of the Sacraments, is plainly declared in this wise; namely, ‘And albeit the king’s majesty, with the advice of his entirely beloved uncle the lord protector and other of his highness’s council, hath heretofore-times essayed to stay innovations or new rites concerning the premises, yet the same hath not had so good success as his highness required, in that behalf,’ etc., thereby it evidently appeareth, that the said bishop’s preaching against those that of themselves made innovations, ought therefore specially to be commended and allowed, because he did therein his bounden duty, and furthered and advanced the king’s majesty’s purpose as much as in him was: and that all secret letters of the said duke’s, speeches, or sayings, contrary to the determination of the king’s majesty and the council, declared in the said act, ought not to be reputed of any force or strength whereby now to trouble the said bishop. 84. Item, The said bishop, as well at the time of his committing to prison to the Tower, as before and since the same time, hath always been, and yet is, as humble, ready, willing, and desirous, as any obedient subject ought to be, to do, accomplish, and fulfil, any commandment, request, or other thing, that shall be moved and made to him, either by the king’s majesty, or by the lords of his most honorable council, whatsoever it be, so that it be agreeable in his conscience to God’s laws, and to the laws and statutes of this realm, and to the proclamations, and ordinances, and injunctions, set forth by the king’s majesty’s authority, in this his realm. And so by these presents, under protestation aforesaid, he offereth himself now most ready to do as is aforesaid, in all things. 85. Item, That the premises above written, all and singular, be true, and, according as is above written, such of the premises be public, notorious, manifest, and famous, and so he above specified; and upon them (so specified to be public, notorious, manifest, and famous) goeth and laboureth a public and common voice and fame, which things and matters above specified, all and singular, the said bishop (saving always his protestations above expressed) purposeth and offereth ready to prove the same jointly and severally, under the said protestations, according to the law, at time and place convement: and, under the same protestations, asketh justice to be ministered unto him on and upon the premises jointly and severally; not compelling him to prove every and singular things, clauses, matters, articles, or points of the premises, neither to the charge of superfluous proving of them, whereof he here specially and expressly maketh his protestations.
And thus much for the long matter justificatory, exhibited by Gardiner, in this present act, unto the commissioners. Now, to proceed further: in this fourth act the said Gardiner, after this matter thus exhibited as is above said, did also, under his said protestation, exhibit a certain letter, 109 to him (as he said) sent from the duke of Somerset, inasmuch as the same concerned his full answers to the positions, and made for his full answers; and not otherwise. And therewith he also gave in his answers to the positions afore not fully answered, the promoters accepting the contents as well of the said letters, as of his answers, as far as they made for the office, and not otherwise; and further alleging, that the bishop had not fully answered; and therefore requiring, that he be pronounced ‘contumax;’ and inpain thereof, be declared ‘pro confesso’ upon those positions whereunto it was not fully answered: the said bishop, under his said protestation, alleging that he had fully answered, as far as he was bound by law, referring himself to all his answers, and to the law, and to the letters and matters aforesaid.
Then the promoters (protesting of the nullity and generality, invalidity and inefficacy, of the said matter), alleged that the same did not conclude in law, and therefore ought not to be admitted; and therefore they required the same to be rejected: the said bishop, under his said protestations, requiring the same to be admitted as afore. Then the judges assigned to hear their pleasure as well upon the said answers as upon the said matters, upon the Monday following, at the same time and place, to which assignation the said bishop (under his said protestations) dissented, and required a letter by him, as before exhibited, to be registered, and the original to be to him re-delivered: which was decreed.
THE FIFTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
The fifth appearance or Session of the aforesaid bishop was on the 12th day of January, anno 1551, in the forenoon of that day, before the judges, and in the place, as it was in the last session;. the said actuaries being present. It was assigned, then and there, to hear the judges’ pleasure upon the bishop’s answers, and the matter by him proposed.
The promoters did allege, that the bishop had not fully answered to the seventh, eighth, ninth, and nineteenth positions, as by them is before alleged (referring themselves to the answers, and to the law), and therefore did accuse the contumacy of the bishop. And he, being commanded to make full answer thereunto, and not full answering, they did, as afore, desire him to be pronounced ‘contumax;’ and, in pain thereof, to be declared ‘pro confesso,’ upon the parts of those positions, whereunto he had not fully answered: — the said bishop, under his former protestations, saying, that he ought not to be so pronounced and declared, for that he did not refuse to make answer, but upon the judge’s decree and declaration made: that wherein he hath not fully answered, he would then make answer accordingly. And after disputation had on both sides upon the matter, the judges admonished the said bishop to make full answers to the said positions already not fully answered, on Monday the 26th day of the same month, the same time and place, under pain of the law. After this, the said judges, at the said bishop’s request, under his former protestation, admitted the matter aforesaid, inasmuch as the law would the same matter to be admitted, and not otherwise; the said promoters accepting the contents in the said matter, as far as the same did make for the office, and none otherwise.
Then the said judges assigned to the said bishop (for a term to prove the contents of his said matter) Monday the 26th day of January, the same time and place; and every judicial day between this and that, to produce his witnesses upon intimation thereof made to the promoters of the office; and further offered to the said bishop, that in case he would nominate his witnesses, he should have (if he would require) letters from the said judges to the said witnesses, to command them with speed to come to answer, and be examined without further compulsory process.
The copy of the letter sent to the several witnesses, here followeth.
THE LETTER FROM THE JUDGES TO GARDINER’S WITNESSES.
After our commendations, we signify unto you, that whereas the bishop of Winchester thinketh your testimony necessary for declaration and proof of the truth, as he saith, in a cause depending before us and others, the king’s majesty’s commissioners, and doubteth lest, upon his own request, ye will not willingly come, without certain advertisement from us, thereby to mean no displeasure or danger: these shall be to do you to wit, that ye may, without all blame and lack, upon request unto you made, repair to bear witness in that matter after the truth, and your conscience.
And, to the intent the matter now depending by your absence be not delayed and deferred, we likewise charge you and command you, upon sight hereof, to repair to London with all convenient speed, to depose and testify in the said matter as afore: and therefore will you to use what diligence you can, whereby to avoid that may he objected unto you for the contrary. Thus fare ye well.
Your loving friends, T. Canterbury, John Oliver, N. London, John Gosnall, William Peter, Griffith Leyson.
From Lambeth, the 16th day of January, anno 1551.
And further the said judges declared, that if at that day (the bishop in the mean time using due diligence for production of his witnesses) there should appear sufficient cause to grant him a longer day to prove, that then they would prorogue his said term further, as should be requisite: the bishop, under his said protestations, dissenting to the assignation to prove, for shortness of the time assigned. After this, upon motion made that the bishop should constitute proctors, to produce, his said witnesses, for him, the said bishop, under his said protestation, alleging and protesting that these causes were criminal, and that he therefore could not, by the law, constitute a proctor; nevertheless, under protestation also that by his constitution he intended not to alter the nature of his cause, did constitute Master Thomas Dockwray, John Clerk, proctors of the Arches, James Basset, James Wingfield, and Thomas Somerset, gentlemen, jointly and severally his proctors, to appear for him, and in his name, before the said judges; and to produce witnesses necessary in that behalf, and to require them to be received, sworn, and examined; and, further, to do all things needful and requisite in that behalf, promising to ratify and stand to their doings in the premises. and other his said protestations; requiring a copy of all the acts and exhibits in this cause; to whom it was so decreed.
THE SIXTH ACT AGAINST GARDINER.
Another act or session was held on Saturday the 17th day of January, in the bishop of London’s palace, before the said bishop, and the bishops of Ely and Lincoln, Master Dr. Oliver, and Master Gosnall, commissioners, in the presence of Thomas Argall and William Say, actuaries.
The said day and place, appeared before the said judges Master Thomas Somerset, one of the bishop of Winchester’s proctors, by him constituted the last court day; and, under the said bishop’s former protestations, he exhibited the said proxy, and, making himself party for the said bishop, produced William Coppinger and John Davy, for witnesses upon Articles 40,41,42,43,44, 55,56,68,79,80 and 81 of the matter laid in by the bishop; requiring them to be charged with a corporal oath in form of law, to testify the truth thereupon. At whose request the judges did onerate the said witness with a corporal oath upon the holy evangelists, to depose the whole and plain truth as well upon the said articles as upon the whole cause, and upon such interrogatories as should be ministered unto them, in presence of Masters Lewes and Clapham, promoters of the office, rotesting to say against them and their sayings, in case and as far as they should depose against the office.
The copy of the which interrogatories as well against Coppinger and Davy, as others undernamed, followeth in these words: — Interrogatories ministered against William Coppinger, John Davy, and William Bell, Nicholas Lentall, and Richard Hampden, John Seton, doctor of divinity, William Medow, clerk, Thomas Watson, clerk, and Robert Massey, pretensed Witnesses, brought in and sworn in, of the Bishop of Winchester’s part.
First, it was asked of every of the said pretensed witnesses, Whether he is or hath been servant retained or belonging to the said bishop, and how long he hath been servant so retained or belonging; and what wages, livery, annuity, or advancement, he hath or hath had, of the said bishop. Item, Whether he hath any affection, and what affection, toward the said bishop and his matter, in this cause moved and depending against the said bishop. Item, Whether they or any of them do earnestly covet and desire that the bishop may overcome in this matter, and have the victory: yea or nay. Item, If any of the said witnesses shall at any time seem to say anything prejudicial unto the office promoted against the said bishop, or sounding to his discharge, let it be asked of the cause of his knowledge, and let him express the same.
And thus much for the interrogatories against Coppinger and others.
Concerning the depositions of the witnesses here produced, ye shall see more at large in the twentieth session, until the which session we have deferred all other depositions of witnesses, as well of the one part as of the other, there the whole to be read and seen together.
THE SEVENTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
The Seventh Appearance or Action of the forenamed Bishop was in the Council-chamber at Greenwich, on Monday the 19th day of January, anno 1551, before the Bishops of Ely and Lincoln, Master Secretary Peter, and Master Doctor Leyson, Judges delegate; the Actuaries, as before, being present.
The said day and place, appeared Master James Wingfield, and Master James Basset, proctors, constituted at the last session (which was the 12th day of January) in this cause, by the bishop of Winchester; and, under the bishop’s former protestations, did exhibit the proxy to them in that behalf made, and produced the right honorable personages here undernamed being of the king’s majesty’s most honorable privy council; that is to say, the duke of Somerset’s grace, on articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 17, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 45, 47, 48, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 76, 77: the earl of Wiltshire, lord treasurer, on articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 17, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 41, 42, 43, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 76, 77: the earl of Warwick, lord great master, on articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 76, 77: the earl of Bedford, lord privy seal, on articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67: the marquis of Northampton, lord great chamberlain, on articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 52, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 76, 77: sir William Harbert, master of the horse, on articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77: the lord Chobham, on articles 63, 64, 65, 66 and 67 of the matter proposed by the bishop. Which said honorable personages they required to be admitted, sworn, and examined, as witnesses thereupon, as the law in that behalf required; the said honorable personages declaring, that such personages of dignity as they, were privileged, by the laws of the realm, not to be sworn after the common form, as other persons and witnesses are accustomably sworn: nevertheless promising, upon their truth to God, their allegiance to our sovereign lord the king’s majesty, and their honors and fidelities, to depose the very truth that they knew in that behalf. Whom the said judges did so onerate upon their truth and allegiauce to God, and the king’s majesty, and upon their honors and fidelities, to depose the very truth, as well upon the said articles, as also upon the whole cause, in presence of Master Clapham, promoter of the office, then and there requiring them to be so onerated upon the whole cause, and with due reverence approving the honorable personages of the said witnesses; protesting, nevertheless, to use the beneft of the law against their sayings (their honors always saved), in case and as far as the same should be seen in law to make against the office; and requiring them to be likewise examined upon such intertogatories as should be ministered unto them by the office; they likewise, as afore, promising, and by the judges onerated, to declare and answer the truth thereunto, according to their knowledge in this behalf. THE EIGHTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
The eighth session or court day was holden upon the cause of the bishop of Winchester, in the place of the lord chancellor, lord Riche, at Great St.
Bartholomew’s, before the archbishop of Canterbury, and the rest of the king’s commissioners, in the presence of the aforesaid actuaries, on the twelfth day, the 20th day of January, anno 1551.
The same day and place, appeared before the said judges Master James Basset, one of the bishop of Winchester’s proctors, constituted the last court day; and, under the said bishop’s former protestations he exhibited the stud proxy; and, making himself party for the said bishop, produced the right honorable lord chancellor of England, as witness upon articles 1,2,3,4,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54 and 55 of the matter laid in by the bishop; whom he required to be admitted, sworn, and examined, as a witness, according to the law; the said lord chancellor declaring, that honorable personages being of dignity and office (as he was), are by the laws of the realm privileged not to be sworn in common form, as other witnesses accustomably do swear; promising nevertheless, upon his truth to God, his allegiance to our sovereign lord the king’s majesty, and upon his fidelity, to testify the truth that he doth know, in this behalf: whom the said judges did so onerate upon his truth to God, allegiance to thy king’s majesty, and upon his honor and fidelity, to depose the plain and whole truth, as far as he knew, as well upon the said articles, as also upon the whole cause, in presence of master Clapham, promoter of the office, approving the honorable personage of the said lord, and yet protesting to say against his sayings, in case and as far as they should be seen in law to make against the office; and requiring his lordship to be examined upon such interrogatories as should be ministered unto him by the office; his lordship (like as afore) promising, and by the judges onerated, to declare and answer the truth thereunto, according to his knowledge.
Concerning this noble personage of the lord chancellor here produced, who was then Master Wriothesley, understand, gentle reader, that though we find him here produced and sworn, yet we find not his depositions in any place. Whether he did depose at all, or not, I am not able to say. And this, by the way, concerning that man. Now to the matter.
This being done, the said James Basset, proctor aforesaid, and under the protestations above recited, did intimate to the said lord chancellor, the appellation 111 and querelation made by the said bishop of Winchester, as he said; and did show the instrument thereof made.
After this, the said James Basset, under the former protestations, did produce the worshipful John Baker, knight, upon articles 1,2,3 and 4 of the matter aforesaid, requiring that he might swear and be examined upon the same. At whose request the said judges did onerate the said sir John Baker with an oath upon the holy evangelists, to declare the truth he knew upon the same articles, and upon the interrogatories that should be ministered by the office; the aforesaid master Clapham approving his person, and yet protesting, as before he protested of the lord chancellor.
INTERROGATETIES MINISTERED BY THE OFFICE. 1. Imprimis: Whether ye know, or have heard say, that the late king of famous memory, king Henry the Eighth, father of our sovereign lord the kingmajesty that now is (for sundry causes him moving, and specially for that he judged and esteemed the bishop of Winchester nothing well pleased with the proceedings of the realm in matters of religion) misliked the said bishop, and was much offended with him? 2. Item, Whether ye know, or have heard say, that for the suspicion conceived of the said bishop, as is aforesaid, his highness did forbear and refuse to have him named among other bishops and learned men, which were appointed to make the books last set forth by his majesty, touching a uniformity in matters of religion? 3. Item, Whether ye know, or have heard say, that for the causes aforesaid, and other great considerations him specially moving, he reputed the said bishop for a man vehemently suspected to favor the bishop of Rome? 4. Item, Whether ye know, or have heard say, that the said late king, expressly willed him (the said bishop), no more to be of the privy council with the king’s majesty our sovereign lord that now is; and omitted, and expressly refused, to have him named among other councillors, in his testament, to be of the council, as is aforesaid? 5. Item, Whether ye know, or have heard say, that the said bishop, being aforenamed as an executor in the testament of the said late king, was, a little before his death, at his declaring of his last will, put out by his highness, and so by him refused to be one of his said executors? for what causes the said bishop was so put out, and what the said late king said of the said bishop at the same time? 6. Item, Whether you know, or have heard say, that the said bishop is, and in the time of our late sovereign lord hath been, commonly reputed and accepted a man much favoring the authority and proceedings of the bishop of Rome, and, as such a one, an adversary to the king’s majesty’s godly proceedings for reformation of abuses in religion in the court, in his diocese, and elsewhere, among such as be men of good understanding; and knoweth him commonly accepted and taken as such, and that such is the common and public fame in the court, in his said diocese, or elsewhere in this realm? 7. Item, Whether ye know, or have heard say, that to such of his diocese as favor the king’s majesty’s godly proceedings, he hath been and is an offense or slander; and whether it is probably thought by them, that he, the said bishop, hath been and is, a great hinderance to the said proceedings; and for such a one hath been and is by them commonly reputed and taken. 8. Item, Whether ye know, or have heard say, that he — being commanded in the king’s majesty’s name, for the avoiding of tumult, and upon other urgent considerations, not to treat of anything in controversy concerning the communion or sacrament of the altar and the mass — contrary to that commandment, spake, among other things, these words following, or like in effect; namely, That the very presence of Christ’s most precious body and blood is present in the sacrament, to feed us, which was given to redeem us, and that Christ consecrated himself to be a memorial of himself; and that it was the same Christ that was offered then, and is now either sacrificed, or else remembered in the mass; and that private masses might be and were well retained in this realm of England? 9. Item, Whether ye know, or have heard says that as well before the time of the sermon made by the bishop of Winchester on St. Peter’s day, in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign, as at the time of the sermon, there was much contention, strife, debate, and controversy, among divers of the king’s majesty’s subjects, as well in the city of London, as elsewhere within this realm of England, concerning the presence of Christ’s body and blood to be in the sacrament of the altar, and the retaining and use of private masses, whether the same might stand with God’s word or no.
Then Basset required the lord chancellor to be examined as a witness on the Monday following.
THE NINTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
The ninth session or action upon the cause of Gardiner was held in the house of Cuthbert, bishop of Durham, called Cold Harbor, before Thomas and Henry, bishops of Ely and Lincoln, with the other commissioners judicially sitting, with the presence of the above-named notaries, on Wednesday the 21st of January, 1551.
The said day and place, appeared before the said judges James Basset, one of the bishop of Winchester’s proctors, and under former protestations, produced Cuthbert, bishop of Durham, on articles 1,2,3 and 4; William Bell, clerk, on articles 34 and 35; Nicholas Lentall and Richard Hampden on article 15; John Seton, doctor of divinity, on articles 15,29,34,35 and 38; William Medow, clerk, on articles 1,2,3,5,15, 25,33,34,35 and 38; Thomas Watson, clerk, on articles 7,11,12,14,16,18,19,20,29,31,33,36, 38 and 68; and Robert Massey on articles 13 and 16 of the matter purposed by the bishop of Winchester; requiring that they and every of them might be onerated with an oath, to say and depose the truth in that they knew. At whose request the judges did onerate the same witnesses, and every of them, with an oath corporal, taken in due form, to testify the truth as well upon the said articles, as also upon the whole cause, and, upon such interrogatories as should be ministered unto them. and every of them, when they should be examined in the presence of David Clapham, one of the said promoters of the office, approving the person of the said Cuthbert, bishop, and yet protesting to say against his sayings, and the persons and sayings of the other witnesses, in case they should say or depose any thing against his office. These things done, appeared before the said commissioners then and there judicially sitting, as before, Thomas Dockwray, one of the proctors of the bishop of Winchester, constituted and appointed by him, and under former protestations made by the said bishop, he did exhibit his proxy for the said bishop, made in the acts, and made himself party for him. And also, under the said protestations, he gave and exhibited certain positions additional unto the matter already purposed by the said bishop of Winchester, which he desired to be admitted in the presence of the aforesaid David Clapham, one of the promoters, protesting of the nullity, generality, invalidity, ineffieacy, and undue specification, of the same; and desiring the same to be rejected.
Then the judges assigned to hear their pleasure upon the said positions upon the Monday following at Lambeth, at the hour accustomed, and heretofore already assigned. Consequently the said Thomas Dockwray, proctor aforesaid, under former protestations, etc., did lay in and give a matter in writing, conceived against the exhibits, desiring the same to be admitted by the judges in the presence of the aforenamed David Clapham, promoter, protesting, as he did of the positions additional afore given; and further, alleging the same not to conclude in law, and therefore desiring the same matter to be rejected. Hereupon the judges assigned their pleasure to be heard upon the admission, or else the rejection, of the said matter, the day and place assigned; concerning which positions additional, with the matter, also, by the aforesaid proctor exhibited, the tenor thereof here followeth:
ARTICLES ADDITIONAL EXHIBITED BY GARDINER.
Here follow the positions and articles additional and declaratory of the matter, and letter, of late purposed and exhibited by the bishop of Winchester, before the pretensed commissaries or judges delegate, named in the same matter, which the said bishop gave under the protestations made by him in the matter aforesaid.
First, that the bishop of London that now is, then being bishop of Rochester, did openly in his sermon made at Paul’s Cross in the month of November or December, or thereabouts, in the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign that now is, very earnestly and vehemently preach and teach the true presence of Christ’s most precious body to be in the Sacrament of the Altar. [Proponit conjunctim, divisim, et de quolibet.] Item, That Dr. Redman, in a sermon which he preached before the king’s majesty in Lent, the second year of his majesty’s reign, did preach and teach to be believed for the true catholic faith, that the true presence of Christ’s body and blood was in the sacrament of the altar. [Proponit ut supra, 113 ] Item, That my lord archbishop of Canterbury, about the time that the bishop of Winchester aforesaid preached a sermon on St.
Peter’s-day at Westminster, before the king’s, majesty, in a book by him translated, called Catechism, did affirm, publish, and set forth, the true presence of Christ’s most precious body and blood to be in the sacrament of the altar; and, to the intent the same should so be believed, observed, acknowledged, and taught to be the true and catholic faith, did cause the same to be printed in his name, and as his translation; which books, so printed into great number of books, were, after their imprinting, to the intent aforesaid, openly and commonly sold by many and sundry booksellers, as well of London as of other places, and came about to all the parts of this realm, or to many parts of the same, and were openly and commonly known, declared, published, read, and heard, of all sorts of the king’s majesty’s subjects of this realm.
And this was and is true, public, notorious, manifest, and famous. Item, That in the months November and December, in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign, the bishops of Durham, Carlisle, London, Chichester, Worcester, Norwich, Hereford, and Westminster (being of the most ancient bishops and best learned in this realm), did openly, in the parliament then kept at Westminster, defend the very and true presence of Christ’s body and blood to be in the sacrament of the altar. Item, That in sundry open and solemn disputations, made as well in the university of Oxford, as of Cambridge, the third year of the king’s majesty’s reign, the same true presence of the very body and blood of Christ to be in the sacrament of the altar, was maintained and defended by the great number of the chief and well learned of the said universities And this was and is true, public, notorious, manifest, and famous. Item, That the truth of Christ’s most precious body and blood in the sacrament of the altar, hath not been nor was impugned, by any famous clerk, or yet by any named learned man in any part of all Christendom, either in the Greek or in the Latin Church, by our time; specially at the time of the letters sent by the same duke of Somerset to the said bishop, mentioned in this matter aforesaid; but only by OEcolampadius, Zuinglius, Vadianus and Carolostadius, the impugning whereof was most manifest error; and, in England, no learned man named had, or yet did, openly defend or favor that error. And this is true, public, notorious, manifest, and famous. Item, That the said bishop said not to Master Cecil that the mass was the chief foundation of our religion, for Christ himself is the only foundation; and in the mass, as now in the communion, [is] the showing forth of Christ’s death; which is a sacrifice recordative of that only sacrifice of the cross, used in the church according to Christ’s institution till his coming; the substance of the sacrifice being all as one, and the manner of the offering only differing. And after this manner and sort, in effect, the bishop, in his speaking of the mass to Master Cecil, as is aforenamed, declared to him, and no otherwise, if he had then rightly taken, perceived, and afterwards so uttered and reported the same. Item, That by our late sovereign lord the king’s majesty’s father that now is, and by his testament and last will, it was provided, ordered, and (upon just considerations then moving his majesty for the preservation and quietness of this his then realm) decreed, that his majesty’s councillors of his privy council, then being named and appointed in the same testament, or the more part of them, with further execution in that behalf should have the whole order and governance of the same realm, during the minority of his only treasure under God, the king’s majesty that now is, which things, according to these effects, were thus declared, before the king’s majesty that now is, by the mouth of the lord chancellor, who was at that time in the Tower of London, then beingq present as well the said bishop of Winchester, as other of the lords of the council, and divers others hearing the same, whereby the authority of the protectorship was clearly restrained. Item, That the digression of the said duke from that order aforesaid, and the breaking thereof, was afterwards, among other matters, with the body of the king’s majesty’s privy council, objected to him as a fault and offense.
THE TENOR OF THE MATTER EXHIBITED BY THE BISHOP OF WINTON AGAINST THE EXHIBITS LAID IN AGAINST HIM.
In the name of God, Amen. — Before you Thomas, by the sufferance of God archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, and metropolitan, and one of the king’s majesty’s privy council; Nicholas bishop of London; Thomas bishop of Ely and one of the king’s majesty’s privy council; Henry, the lord bishop of Lincoln; sir William Peter knight, one of the principal secretaries of the king’s majesty, and one of his majesty’s privy council; sir James Hales knight, one of the justices of the king’s Common Pleas at Westminster; John Oliver and Griffith Leyson, doctors of the civil laws; Richard Goodrick and John Gosnall esquires, commissaries or judges delegates, as it is pretended, in this behalf deputed; either before all you jointly together, or before some of you, such as, in this pretensed matter of your office (as it is pretensed, necessarily against Stephen bishop of Winton promoted) shall happen to proceed — the said bishop, all and singular protestations heretofore by him made in this pretensed cause always to him reserved and saved; and in all things that he doth or shall do now, or at any time hereafter, to be had always for often and oftener repeated — under the same protestations excepting and admitting all such matters, clauses, words, articles, sentences, and all such parts of the books, acts, or writings, as were exhibited before you the commissaries pretensed aforesaid, or before some of you, then howsoever sitting in this pretensed matter at Lambeth, the Tuesday afore the nativity of Christ last past, being the 23d day of December, as maketh for that part purpose and intent of the said bishop, in this behalf, against all such pretensed parts, clauses, sentences, words, or matters, of the same books, acts, [and] writings, that shall seem to make against the said bishop, and against all other things as be against him purposed and pretended in this matter, by all ways, manners, and forms of the law, best and most effectual, owed by the law, and to all effects, purposes, and intents of the law, that may thereupon follow, saith, allegeth, and in this writing purposeth in law articularly, and jointly and severally, as hereafter followeth:
First , that the said books, acts, and writings, or anything in them contained, be [not] in effect, strength, virtue, or efficacy, to make any proof, namely, sufficient by the law, against the said bishop, nor yet be, nor ought to be, by the law, in anywise prejudicial to the said bishop, in this pretensed cause, for the causes, matters, and considerations in this present article, and in other articles, in their order and course following respectively deduced; and, among other things, because the said bishop, being commanded, by letters directed to him from my lords of the council, to appear before the king’s majesty’s council the 25th day of the month of September, the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign; according to the same commandment, repaired unto them with all speed he could, and, the 25th day of that month, the same bishop appeared at Hampton Court, before them. [Proponit conjunctim, divisim, et de quolibet.] 2. Item, That the said bishop, for desire he had to have the king’s majesty’s visitors honorably and duly received, provided, before his repair to the council, to make a sufficient proxy under his seal, in ample form, to one Master Cook, and one Potinger, to supply the absence of the said bishop, and do for him, and in his name, all things duly and accordingly, if the said bishop should happen, by sickness or otherwise, then to be absent, as he, the said bishop, might do, being personally present. [Proponit ut supra. 114 ] 3. Item, That the said bishop — hearing that the said king’s majesty’s visitors should come to Winchester, and then having commandment, as is aforesaid, to appear before the king’s majesty’s council, about three weeks or thereabouts before the visitors’ coming thither — doubting, for the causes that might happen (as is aforesaid), that he should then be absent, gave especial and express commandment, as well to his proctors aforesaid, as to his chancellor and other his officers, there to do their duties to the said visitors, if they came in his absence, and to receive and use them in most humble and honorable manner; and also to obey them, in their doings and commandments, quietly and willingly in all things. 4. Item, That likewise the said bishop, besides the general commandment aforesaid, willed and commanded his chaplains and curates of his diocese, such as it chanced him to speak withal, after that he had knowledge of the visitation (as is aforesaid) to be had at Winton, especially such as it chanced him to speak with by the way coming to the council, that they, in anywise, should duly receive and obey whatsoever in that visitation should be done, enjoined, and commanded. 5. Item, That according to the will, mind, and commandment aforesaid, by the said bishop respectively given, the said bishop’s proctor, his chancellor, his chaplains, and other his officers and ministers, and the residue of his diocese, did, with due honor, obedience, and quietness, use themselves to the said visitors; and did obey and fulfil their commandments and injunctions. 6. Item, That the said visitation began in the diocese of Winton about the 12th day of the month of October,. in the first, year of the king’s majesty’s reign. 7. Item, That at the time of the said visitation, kept as is aforesaid at Winchester, and likewise somewhat afore the said visitation, and a long time after, the said bishop was a prisoner in the Fleet; and under commandment so to be kept there, that none of his servants but only two specially appointed or licensed in that behalf, nor yet any other stranger, might have access or speak with him; but there to remain secretly. 8. Item, The said bishop was committed to the Fleet, as is aforesaid, by reason of his letters, which, according to his bounden duty, and as a true and faithful subject, about a month before the said visitation at Winchester, he sent to the king’s majesty’s privy council, declaring in the same letters (like a faithful obedient subject) what his conscience and duty bound him to utter; specially concerning certain contrarieties contained in matters to be set forth by that visitation, as by the same letters, and by the contents of the same matters, more plainly may appear; to which he refcrreth himselfinto as much as may make for his purpose in this behalf. 10. 115 Item, At the time the said bishop was committed to the Fleet, as is aforesaid, the duke of Somerset was not then at home in these parts, but, at that time and likewise before, was in Scotland, or at the least was not come home from his journey in Scotland. And this is true, public, manifest, and famous. 11. Item, The said bishop, being prisoner in the Fleet, after the coming home of the duke of Somerset, sent to the same duke many and sundry times, requiring him that he might be heard, and to know why he should be so detained in prison without any offense specially declared unto him: and thereupon, by his letters, declared to the said duke, the circumstance of that whole matter, as by the contents of the same letters, and otherwise, if need require, shall and may appear. 12. Item, The said bishop, being in prison in the Fleet aforesaid by the space of fifteen weeks 43 or thereabouts, remained continually there, not called before any judge, or any of the king’s majesty’s council by way of examination, nor yet anything objected against him wherefore he should be committed to prison, or so to be used. 13. Item, That the said bishop was delivered out of the Fleet, by the general pardon the morrow after Twelfth-day, at Hampton Court, in the said first year of the king’s majesty’s reign. 14. Item, That within fourteen days then next following, or thereabouts, the same bishop was, by the same duke and others of the king’s majesty’s privy council, commanded to keep his own house in Southwark, for not agreeing to a certain form of articles touching Justification, as was then conceived; where he remained after that manner till the first Monday in Lent then next following. 15. Item, That the said first Monday in Lent, or incontinently after, he said bishop returned to Winchester, where he lived quietly, and did duly execute, accomplish, and set forth all such commandments as were then ordered to be set forth and executed, with the due obedience; observing, following, and executing of, all such proclamations as were then, in the king’s majesty’s name, sent abroad to be published in that diocese, and other parts of his majesty’s realm. 16. Item, That as well the said bishop as his servants, at all times of his being at Winchester, and at all other places of this realm, hath been always in quiet peace and quiet behavior, without any tumult, commotion, or disturbance, either among themselves or any other of the king’s subjects, or in giving any occasion thereunto, — nor yet at any time they or any of them were in harness, or prepared harness, or any other weapons, to any such purpose or intent; and as well the said bishop as his servants, always have been and be — for persons of quietness, soberness, and of good and peaceable demeanors and behaviors in all their doings — commonly and openly named, accepted, taken, and reputed. 17. Item, That the said bishop, being a person of quietness, and of quiet and peaceable behavior, as is aforesaid, did never at any time command any of his servants to wear harness, or foresee any manner of safeguard of his house and person from the force of any man, nor yet to withstand the powers of the realm; nor yet the said bishop hath at any time showed in his doings any likelihood of such a temerous act, or any token of such folly, to think he could, without his utter destruction, give or attempt the least signification of such a purpose.
And therefore this pretense (as here, for the bishop’s lawful defense only, may be declared without the offense of any personage of authority) is such an untrue imagined matter as was neither true nor yet done or thought of by the said bishop or any of his, to his knowledge; nor yet the same was ever at any time in anywise objected against the said bishop, nor any such surmise or information should be against him, till now it should seem such matter to appear in some part of the pretensed acts aforesaid. 18. Item, That at such time that master Tonge and master Eyre repaired to Winchester, to be instituted canons in that church, they were required and caused to come to the bishop, and to his house there, and by the same bishop gently welcomed, and familiarly entertained, and caused by him to tarry and to sup with him, being the Thursday at night before the bishop preached on the Sunday then next following as he had before so appointed. And, afterwards, the bishop departed from them very familiarly, offering them to be welcome to his house during their tarrying in the town. 19. Item, The said bishop, in his preaching or sermon aforesaid, made at Winchester the Sunday after their coming, or otherwise, did not disprove or disgrace the said master Tonge and master Eyre, or either of them, as by them was surmised; and the said bishop, having that objected to him by the duke of Somerset, did justly deny it expressly. 20. Item, That the said bishop, after his preaching at Winchester aforesaid, was called before the duke of Somerset and others of the king’s majesty’s council then being, and being charged with certain matters of no importance, and most untruly surmised, did so answer unto the same as they appeared not worthy of any further examination, and the said bishop and council did indeed no further proceed in them. And thereupon, the said bishop (required to tarry in the town) was bold to say to them, he ought not to tarry as an offender, for he was none. 21. Item, That the said bishop, in his sermon before the king’s majesty made at Westminster, on St. Peter’s day shall be three years, was very quietly heard, and so quietly departed without any tumult or disturbance then risen there, or in the town, or any other place, or any time since, by occasion thereof. 22. Item, Albeit the said bishop ought and doth honor all virtues of the king’s majesty, and esteemeth justice worthy to be extolled with the commendation of clemency; yet as touching clemency, as it implieth forgiveness and pardon of a manifest fault, after special conviction and condemnation therein, the said bishop never hitherto came into the same case, being never convicted or condemned of any fault; and yet hath and doth, with other of the king’s majesty’s subjects, enjoy such general pardon, as it hath pleased his highness to grant; for the which he will also with them pray and extol the king’s majesty’s clemency, to which virtue the said bishop thinketh the king’s said majesty to be, by God’s goodness, inclined. 23. Item, The said hishop — under the protestations aforesaid, alleging against those parts of the books, acts, or writings against him, as is aforesaid in this behalf howsoever exhibited — to the intent and purpose only to use his just defense, herein, without any prejudice or offense of any party, and no otherwise (whereof he here expressly protesteth) saith; that the devisers, conceivers, and writers of the said pretensed exhibits, have inserted expressly, and specified in them, divers and sundry matters, clauses, and things, which notoriously and manifestly were and be untrue and unjust; as, among other things, concerning the bishop’s servants to be by the said bishop secretly armed and harnessed to withstand such as should be sent, by the duke of Somerset’s grace and the council, to Hampshire, and those parts.
And in divers other places of the same exhibits, the said devisers, conceivers, and writers, have omitted and left out divers and sundry clauses, points, matters, and allegings, as make for the just defense and declaration of innocency of the said bishop, videlicet, among other things, where the bishop offered to make particular answer to the articles mentioned in the same books propounded unto him; and required a copy of the articles to be delivered unto him, that he might so do; and offered to be ready to make the said answer, being in prison, as by the contents of the said pretensed exhibits, and otherwise, if need required, might and should evidently appear. 24. Item, That the premises, all and singular, were and be true, public, notorious, manifest, and famous; and upon them had and did labor a common voice and fame: whereupon the said bishop, under his protestations aforesaid asked and required justice to be ministered unto him of and upon all and singular the premises jointly and severally not obliging in him to prove all and singular the said premises nor any superfluous charge of any proving of them, whereof he here expressly protesteth.
THE TENTH SESSION.
The tenth session against Cardiner bishop of Winchester was holden in the house of the bishop of Ely, in Warwick-lane, before the said bishops of Ely and London, master Leyson, and other the kings commissioners, with their notaries above mentioned, on Friday the 28d day of January, 1551, in the fourth year of Edward the Sixth.
The said day and place appeared before the said commissioners master Thomas Somerset, one of the bishop of Winchester’s proctors, and under former protestations made, etc., he produced sir John Markham knight, on articles 40, 41,42,43,44,56,68 and 81; Thomas White esquire, on articles 1, 2,3 and 13; John Norton esquire, on articles 1,2 and 3; John Cooke esquire, on articles 1,2,3,8 and 14; master John White, warden, on articles 1,2,3,15,29, and 37; Francis Allen, on articles 7,8,11,12, 36, 38,45 and 68; John Potinger, on articles 1,8 and 15; Peter Langridge, on articles 1,8 and 15; Roger Ford, on articles 1 and 8; William Laurence and Giles White, on the 15th; William Lorking, vicar of Faruham, on the 14th; Herman Bilson, on the 15th; Thomas Williams, John Hardy, Robert Braborne, Robert Quinhy, John Reade, on 14th; Thomas Crowte 116 on the 15th and 68th; George Bullock, George Smith, Hugh Weston, Philip Morgan 117 Richard Bruerne, 118 John Weale, clerks, on the articles 34,35 and 37; Alexander Deringe, William Browne, on articles 1,8,9 and 15; John Temple, on articles 1,2 and 3; Thomas White, prebendary, on the 15th; and John Glasiar, on the 8th and 9th articles of the matter given by the bishop of Winchester: which said witnesses, and every one of them, the said bishop of London, by the consent of his colleagues, and the desire of the said Thomas Somerset, proctor aforesaid, did onerate with a corporal oath on the holy Evangelists, to depose the whole truth as well upon the same articles, that they were so specially produced on, as the whole cause and matter, and upon such interrogatories as should be ministered to them, as far as they knew, in the presence of master Davy Clapham, one of the promoters of the office; dissenting from the said production, and approving the persons of the aforesaid sir John Markham and master Ralph Hopton; but yet protesting to say against their sayings, in case they should depose against the office; and desiring that they might be examined of such interrogatories as should be ministered by the office; and protesting against the persons and sayings of all the other witnesses and of every of them, in case they or any of them should depose against the office; and repeating against them the interragatories last ministered by the office. This done, the said master Somerset, proctor aforesaid, alleged that master doctor Redman, and doctor Steward, were necessary witnesses for to prove certain things contained in the aforesaid matter, which master Redman had been and then was sick, and the said master Steward in durance.
Wherefore he desired a commission for the examination of the said master Redman, and means had, that the said master Steward might come to be sworn and examined; and also required temporal counsel to be assigned to the said bishop. THE ELEVENTH SESSION.
The eleventh session upon the matter of Gardiner bishop of Winchester, was in the house of the lord Paget, without Temple-bar, before the aforesaid commissioners judicially sitting (Thomas Argall, notary, being present), the day aforesaid; that is, the 23d of January, 1551.
At that time and place master Davy Clapham, and John Lewis, promoters of the office, did produce sir William Paget, knight of the order of the garter, lord Paget, upon the articles laid in by the office; whom they desired to be sworn and examined as a witness, according to law; the said lord Paget declaring, that honorable personages being of dignity as he was, were, by the laws of this realm, privileged not to be sworn in common form, as other witnesses accustomly did swear; promising, nevertheless, upon his truth to God, his allegiance to our sovereign lord the king’s majesty, and upon his fidelity, to testify the truth that he did know in this behalf; whom the said judges did so onerate upon his truth to God, allegiance to the king’s majesty, and upon his honor and fidelity, to depose the plain and whole truth, as far as he knew, as well upon the said articles, as also upon the whole cause and interrogatories that should be ministered, in the presence of Thomas Somerset, proctor to the bishop of Winchester, under protestation, etc., dissenting to theproduction, and protesting of the nullity, etc.; and to say against his person andsayings (if he should depose against the said bishop in this matter); and requiring that he might be examined upon such interrogatories as should be ministered against him; and requiring, also, that he might be sworn with a corporal oath upon the Evangelists. THE TWELFTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
The twelfth session upon the matter of Gardiner bishop of Winchester, was within the bishop of Ely’s house, before the bishops of London and Ely, with the rest of the commissioners delegate, one of the aforesaid two aetuaries being present, the 24th day of January, 1551.
The said day and place appeared James Basset, one of the bishop of Winchester’s proctors, and, under protestations before made, and aiways reserved, he produced sir Thomas Smith, on articles 17,22,23,24,25,26, 27 and 28; Robert Willerton, John Young, and Edmund Bricket, clerks, on articles 34,35 and 37; whom and every one of them the said judges, at his desire, did onerate with a corporal oath, for to say and depose the truth upon the said articles, the whole cause and interrogatories, in the presence of master Clapham, approving the person of sir Thomas Smith, and protesting to say against his sayings, and the persons and sayings of the other witnesses, in case they or any of them should depose against the office; repeating the interrogatories already ministered against all the said witnesses, saving sir Thomas Smith.
THE THIRTEENTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
The thirteenth session wherein appeared the said bishop of Winchester was held at Lambeth, before the archbishop of Canterbury, with all the other judges except master Hales and master Goodrick; the two aforesaid actuaries being withal present, on Monday in the forenoon, which was the 26th day of January, 1551.
This said day and place, the bishop of Winchester, under his former protestations, exhibited an allegation in writing touching the admonishment given to him the last court day to make answer to the seventh, eighth, ninth, and nineteenth positions or articles; the copy and tenor of this allegation, so by him exhibited, hereafter followeth.
THE ALLEGATION OF WINCHESTER, TOUCHING THE PRETENSED ADMONISHMENT. The said bishop, repeating his protestations in the acts, said, that discoursing, and particularly debating, the last court day the answers made by him to the said articles, and agreeing, as he took it, with the judges therein, and so departing, it had been, and was besides, his expectation to hear, in the acts, mention of such admonishment. Nevertheless, the said bishop, for the declaration of himself, how ready be was to obey always, for satisfaction of that admonishment laid in his allegations; and therewith declared, that according to the testimony of his conscience, he had fully answered the said articles, weighing together all that he had answered already and proved, so far as the same opened. And further declared the matter of the said answer, without cautious understanding, whereof the bishop protested. And yet, if the judges should declare any special point of any the said articles, wherein a more full answer ought by law to be made, the said bishop offered himself, without any further delay, to make such answer as the law should bind him; and thereby eschew, as much as in him was, the report of disobedience not to answer, when he might answer, or not so fully as he might, with his conscience.
This allegation thus exhibited by the said bishop — furthermore, by word of mouth, for fuller answer [he] alleged, that he thought he spake of every article particularly, saving of the king’s authority in his young years, and except St. Nicholas and St. Edmund, and such children’s toys. And also he said, that he always submitted himself to justice; and for that he knew not himself guilty, he called not for mercy within the time of three months expressed in the said articles: which time of three months ran not, because it was suspended by his appellation made from the sequestration mentioned in the said articles.
After this the judges, at the said bishop’s request, under his former protestations, admitted the positions additional, and the matter lastly laid in on his behalf, and before inserted in the ninth session (as far as the same should or ought in law to be admitted, and none otherwise) in presence of the promoters protesting of the overmuch generality, impertineney, and ineffieacy, of the said positions additional and matter; and alleging, that the same ought not, by the law, to be admitted. Then the bishop, under his former protestations protesting that he intended,not to renounce the benefit of the law which he ought to have, in the production and swearing of such witnesses as he alleged were received afore in his absence — touching their oath, gave certain interrogatories in writing against the lord Paget, being a witness received and sworn against him; the promoters alleging that nonewere received but either [in] his own presence or that of his proctors.
The copy of the said interrogatories, laid in against the aforenamed lord Paget, followeth; which were these: — INTERROGATORIES MINISTERED TO THE LORD PAGET.
First , Whether he was present at the Council sitting in the king’s majesty’s palace at Westminster, when the bishop of Winchester appeared there, to answer such matter as was objected by the duke of Somerset, then lord protector; being in the month of May or June in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign? Item, Whether the said bishop, after answer made to all such matters as were objected against the bishop of Winchester, when he was required to tarry in town, did answer, that he ought not to tarry as an offender; for he was none? 2. Item, Whether the said bishop did thereupon request, to the intent it might so appear the better, that the said bishop might borrow some house in the country more near London, whereunto to resort for shift? 3. Item, That the said bishop required specially the house of Esher, whereof the said lord Paget was then keeper. 4. Item, Whether the said lord Paget, incontinently upon the attainder of the late duke of Norfolk, did not do a message from the king’s majesty to the said bishop, that he would be content that master secretary Peter might have the same hundred pounds a year of the said bishop’s grant, that the said duke had? 5. Item, Whether, after the said bishop had answered himself, to gratify the king’s majesty, to be content therewith, the said lord Paget made relation thereof, as is said, to the king’s majesty, who answered, that he thanked the bishop very heartily for it, and that he might assure himself the king’s majesty was his very good lord? 6. Item, Whether the said lord Paget knew the said bishop to have been in the council, within thirteen days of the king’s departure, to be there mouth to mouth, to commune with the ambassadors, or no?
After this the said bishop, then and there, under his former protestations alleged as followeth:
That master secretary Peter, one of the judges, was a necessary witness for proof of certain articles received in his matter justificatory; wherefore he required him so to be received and sworn by the rest of the commissioners, the promoters protesting of the nullity of the said allegation and petition; and alleging, that the same ought not to be admitted, for that, chiefly, there hath hitherto been divers articles sped in this cause, having the strength and efficacy of ‘litis contestatio:’ and master secretary then and there declared, that his testimony was not so necessary for the bishop, for that at such time as he was with the bishop in the Tower, there were two or three more with him, by whom the truth of that which was then done, might be known, without his testimony; and that whereas sir William Harbert and he were there with him at another time, he (the said master secretary) would always be ready to declare, by mouth or writing, what was done and said at that time, to his knowledge and remembrance, as well as if he were sworn.
This done, the bishop, under protestation aforesaid, produced for a witness upon articles 1,2 and 3 of the matter justificatory, master Philip Paris, whom the judges did onerate with a corporal oath, in form of law, to testify the truth as well upon the said articles, as upon all other articles and interrogateries, to be ministered in this cause unto him; the promoters protesting to say, both against the person of the said witness, in case and as far as he should depose against the office, and repeating the interrogatories heretofore ministered. The bishop also, under his said protestation, required to have master Thomas Somerset, James Basset, and master James Wingfield, sworn as witnesses; the promoters alleging, that they were the bishop’s proctors, and had exercised for him in this cause, and therefore ought not now to be admitted for witnesses. After this, the said bishop, under his protestations aforesaid, for part of his proof of his matter justificatory, did exhibit and leave among the articles of this cause a certain book, written and made by him (as he said) concerning his opinion and true belief of the Sacrament of the Altar, and of the True Catholic Faith therein, for confutation (as he affirmed) of my lord of Canterbury’s book, lately set forth upon the said matter. And, not provoking (as he said) the said judges presently to dispute thereupon, offered himself tobe ready, at the will and pleasure of the judges, at any time and place convenient, and before a due audience, by learning to defend the said book: which book he required to be inserted among the articles of this cause, and a copy thereof to be granted to him, to whom the judges did decree. 122 The exhibition of which book, and the contents thereof, the said promoters, protesting of the nullity, alleged the same to be the hishop’s private writings, and not authentic and such whereunto by the law there is faith to be given; referring themselves to the book, and to the law, as far as it was expedient. After this, the said judges, at the petition of the said bishop, under his former protestation, prorogued his term probatory until Tuesday, the 3d of February next, by nine of the clock in the forenoon of the same day, in the same place; and every judicial day in the mean time to produce witnesses, upon due intimation thereof made to the promoters, or one of them: and assigned to the said bishop to see further process in this cause between ten and eleven of the clock aforenoon, the same day.
Then the said judges, at the said bishop’s request, under his protestations aforesaid, alleging master doctor Redman to be a necessary witness for proof of the contents of articles 34,35 and of his matter justificatory, and that he was at this present, for sickness, not able to come thither without danger, decreed a commission for his examination, and committed power and authority to receive, swear, and examine him, to master Edward Leedes and master Michael Donninge of Cambridge, jointly and severally, in Trinity College in Cambridge, on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, now next ensuing; taking to them for actuary Robert Chapman, or (he being absent or letted) any other indifferent notary; and assigned them to transmit the same on Tuesday, the 3d of February next, by nine of the clock in the forenoon in this place.
And further the said judges — at the said bishop’s request, under protestation as afore, required to have Dr. Steward examined upon certain articles of his matter, and to have more temporal counsel besides sir John Morgan — decreed, that Dr. Steward should be examined between this and the next Court day, and willed the bishop to send them the names of such temporal counsellors as he required. The said bishop also, under protestations as afore, showed forth certain letters, and other writings, which he intended also (as he said) to exhibit. To whom the judges did assign to bring in the same and leave them ‘apud acta’ with them (the said actuaries) the morrow next.
THE FOURTEENTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
The fourteenth action, or session, was in the bishop of Winchester’s lodging, within the Tower of London, on Tuesday, the 27th day of January, in the presence of William Saye, one of the aforesaid two actuaries.
The said day and place, in presence of William Saye, notary, the bishop of Winchester, under his former protestations (that by this act he intended not to alter the nature of the cause), did constitute master Thomas Dockwray, John Clerke (proctors of the Arches), Thomas Somerset, James Basset, and James Wingfield, his proctors; jointly and severally — for him and in his name — to produce witnesses upon his matters purposed, and to be purposed, in this matter: and further, to do therein as he himself ought or should do, at all times, as well when he was present as absent. And likewise did constitute William Buckham and master Mitch, fellows in Trinity-hall in Cambridge, jointly and severally his proctors, to produce Dr. Redman before the king’s majesty’s subdelegates, and to require him to be received, sworn, and examined, upon the articles to the commission annexed; and promised to ratify the doings of his said proctors herein, being present hereat master Dr. Jeffrey, William Copinger, and John Davy, etc.
THE FIFTEENTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER The fifteenth action or session upon the matter of the bishop of Winchester was holden before Dr. Oliver, one of the king’s commissioners, in the presence of Thomas Argall, one of the two actuaries.
The said day master Thomas Somerset, one of the bishop of Winchester’s proctors, according to the assignation made, and under former protestations, etc., did exhibit certain minutes, letters, and escripts, to declare the said bishop’s conformity from time to time, since the death of king Henry the Eighth, unto this present time; and also exhibited the same, as much as they should make for him in this cause, and not otherwise; videlieet first, five original letters, whereof three [were] from the duke of Somerset, one from master Cecil, and the others from master Brig and other the king’s visitors. Item, A book of statutes set forth in the second and third year of the king’s majesty that now is; wherein is contained An Act of Uniformity of the Service, and the Administration of the Sacrament throughout the realm. Item, The bishop of Winchester’s proxy exhibited in the visitation. Item, The copy of a letter printed and directed unto the preachers, from the duke of Somerset and others of the council. Item, Minutes of two letters from the bishop of Winchester to the duke of Somerset, then protector, from Winchester, before the said bishop’s committing to the Fleet, with copies of them. Item, Minutes of letters from the bishop of Winchester to the bishop of Canterbury in No. 3, with their copies. Item, Minutes of letters from the bishop of Winchester to the lords of the king’s majesty’s council, before his committing to the Fleet — in No. 2, with their copies. Item, Minutes of letters from the bishop of Winchester to the lord protector out of the Fleet — in No. 4, with their copies, Item, Minutes of letters from the bishop of Winchester to the lord protector, when he was committed to ward in his house — in No. 1. Item, Minutes of letters from the bishop to the lord protector, from Winchester — in No. 1.
In the mean time before the bishop’s sending for to London, at which time he was sent to the Tower, all these said originals the said master Somerset required to have, when they were collated and conferred. THE SIXTEENTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
Another action or session upon the cause of Gardiner was in the house of the bishop of Ely, before the bishops of Ely and Lincoln, master Leyson, and master Oliver (Thomas Argall, actuary, being present), on Thursday, the 29th day of January, 1551.
The same day and place, James Basset, one of the bishop of Winchester’s proctors, under the bishop’s former protestations, exhibiting, his proxy, etc, produced the reverend father Thomas, bishop of Norwich, on articles 1,2,3,4 of the first matter, and the 4th and 6th of the additionals; sir Edward Carne, on the articles 1,2 and 3 of the first matter; Thomas Babington, on articles 1,7,10,11 of the last matter; Maurice Griffith, clerk, on articles 3,4,35 and of the first matter, and the first article of the additionals, and on the twentieth of the last matter; Christopher Moulton, on articles 3,4,35 and 37 of the matter, and on the 20th of the matter contra exhibited; William Glyn clerk, on the 4th of the additionals; Thomas Nave, on articles 15,16 and 20 of the last matter; Oliver Wachell, on articles 13,15,16 and 18 of the last matter; Thomas Cotisforde, on the 7th of the last matter; Henry Burton on articles 9,15 and 16 of the last matter; Thomas Skerne, on the 15th and 16th of the last matter; Osmond Coware, on the 9th, 15th, and 16th of the last matter; John Cliff, on the 15th and 16th of the last matter; John Warner, on the 15th and the 16th of the last matter; John Seton, clerk, on articles 4,7,14,15,16,17,18 and 20 of the last matter; William Medowe, clerk, on the 1st of the additionals, and on articles 4,5,6,7,9,14,15,16,18 and 20 of the last matter; Thomas Watson, clerk, on the 1st of the additionsis, and on articles 4,7,9,13,14,15,16,17, and 20 of the last matter; John Potinger, on articles 2,3,5,6,15 and 16 of the last matter; John Temple, on the 13th of the last matter; Alexander Dering, on the 15th and 16th of the last matter; William Browne, on the 2d, 3d, 5th and 6th of the last matter — which witnesses the said judges did onerate with an oath, to depose of and upon all and singular such articles as they were produced upon, and the whole cause, and such interrogatories as should be ministered in the presence of Clapham and Lewis; approving the persons of the said bishop of Norwich, and sir Edward Carne; and protesting to say against their sayings, and the persons and sayings of all the other witnesses; and repeating the interrogatories before ministered, and requiring them to be examined on the same, and others to be ministered by them. Which done, the same James Basset (under the said bishop’s former protestations) alleged that the bishops of Durham, Worcester, and Chichester, were necessary witnesses to prove, etc.; and to have a commission for the examination of Dr. Steward, being prisoner in the Marshalsea. Whereupon the said judges, by one assent, committed their power to the bishop of Ely and Dr. Oliver, for the examination of the bishop of Durham; master Leyson for the examination of Dr. Steward; and the bishop of Lincoln for the examination of the bishops of Worcester and Chicheater in the Fleet.
And forasmuch as mention is made, in this act, of certain interrogatories, as well of such as were to be ministered, as of the others being repeated before, the copy of them, which were afterwards ministered, here followeth in these words:
INTERROGATORIES UPON THE FIRST ARTICLES ADDITIONAL. 1. Whether the bishop of London, in his said sermon, speaking of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, did use any of these words: ‘the real, corporal, or substantial presence,’ or the same adverbially; or any such like, and of the same effect, and what they were? 2. Item, Whether he did not bid his auditory to be content to delay the discussion of the secret of that matter, till it should be afterwards judged by learning and authority? Item, Whether he did not say, that he would, and did, show them the sentence of an old author, which was both a great learned man, and martyr; and only did cite the same for the manner of Christ’s presence in the sacrament, and who was the author, and what was the place?
THE SEVENTEENTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
Another action upon the cause of Winchester was holden at Cold Harbor, before the bishops of Ely and Lincoln, and master doctor Oliver, with the presence of Thomas Argall, actuary, on Friday, the 30th day of January, 1551.
James Basset, under the bishop of Winchester’s former protestations, produced Cuthbert, bishop of Durham, upon the 4th and 5th positions additional; John Bourne, clerk, on the 1st article of the same additionals; ‘Owen Oglethorp, doctor, on the articles 3,4 and 37 of the first matter or matter justificatory, the 5th article of the additionals, and the 10th article against the exhibits; whom the said judges did admit and onerate with an oath, to say the truth and the whole truth upon those articles, and such interrogatories as should be ministered in behalf of the office, in the presence of David Clapham, one of the promoters; approving the person of the said bishop of Durham: protesting, nevertheless, to say against his depositions, and the persons and sayings of the other witnesses, in case they deposed any thing prejudicial against the office; and repeating the interrogatories afore ministered, requiring the witnesses to be examined upon the same.
THE EIGHTEENTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
The same Friday they also met in the Marshalsea in Southwark, master doctor Oliver and Thomas Argall being present, on the cause of Winchester.
James Basset, under the bishop of Winchester’s former protestations, produced master Edmund Steward, clerk, on articles1,2,3,8,9,15 of the matter justificatory; and on articles 2,3,5,6,7, 9,15,16 and 18 of the matter against the exhibits; whom the said master doctor Oliver, at the petition of the same James Basset, did admit and onerate with an oath upon the premises, in the presence of David Clapham, one of the promoters aforesaid, protesting to say against the said witness and his testimony, in case he deposed against the office, and repeating these interrogatories afore ministered.
The same Friday, in the Fleet [before] Henry, bishop of Lincoln, in the presence of Thomas Argall, etc. the said James Basset, under the former protestations, produced Nicholas, bishop of Worcester, in his chamber where he lieth there, and George, bishop of Chichester, in another chamber where he lieth, of and upon the 4th and 6th articles of the positions additional; when the bishop of Lincoln, them and either of them, did respectively onerate with an oath, to depose the whole truth that they and either of them knew, upon the said articles, and all such interrogatories as should be ministered unto them, in presence of David Clapham; protesting to say against them and their sayings, in case they deposed against the office.
THE NINETEENTH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
Saturday, the last day of January, 1551, there was a session in the house of Thomas Argall, before master John Oliver; the said Argall being present.
James Basset, proctor, etc. under the bishop’s former protestations, did produce John Cooke, a witness before sworn, upon articles 2,3,5,6 and 14 of the matter against the exhibits; whom the said master Oliver did admit and swear, at the petition of the said Basset, in the presence of David Clapham, one of the promoters; protesting, etc. and repeating the interrogatories afore ministered.
THE TWENTIETH SESSION AGAINST GARDINER.
The twentieth session or action upon the cause of Winchester, with his appearance at Lambeth before the archbishop of Canterbury and the rest of the commissioners, (master Gosnall 124 ) only absent, Thomas Argall and William Say being present), was on Tuesday, the 3d day of February, anno 1551.
The term probatory assigned to the bishop of Winchester, was prorogued to this day by nine of the clock afore noon; and, by the same time, it was assigned to transmit the examination of Dr.
Redman. 125 And it,was also assigned to the said bishop of Winchester, to see further process, in this cause, between the hours of ten and eleven afore noon of this day. The said day, one Paul Hampcoats, on the behalf of master Edward Leedes, and master Michael Dunning, presented the process of the examination of master doctor Redman, at Cambridge, being sealed, and in authentical form, in the presence of the bishop of Winchester; under his former protestations, protesting that he intended not to revoke his proctors exhibiting the same process, as far as it made for him, and not otherwise; the promoters protesting to say against the said process, in case and as far as it should seem to make against the office.
Then the bishop, under, his former protestations alleging master James Basset and master Jacques Wingfield to be neeessary witnesses for proof of certain articles by him purposed, desired that they might be admitted and sworn; at whose requiring the judge admitted them as far as the law would them to be admitted, and not else: whom they did then and there onerate with a corporal oath, to depose the truth, as they knew, upon such articles as they should be examined upon; the promoters protesting of the nullity of their production, for that they were the said bishop’s proctors, and had exercised in this cause for him; and, in case the production were of force in law, protesting to say against them and their sayings, in case and as far as the same should make against the office, and to repeat the interrogatories heretofore ministered against the other witnesses produced by the said bishop. And the said bishop, under his said protestations, for further satisfaction of the term assigned him to prove, did exhibit these writings ensuing; videlicet first, an original letter from the king’s majesty that dead is; and another original letter from the king’s majesty that now is, 126 as much as the same did make for his intent, and not otherwise; the promoter accepting the contents of the same letters as far as they made for the office; and none otherwise.
The tenor and words of these two letters, sent to Gardiner from the aforesaid kings, albeit they seem to me not much to make for the bishop, yet, forasmuch as he doth here allege them, I thought not to omit them; the copies whereof thus ensue: — COPY OF A LETTER SENT FROM KING HENRY THE EIGHTH TO THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER.
Right reverend father in God, right trusty and well-beloved, we greet you well. Understanding, by your letters of the 2d of this instant, your mind touching such matter as hath lately, on our behalf, been opened to you by certain of our council, we have thought good, for answer, to signify that if your doings heretofore in this matter, had been agreeable to such fair words as ye have now written, neither you should have cause to write this excuse, nor we any occasion to answer the same; and we cannot but marvel at this part of your letter, that you never said nay, to any request made unto you for those lands, considering that this matter being propounded, and, at good length, debated with you, as well by our chancellor and secretary, as also by the chancellor of our Court of Augmentations, both jointly and apart you utterly refused to grow to any conformity in the same, saying, That you would make your answer to our own person: which, as we can be well contented to receive, and will not deny you audience at any meet time, when you shall make suit to be heard for your said answer, so we must, in the mean time, think, that if the remembrance of our benefits towards you had earnestly remained in your heart indeed, as you have now touched the same in words, you would not have been so precise in such a matter, wherein a great number of our subjects, and, amongst others, many of your own coat (although they have not had so good cause as you), have yet, without indenting, dealt both more lovingly, and more friendly with us. And, as touching you, our opinion was, that if our request had been for a free surrender, as it was for an exchange only, your duty had been to have done otherwise in this matter than you have: wherein, if you be yet disposed to show that conformity you write of, we see no cause why you should molest us any further therewith, being the same of such sort as may well enough be passed without officers there.
Given under our signet, at our manor of Oatlands, the 4th of December, the thirty-eighth year of our reign.
Also, then and there the said bishop did, under his said protestations, exhibit a letter written from Louvain by one Francis Driander, the contents whereof are hereunder expressed in Latin 126a as he wrote it, and the English whereof, as much as to the present purpose appertaineth, here followeth translated:
PART OF A LETTER OF FRANCIS DRIANDER Before my departure from the city of Paris, I wrote unto you by our friend the Englishman, etc. Now the narration of your bishop of Winchester, shall satisfy and content you. He (the said bishop) as appertained to the ambassador of so noble a prince, came to Louvain with a great rout and bravery, and was there, at a private man’s house called Jeremy’s, most honorably entertained and received; where the faculty of divines, for honor’s sake, presented him wine in the name of the whole university. But our famous doctors, and learned masters, for that they would more deeply search and understand the learning and excellency of the prelate, perused and scanned a certain oration made by him, and now extant, entitled ‘De Vera Obedientia,’ which is as much as to say, in our English tongue, ‘Of True Obedience;’ in the which his oration he did greatly impair and subvert the supremacy of the bishop of Rome, and preferred his lord and king’s authority before the holy apostolic see, as they were wont to term it: which being read and considered by them, they did not only repent them, for attributing such their honor unto him, but also recanted what they had done before; and, like impudent persons, did not so much honor him afore, but now twice so much, with many obloquies and derisions, disabled and dishonored his person. But, in conclusion, Richard Lathomus, interpreter of the Terms, with the favorers of this fraternity, and other the champions of the falling church, boldly enterprised to dispute with him concerning the pope’s supremacy. The bishop stoutly defended his said oration. The divines, contrary, did stiffly maintain their opinion, and, divers times openly, with exclamation, called the said bishop an excommunicate person, and a schismatic; to the no little reproach and infamy of the English nation.
I will not here repeat the arguments and reasons which were alleged on both parts, for the defense of the opinions of each side, for that lest, perhaps, to learned men, they shall not seem all of the strongest; and also, because it becometh me to save and preserve the estimation of either party. The bishop not long after, minding to say mass in St. Peter’s church, they did deny unto him, as to an excommunicate person, the ornaments and vestments meet for the same; wherewith being highly offended, he suddenly hastened his journey from thence. The dean, the next day after, made an eloquent oration, wherein he openly disgraced and defamed his person. I lament greatly their case, who so rashly, without any advisement, gave themselves to be mocked among grave and witty men. You have heard now a true story, for our doctor was the chief and principal doer of that tragedy.
After this, the said bishop also exhibited a minute of a letter, sent by the said bishop out of the Fleet, to the duke of Somerset, the copy whereof ensueth:
A LETTER OF GARDINER TO THE LORD PROTECTOR, OUT OF THE FLEET.
After my most humble commendations to your good grace: This day I received your grace’s letters, with many sentences in them, whereof in some I take much comfort, and especially, in sending a physician; and for the rest that might grieve me, do so understand them as they grieve me not at all. If I have done amiss, the fault is mine; and I perceive your grace would not be grieved with me, unless I had offended. As for the council, I contend not with their doings, no more than he that pleadeth ‘not guilty’ doth blame the judge and quest that hath indicted him, and requireth on him. I acknowledge authority: I honor them and speak reverendly of them; and yet, if my conscience so telleth me, I must plead ‘not guilty,’ as I am not guilty of this imprisonment. And so must I say, unless I would accuse myself wrongfully; for I intended ever well.
Howsoever I have written or spoken, I have spoken as I thought; and I have spoken it in place where I should speak it; at which time I was sorry at your grace’s absence, unto whom I had used like boldness, the rather upon warranty of your grace’s letter. But I have written truth, without any affection other than to the truth, and could answer the particularities of your grace’s letter shortly, were it not that I will not contend with your grace’s letters; unto whom I wrote simply for no such purposes as they be taken (not by your grace, but by others); for I trust your grace will not require of me to believe, that all the contents of your grace’s letter proceed specially from yourself, and, in the mean time, I can flatter myself otherwise than to take them so. Whereupon, if it shall further be applied unto me, that I do your grace wrong, being in the place ye represent, not to take your grace’s letters as though every syllable were of your grace’s device, being your hand set to them, I will be sorry for it. Thus I take the sum of your grace’s writing: that I should not, for any respect, withstand truth; and of that conformity I am. And to agree against the truth can do your grace no pleasure, for truth will continue, and untruth cannot endure; in the discerning whereof if I err, and, when all the rest were agreed if that were so, I only then cannot agree, yet I am out of the case of hatred: for I say as I think. And, if I think like a fool, and cannot say otherwise, then it shall be accounted as my punishment, and I to be reckoned among the indurate, who, nevertheless, heretofore had used myself (when no man impeached me for religion) as friend to friends; and although I were not (as is of some now thought) a good christian man, yet I was no evil civil man; and your grace, at our being with the emperor, had ever experience of me, that I was a good Englishman.
Now I perceive I am noted to have two faults: one, not to like Erasmus’s Paraphrase; another, not to like my lord of Canterbury’s Homily of Salvation. Herein if I mislike that all the realm liketh, and, when I have been heard speak in open audience what I can say, can show no cause of my so doing, or else it cannot so be taken, yet should it be taken for no wouder, seeing the like hath been seen heretofore. And, though your grace will be sorry for it, I am sure you will love men never the worse: for I adventure as much as any man hath done, to save my conscience. And I do it, if it may be so taken, in the best fashion I can devise: for I accuse not the council, which I confess ought to be honored; and yet it is not always necessary for those which be committed by. the council to prison, ever more to appear guilty; for then should every prisoner plead guilty, for the avoiding of contention with the council. And, howsoever your grace be informed, I never gave advice, nor ever knew man committed to prison, for disagreeing to any doctrine, unless the same doctrine were established by a law of the realm before. And yet now it might be, that the council, in your grace’s absence, fearing all things, as rulers do in a commonwealth, might, upon a cause to them suspected, and without any blame, commit me to prison; with whom I have not striven in it, but humbly declared the matter with mine innocency, as one who never had conference in this matter with any man but such as came to me; and with them thus — to will them to say nothing. Because I thought myself, if I spake, would speak temperately, and I mistrusted others; being very loth of any trouble to ensue in your graee’s absence, and specially such absence as I feared in vain, (thanks be to God!) as the success hath showed: but not altogether without cause, seeing war is dangerous in the common sense of man, and the stronger hath had ever more the victory.
I allege, in my letter to your grace, worldly respects, to avoid worldly reasons against me; but I make not my foundation of them.
The world is mere vanity, which I may learn in mine own case, being now destitute of all such help as friendship, service, familiarity, or gentleness, seemed to have gotten me in this world.
And if I had travailed my wit in consideration of it since I came hither (as, I thank God, I have not), it might have made me past reasoning ere this time. I reserve to myself a good opinion of your grace, being nothing diminished by these letters; in remembrance of whose advancement to honor, when I spake of chance, if I spake ‘ethnically,’ as you termed in your grace’s letters, then is the English Paraphrase to be condemned for that cause besides all other, wherein that word ‘chance’ is over common in my judgment.
And yet, writing to your grace, I would not (being in this case) counterfeit a holiness in writing otherwise than my speech hath been heretofore, to call all that comes to pass, God’s doings; without whose work and permission nothing indeed is, and from whom is all virtue. And yet, in common speech, wherein I have been brought up, the names ‘fortune,’ and ‘chance’ have been used to be spoken in the advancement to nobility, and commended when virtue is joined with them. Wherein, me thinketh, it is greater praise, and more rare, to add virtue to fortune (as your grace hath done), than to have virtue go before fortune; which I wrote, not to flatter your grace, but to put you in remembrance what a thing it were, that, bearing in hand of such as might have credit with you, should cause you to enterprise that which might indirectly work what your grace mindeth not, and, by error in a virtuous pretense to the truth, advance that which is not truth: wherein I ask no further credit than that I can show shall persuade, which is one of the matters I kept in store to show against the Paraphrase, intending only to say truth, with suit to be heard, and instant request rather to be used, to utter that I can say, than to be here wasted after this sort. I can a great deal, and a great deal further than I have written to your grace; and vet am so assured of that I have already written, as I know I cannot therein be convicted of untruth. As for Erasmus himself, I wrote unto your grace what he writeth in his latter days, only to show you the man thoroughly.
And [how] in speaking of the state of the church in his old days, [he] doth not so much further the bishop of Rome’s matters, as he did in his young days, being wanton; which Paraphrase if I can, with expense of my life, let from going abroad, I have done as good a deed, in my opinion, as ever was done in this realm, in the let of an enterprise: in which book I am now so well learned, and can show the matters I shall allege so plainly, as I fear no reproach in my so doing. And as for the English, either my lord of Canterbury shall say, for his defense, that he hath not read over the English, or confess more of himself than I will charge him with. Therefore I call that, the fault of inferior ministers whom my lord trusteth. The matter itself is over far out of the way, and the translating, also. In a long work (as your grace toucheth) a slumber is pardonable; but this translator was asleep when he began, having such faults.
I cannot now write long letters, though I would; but, to conclude, I think there was never man had more plain evident matter to allege than I have, without winches, or arguments, or devices of wit. I mean plainly, and am furnished with plain matter, intending only plainness, and destitute of all man’s help, such as the world, in man’s judgment, should minister. I make my foundation only on the truth, which to hear, serveth for your graee’s purpose towards God, and the world also; and, being that, I shall say truth in deed and apparent. I doubt not your grace will regard it accordingly, for that only will maintain that your grace hath attained; that will uphold all things, and prosper all enterprises: wherein if I may have liberty to show that I know, I shall gladly do it; and, otherwise, abide that [which], by authority shall be determined of me, as patiently and quietly, as ever did man; continuing your grace’s bead-man, during my life, unto Almighty God; who have your grace in his tuition!
And thus have ye the aforesaid letter sent from the Fleet to the lord protector. After this the said bishop did also exhibit another minute of a letter by him sent to the said duke from Winchester. Also another minute of a letter to the said duke from Winchester. Also another minute of a letter sent to the said duke from the said bishop when he was prisoner in his house, as he affirmed; the copy of which letters we have above specified, page 24. Also another minute of a letter in Latin, by him sent to master Cecil. And also a minute of a letter written from Ratisbon, to the king’s majesty that dead is, by the said bishop, subscribed with the hand of sir Henry Knivet, as he affirmed; which two last letters here mentioned be not yet come to our hands. All these letters abovesaid, he, under his former protestations, did exhibit as far as they made for his intent, and not otherwise; and required the same to be registered, and the originals to be to him delivered: which was decreed in presence of the promoters, protesting of the nullity of the exhibition of these letters, and of the same exhibits; alleging the same to be private writings, and not authentic, and such whereunto there ought no faith to be given in law; and accepting the contents of the said exhibits as much as they made for the office, and not otherwise. The said bishop, also, under like protestation as before, exhibited a book of Statutes of Parliament, of the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign that then was, concerning his general pardon. And, lastly, two papers of articles, 127 which the bishop affirmed were sent to him to preach, which likewise he did exhibit inasmuch as they made for his intent, and not otherwise, the promoters accepting the contents thereof, as far as they made for the office, and not otherwise.
After all this, the judges, at the request of the said promoters, did publish the sayings and depositions of the witnesses examined in this cause, reserving the examinations of the two witnesses lastly sworn as afore; the bishop, under his former protestations, dissenting to the said publication.
And now — forasmuch as we are come to the publication of the witnesses being in the acts before produced — here to perform what we have so oft promised before, it remaineth now to declare and bring forth, all such the aforesaid witnesses in order as they were examined. But yet before (to make the matter more plain and sensible to the reader, concerning the production and publication of these witnesses), first, here is to be noted and understood, that as these witnesses were not all produced and sworn at one time (as in the acts doth appear), nor for one part alone, but some against him, and some with him; so the cause and matter whereupon they were produced, was not one, but divers. For some were only produced upon the Articles by the office ministered against the bishop of Winchester: others were produced upon the Matters Justificatory, laid in by the bishop: certain upon the Positions Additional laid in by the said bishop: and, lastly, divers upon the Matter against the Exhibits laid in on the behalf of the office against him, according as here in order followeth:
THE ATTESTATIONS OF ALL SUCH WITNESSES44 AS WERE PRODUCED, SWORN, AND EXAMINED, UPON THE ARTICLES MINISTERED BY THE OFFICE, AGAINST STEPHEN, BISHOP OF WINCHESTER. Sir Anthony Wingfield.
Sir Anthony Wingfield, knight of the most honorable order of the garter, comptroller of the king’s most honorable household, and one of the king’s most honorable privy council, being sworn and examined, saith as followeth: To articles 1,2 and 3 he saith the contents thereof are true. To the 4th : he believeth the same to be true.
To the 5th: he believeth the contents thereof to be true.
To the 6th he saith, that he knoweth, that there have been divers complaints made against the said bishop, for his sayings, doings, and preachings, against the king’s majesty’s proceedings; for he, being one of the king’s majesty’s privy council, heard certain of the complaints made to the council, whereof part, he remembereth, was for being against the king’s majesty’s visitors at the time of his grace’s visitation in his diocese, in setting forth of the king’s majesty’s proceedings.
To the 7th : he thinketh that the lords of the council have, often times, admonished him according to the said article.
To the 8th article he saith, that after the said admonitions in the month of June, in the year articulate, the said bishop was called before the king’s most honorable council, at the king’s palace of Westminster; and then and there, on his majesty’s behalf, commanded to preach a sermon before his grace, on a certain day shortly after following; and therein to declare his conformity in declaring and setting forth the king’s majesty’s father’s, and his majesty’s, just and godly proceedings in matters of religion: and, to the intent he should do it the better, they delivered him the articles in writing, containing the effect as in the articles specified, which he should so declare; which he, receiving then and there, promised to declare and set forth. Nevertheless he (saying that he had been some time one of them, and that he was then a man of years, and not meet, then, to be set to school, to read, as it were, a lesson out of a book), required that he might not be commanded to read or declare them on the book; for he promised, in his sermon he would so set forth and declare them; that it should be much better than if he did read the said writing. And this he knoweth, for that he, the said deponent, was present with the said council at the said commandment given, and the articles’ delivering, and the promise by the said bishop made as afore.
To the 9th he saith, that he (the said deponent) was at the said bishop’s sermon from the beginning to the end, and heard the same; and thereby perceived, that the said bishop did not set forth in his said sermon the said articles, neither according to the said commandment to him given, neither according to his own promise.
To the 10th article: he cannot certainly depose upon the contents thereof. To the 11th article : he cannot certainly depose thereof.
To articles 12,13 and 14 : he cannot depose.
To the 15th article he saith, that the said 19th day of July, in the year articulate, this deponent was present with the rest of the privy council at Westminster, when the said bishop, being personally present, and having a submission and articles openly and distinctly read unto him, and required to subscribe the same, refused so to subscribe, because certain of the said articles did, as he then affirmed, mislike him; which this deponent cannot now specify.
To the 16th and 17th he saith, he doth not now remember the sequestration made, but he was present, and heard the intimation read unto him, according as in the 17th article is contained.
To the 18th he saith, the contents be true.
To the 19th he saith, the contents are true as far as he knoweth. Upon the Interrogatories. 129 — To the 1st he saith, he remembereth no such words spoken by the said bishop.
To the 2d he saith, he remembereth no such words spoken by the bishop. To the 3d he saith, he remembereth no such request, nor words spoken. Anthony Wingfield.
MASTER SECRETARY CECIL.
Master William Cecil esquire, one of the two principal secretaries to the king’s majesty, of the age of twenty-seven years, sworn and examined. To articles 1,2 and 3 he saith, that they are true. To the 4th: he believeth it to be true. To the 5th : he believeth it to be true.
To the 6th he saith, that of the bishop’s doings and sayings at the king’s majesty’s visitation, he can nothing depose; but at other times, since the said visitation, this deponent knoweth, that the said bishop had been often complained upon, for not doing his duty in furtherance of the king’s proceedings, of his certain knowledge; for that he (the said deponent), being attendant on the duke’s grace of Somerset, then protector, hath seen and heard the said complaints brought and presented in writing, and by mouth, to the said duke.
To articles 7 and 8 he saith, that it is true, that in the month and year articulate, the said bishop was called before the king’s majesty’s council, at the palace of Westminster; and there, in the queen’s closet (as he slow remembereth), was charged with his disobedience in not conforming himself to the king’s majesty’s proceedings. And thereupon the said bishop, offering to show his conformity therein all ways possible that he might, was commanded to preach a sermon before his majesty, on a certain day about a fortnight thence ensuing, and therein to declare and set forth the effect of the articles specified in the said 7th position.
And this he knoweth to be true, for that master Smith, then secretary, made this deponent then privy to the said articles, and was present and attendant on the council at the time of the delivery of them, and charge given to the said bishop. At which time he heard the said bishop, in the taking of them, require that he might be trusted to set them forth, not like a scholar to read them upon the book, but to handle them more largely, as his matter should serve him; promising that, that ways, he would set them forth better than they were penned to him. And as touching the first article, of. the king’s supremacy, promised to set it forth much better than it was conceived in writing.
To the 9th article he saith, that he was at the said bishop’s said sermon, having a copy of the said articles then with him; and gave good heed to conceive the said sermon from the beginning to the end, and how therein the bishop accomplished his said promise and duty; and, as he said, omitted divers things that he was commanded, as afore, to set forth: and divers other things he handled in such doubtful sort, as at that time this examinate thought it had been better he had never spoken of them; and namely the king’s supremacy, and of the bishop of Rome’s authority.
To the 10th article he saith, that the contents of the said article were true, for, he said, that he, the said deponent, was sent to the said bishop by the lord protector, in the king’s name, to declare unto him great inconveniences risen among the people for an evil opinion of the king’s authority in his young years; namely, in the county of Cornwall, where the people had, a little before, slain one Body in executing certain injunctions of the king; and held then opinion, that the commandments of the king were of no force during his young years otherwise than they did agree with his father’s proceedings. Wherefore he required him, in the king’s name, at his next sermon, preached on St. Peter’s day, as afore, to teach the people the truth in that matter. Whereunto the bishop made answer, that he was very glad to be desired to speak in that matter, because he could speak as well, and as much in it, as any one in this realm; declaring, that he had treated, in the king’s days that dead is, upon that matter for the defense of the young queen of Scots’ authority, to make a pact of marriage with the king’s majesty, now our sovereign, in her young years. After which talk the said deponent entered into the other part of his message, which was, to require him that he would in no wise meddle with any matter in his sermon being in controversy for the mass or the sacrament; declaring unto him at length divers inconveniences that might follow thereupon. Whereunto the said bishop made answer, that he could not, in his conscience, refrain to speak thereof as he thought, and prayed that he might not be straited therein like a child: but, in the end, resolved to do so well therein, as the said lord protector and the council should be well pleased with him.
Whereupon this examinate, returning his answer to the said lord protector, the latter part of the same was much misliked. And therefore this examinate was, by the said lord protector, commanded to take a letter unto him from the lord protector, in the king’s majesty’s name, the day before his said sermon, among other things commanding him expressly, not to treat of any matter in controversy touching the said mass, for causes and considerations thereof contained in the said letter; which letter the said lord protector signed at Sion, and sent it unto the said bishop by a special messenger, who, returning that night, declared the deliverance thereof; the very and true copy of which letter remaineth with this deponent, as he said. And he said, that, notwithstanding the premises, the said bishop did, in his said sermon, declare his private opinion in the said matters, forbidden him as afore.
To the other articles he saith, he could not certainly depose upon the contents of the said articles. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answered, that he did not remember that the said bishop spake anything of the first part (of the interrogatory touching his agreement with the rulers), but, for the finding fault with the lower part, he remembereth that the bishop did entreat thereof.
By me, William Cecil.
SIR RALPH SADLER.
Sir Ralph Sadler knight, one of the king’s majesty’s most honorable privy council, of the age of 43 years, sworn and examined.
To articles 1,2 and 3 he saith, they are true.
To the 4th : he thinketh it is true; but he cannot certainly depose.
To the 5th : he believeth the same to be true.
To the 6th he saith, that he, being present with the council, in the council-chamber, had sundry times heard the said bishop named and noted to be no favourer of the king’s majesty’s proceedings; and reported, also, that men abroad did marvel that he was so suffered to do and preach as he did, contrary to the king’s proceedings.
To the 7th he saith, it is true of his certain knowledge; for he was then one of the council, and present when the said admonition was given unto him.
To the 8th he saith, the said article is true; for he (the said deponent) was present with the said council at Westminster, in the month articulate, when the articles mentioned in this position were delivered unto him, and he commanded to set them forth accordingly, in a sermon to be made before the king; who, then and there, promised to set forth the matters contained in this article, and the justness of the king’s majesty’s proceedings concerning those matters, more amply and in better sort, than was contained in the said writing delivered unto him: requiring that he might not be constrained to read them upon the book, but to set them forth by mouth, in his said sermon; which he promised to do more amply, and much better, than was contained in the articles, praying my lords of the council to credit him therein; saying these, or like words: ‘Why should you mistrust me, for, if I do not as you command me, I remain still in your hands.’
To the 9th he saith, that the contents thereof are true, for this deponent was present at his sermon from the beginning to the end, and understood that he did not declare the said matters in such sort as he was commanded, and as he afore promised to do; insomuch that this deponent, and divers others (as well of the council as others), such as he conferred withal upon his said sermon, were much offended for the same.
To the 10th article he saith, the said article is true, for he knoweth he was both sent unto, and written unto, to forbear to speak of these two matters: contrary to which commandment he heard the said bishop, in his said sermon, speak of both the said matters.
To articles 11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18 and 19 : he knoweth nothing certainly of the contents therein. Upon the Interrogatories . — To the 1st interrogatory he saith, that he doth remember no such thing.
To the 2d and 3d he answereth, that he remembereth not that the said bishop spake those very words contained in the interrogatories; but well he remembereth the bishop had long talk with him tending much to the same effect.
By me, Ralph Sadler.
SIR THOMAS CHALONER.
Sir Thomas Chaloner knight, one of the clerks of the king’s most honorable council, of the age of 30 years, sworn and examined.
To articles 1,2 and 3 he saith, the same contain truth.
To the 4th : he believeth it is true.
To the 5th : he believeth the same to be true.
To the 6th he saith, that the said bishop had been sundry times complained upon to the king’s majesty’s council, for the causes expressed in this article, of this deponent’s certain knowledge; for he was personally present and attendant on the said council, when he heard such complaint made.
To the 7th he saith, it is true, for he hath been present, as afore, when he hath heard the said council admonish the said bishop, as in this article is contained.
To the 8th he saith, that upon the said bishop’s imprisonment in the Fleet, and his often suit to be delivered, at the last (after sundry conferences had with the said bishop of the privy council, and their report of the hope they conceived that he would be conformable to the king’s majesty’s proceedings in those things whereupon his said imprisonment ensued), the whole council thought good he should be released out of prison. And furthermore concluded, that for evident demonstration of his reformation, the bishop should preach a sermon before the king’s majesty, at the time in this article expressed. Also this deponent saith, that the lords, and others of the council, debated among themselves what points he should treat of in his said sermon. Whereupon, either sir Thomas Smith (then one of the king’s majesty’s secretaries), or master Cecil, was commanded to pen certain articles by the lords agreed upon, which this deponent supposeth to be those which in this article are set forth; but he cannot now certainly remember which thing particularly, and therefore cannot certainly affirm them to be in each point the same. But this he remembcreth, that upon thepenning and digesting, of those articles in writing, and reading the same to the council, they appointed either sir Thomas Smith, or some other (whom he certainly remembereth not), to exhibit them unto the said bishop, on the council’s behalf, accordingly: which delivery or receiving of them by the bishop, this deponent can no otherwise depose of; saving that, afterwards, he well doth remember that those of the council who in this behalf had travailed, and had conference with the said bishop, declared to the rest of the council assembled together (this deponent standing by), that they had spoken with the bishop, and exhibited those articles unto him to read, telling him thereupon, that it was the king’s majesty’s pleasure, by the council’s advice, that at the day of his preaching prefixed, he should, in his sermon, peculiarly set forth and preach and treat upon those articles contained in that writing. Whereupon the bishop required them (as they say) to be means for him unto the king’s majesty, that he should not, like a scholar, be set as it were to his task, to be taught his lesson by book; adding, that those articles, as they were penned, were not so ample as he would enlarge them in his sermon, but rather too scant; and that, in his sermon, be would do more than was required of him: with such like words. So that upon this report of the said bishop’s words, the whole council there assembled, conceived such hope of the bishop’s conformity, as they resolved to permit to the bishop’s choice, to treat of the aforesaid articles, in his sermon, after what sort he thought best; the substance of the matter always reserved.
Now whether aught were afterwards altered of this the council’s order and determination, this deponent cannot depose, not being used for any minister in that altair.
To the 9th article he saith, he cannot depose, for that he was not present at the whole sermon.
To the 10th he saith, and well remembereth, that it was by the lords, for certain respects, thought not expedient that the bishop should, in his sermon, treat and touch any part of the matter then in controversy concerning the Sacrament of the Altar; and therefore concluded among themselves, that he should be commanded, from the king’s majesty, not to meddle aught in his sermon on that point; which commandment, like as he believeth, was delivered unto him at the time of the delivery of the said articles before mentioned, or at some other time before his sermon; [but] so he cannot specially affirm the same, because he was not present thereat.
To the 11th : he remembereth that certain lords, and others of the council, were sent unto the bishop, to travail with him for his reducement to a conformity; but the particulars he cannot depose of.
To the 12th : he remembereth such a letter sent, signed by the king’s majesty, was read before the council, and that certain were assigned to deliver the same to the bishop; and more he cannot depose.
To the 13th : he can no further depose than as before.
To the 14th : he remembereth that another submission was also read at the council-board, before them, to be sent also to the bishop; the particularities whereof he doth not remember, nor more can he depose.
To the 15th : he remembereth it well, that he refused the said subscription, this deponent being then present.
To the 16th and 17th : he doth remember well, for he was present, and saw it entered into the register-book of the council. To the 18th: it is true. To the last: he cannot tell. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 13th interrogatory he answered, that he was not throughly present at the bishop’s sermon, and therefore heard no such thing as, in the said interrogatory, is mentioned.
The 2d and 3d do not concern the said respondent. By me, Thomas Chaloner.
MASTER NICHOLAS THROGMORTON.
Master Nicholas Throgmorton esquire, one of the gentlemen of the king’s majesty’s privy chamber, of the age of 35 years, sworn and examined, saith as ensueth.
To articles 1,2 and 3 he saith, those articles be true.
To the 4th he cannot depose.
To the 5th he saith, that he thinketh this article containeth truth.
To the 6th he cannot depose. To the 7th he cannot depose.
To the 8th he saith, he cannot depose anything on this article.
To the 9th : that he was not privy what commandment was given to the bishop of Winchester, nor what he promised to do; and therefore cannot depose, of his own knowledge, whether he did break the said commandment and promise, or not. And besides, this examinate was present at the sermon made in the day mentioned in these articles; but, he saith, he stood so far off; and in such a thrust of the people, as he could not well hear, at all times, what was said by the said bishop in the time of his said sermon.
To the 10th article, and to all the rest of the articles, he saith, he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st interrogatory, he saith, he can nothing depose, nor answer certainly thereof, for causes afore by him deposed. Nicholas Throgmorton.
SIR THOMAS WROTHE.
Sir Thomas Wrothe knight, one of the king’s majesty’s privy chamber, of the age of 32 years, or thereabouts, sworn and examined, answereth. To articles 1,2 and 3 he saith, they be true.
To the 4th : he cannot depose thereof.
To the 5th he saith, that all the king’s subjects disobeying his majesty’s laws, injunctions, and ordinances, ought to be punished.
To the 6th he saith, he cannot depose thereof of his certain knowledge, but only that he hath so [heard] reported.
To the 7th : he hath heard so reported; and, otherwise, he knoweth not. To the 8th he saith, that he heard say the bishop had a commandment given him, to set forth certain articles touching the king’s proceedings; but what they were, certainly he cannot depose.
To the 9th he saith, that he was present at his [the bishop’s] sermon from the beginning to the end, in the day mentioned in the article, and in a place where he might, and as he thinketh did, hear all that the said bishop then said. And saith, that he heard not the said bishop speak any word that the king’s majesty’s authority was, and should be, as great now, in his grace’s young years, as if his grace were of many more years; for, if he had, this deponent saith, he should have heard it. For, hearing afore that the said bishop should preach thereof, he gave more heed to hear and note if he spake thereof, as he doubteth not he did not. As for the rest of the matters mentioned in the 8th article afore, what and how he spake of them, he doth not now perfectly remember.
To the 10th article he saith, that he cannot tell whether the said bishop were inhibited to speak of the mass and communion articulate, then commonly called the Sacrament of the Altar, or not; but he is assured that he heard speak of both in his said sermon.
To the other articles he saith, he knoweth not of the contents thereof of his own knowledge; but that he hath heard so reported. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he saith, he doth not presently remember whether the said bishop, in his said sermon, spake according as in the interrogatories is contained, or no. Thomas Wrothe.
MASTER JOHN CHEKE.
Master John Cheke esquire, of the age of 36 years; a witness sworn and examined.
To the articles 1,2 and 3 he saith, the same do contain truth. To the 4th article: he thinketh the same to be true. To the 5th he saith, it is trne.
To the 6th and 7th he saith, he believeth the contents thereof to be true, and so, he saith, he hath heard reported: but otherwise he cannot depose of his certain knowledge.
To the 8th article he saith, that he (the said deponent), being at the king’s palace at Westminster, in June articulate, saw the said bishop of Winchester attendant upon the council; and then and there heard it credibly reported, that the said bishop had in commandment to preach a sermon afore the king’s highness, and therein to declare the effect of the articles mentioned in this position. And otherwise, he cannot certainly depose.
To the 9th he saith, that he (the said examinate) was personally present at the said bishop’s sermon preached before the king’s majesty the day and year articulate, standing beside the king’s majesty’s person, where he might and did perfectly hear the said bishop from the beginning to the end of the said sermon: in which the said bishop spake nothing of the king’s majesty’s authority to be of like force now, in his young years, as when his grace is of more years; for, if he had, this deponent (for the causes aforesaid) must needs have heard it. And for that also — because he heard say, that that article was among others specially enjoined to the said bishop — this deponent was the more attentive to hear him set forth the same, which, he saith, he did not. And saith also, that the said bishop, entreating in his said sermon of the bishop of Rome, and [of] other articles the specialties of which he doth not now remember, handled them in [such] doubtful sort, that this deponent, at that time, judged it much better that the said bishop had not spoken of them at all, than to do as he did.
To the 10th article he saith, that he cannot depose of the commandments given. But he heard the said bishop, in his said sermon, speak both of the mass, and of the communion (then commonly called the Sacrament of the Altar). To the residue, he saith, he cannot certainly depose; but that he hath heard so reported. Upon the Interrogatories. — Examined also upon the 1st interrogatory ministered by the bishop, he saith, that he thinketh the said bishop did not speak particulate, nor the like; for he doth not remember he heard him speak so, or like. John Cheke.
SIR THOMAS SMITH.
Sir Thomas Smith knight, of the age of 33 years, sworn and examined. To the articles 1,2, and 3 he saith, that they contain truth. To the 4th : he knoweth it not.
To the 5th : he believeth the same to be true.
To articles 6 and 7 he saith, that he thinks the contents of the same to he true; but, he saith, he hath no certain knowledge thereof.
To the 8th article he saith, it is true, so far as he shall hereafter consequently declare; for, he saith, that upon such complaints and admonitions as are there specified, as might appear in the proceedings of the council, my lord of Somerset, then protector, sent divers times this deponent to the said bishop, to travail with him to agree to certain of the king’s majesty’s proceedings, and to promise to set them forth in sermon, or otherwise. And so this deponent did travail, and master Cecil also. And hereupon certain articles, by commandment of the king’s majesty’s council, were drawn forth by this deponent, and master Cecil; to the which the said bishop should show his consent, and to agree to preach and set forth the same. And, after divers times of travailing with the said bishop (as well by this deponent, as by the said master Cecil), to bring the said bishop to a conformity herein, and upon some hope of conformity, the said bishop was sent for by the lords of the council to the palace at Westminster, into a chamber in the garden there; and there he had the articles (the effect whereof, he saith, is mentioned and contained in this article, written to him in a sheet of paper), to debate and deliberate with himself upon them. Then and there was sent to him the lord of Wiltshire, to travail with him, to bring him to a full agreement to set forth the said articles. And after the said bishop had showed to the said lord (as the said lord reported to the council) some conformity therein, the said lord of Wiltshire, with this deponent to wait on him, was eftsoons sent to the said bishop, to take his final resolution; at whose coming the said bishop showed great conformity to be willing to set forth the said articles in his sermon, or otherwise, as it should seem meet to the council: only he required, not to have his lesson given unto him in writing, as a boy (for so he termed it), but that it might be put to his discretion; and so he would do it better than they looked for.
Upon this relation to the lords of the council then sitting, the said bishop was sent for up to the council-chamber, and, then and there, before the lords of the council then present, he made the same request. And, at much entreaty of him, and great show of conformity to do it, made, a day was appointed unto him to preach a sermon, in the which he should declare all those articles. And he then and there [was] commanded to do it, and promised to do them much better, and more for their minds, than it was in the articles.
Marry for order, he required to bring them in, as his matter served.
And, the more to persuade the lords herein, he used these persuasions: That it was a shame for him, who had been noted for a learned man, to have his lesson taught him as a boy; and that he had been trusted with embassage, and greater matters titan these. ‘And,’ said he, ‘if I should deceive you, my lords, I am still in your hands: I am in your order.’ Upon this he (the said bishop) had the said articles left with him, which contain in effect those matters which are mentioned in this article; and that the said deponent remembereth the better, for divers had copies then delivered of the articles, whereof one copy master doctor Coxe had, of this deponent’s clerk’s writing. Those articles the said bishop was commanded to preach. A day was given him, and he promised to do it; and so he was dismissed at that time. The next day, this deponent saith that he departed from the court, and took his journey towards Flanders; and, therefore, how the said bishop preached, he cannot tell.
Upon the other articles he saith, he cannot certainly depose upon the contents of them. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he saith, he was not at his sermon; and therefore cannot answer thereto.
To the 2d and 3d : he can nothing declare thereof. Thomas Smith.
DR. RICHARD COXE.
Master Richard Coxe, doctor of divinity, almoner to the king’s majesty, of the age of 51 years; sworn and examined of and upon certain articles mini-stored against the bishop of Winchester.
To articles 1,2 and 3 he saith, they are true. To the 4th article he cannot depose. To the 5th he saith, it is true.
To the 6th he answereth, that he was complained upon, as he heard say, by Dr. Ayre and Dr. Tonge unto the king’s majesty’s council, for the said Dr. Ayre and Dr. Tonge, being prebendaries of Winchester, were sent together by the king, to preach and set forth the king’s proceedings, forasmuch as the bishop there had preached against his majesty’s said proceedings, and that the said Dr. Ayre and Dr. Tonge showed unto this deponent, that the said bishop entered before them into the pulpit, and there said, ‘I hear say, that there be preachers sent into my diocese to preach. I trust you will believe no doctrine but such, ‘is I have taught you: you will not believe them that you never heard before.’ Whereupon the audience of the said preachers, Dr. Tonge and Dr. Ayre, was but very slender. Being demanded what time it was, he saith it was more than two years and a half now past, as far as he now remembereth.
To the 7th article he saith, it containeth truth, as he heard say.
To the 8th article he answereth, that the contents therein are true, for so he heard certain of the king’s majesty’s council, videlicet, my lord of Somerset, my lord Paget, sir Thomas Smith, and others: and also he heard of the king’s majesty himself. Being demanded about what time, he answered, that it was about the time articulate.
To the 9th , unto this place ‘his highness’s reign,’ he answereth, and believeth, that that part is true, for that he heard it spoken of the king’s majesty, and the duke of Somerset.
And to the other part of the said articles he saith, that the said bishop — in his said sermon, made upon St. Peter’s day, before the king’s majesty at Westminster, was two years at Midsummer last past (at which sermon this deponent was present, hearing and observing the said sermon), said: ‘Tu es Petrus, etc. The bishop of Rome could claim no superiority by this text: in case it made any thing for Peter, the bishop of Rome was not entailed thereby.’
The said bishop of Winchester brought no Scriptures, doctors, nor council against him. He compared him to a schoolmaster, a councillor, and to the head and fountain of waters: ‘insomuch,’ quoth he, ‘that if in case the realm should fall into an ignorance and a barbarousness, then the king may take him to be a councillor, and to be ordered after him.’ And as touching religious houses and monasteries, the said bishop, in his said sermon said, that religious men, for abusing their garments and cowls, and many other things, at length were evil served, and lost all together. And said there, that the vow of chastity was not taken away; but their vow of poverty was provided for meetly well, for many of them were become poor enough. And as concerning ceremonies and images, he said generally, that when they be misused, they may be taken away; as books, when they be abused, may also be taken away. And as concerning pilgrimages, relics, shrines, the superstitious goingabout of St. Nicholas bishop, St. Edmund, St. Katherine, St.
Clement, and such like, he spake nothing: and as concerning the taking-away of chantries, obits, and colleges, he saith, that he doth not remember that the same bishop spake of them in his said sermon; and as touching the setting-forth of the king’s majesty’s authority in his young years to be as great as if his highness were of many years, he spake nothing thereof, in his said sermon, nor of auricular confession. For, if the said bishop had treated of that matter, this deponent saith that he should have heard him, forasmuch as he was there hearing and observing, and partly noting such things as the said bishop did preach, from the beginning of his sermon, to the end thereof. For if he had, this deponent saith, that he should have heard him, and would have noted them, as he did other things. And as touching holy bread, holy water, holy candles, and ashes, palms, beads, and creeping to the cross, the procession, and common prayer in English, and other such like, the said bishop spake nothing specially of them, but generally, as of ceremonies.
All which things he was commanded specially to touch in his said sermon, as it is contained in a bill of articles, which the council delivered unto this deponent; which bill of articles, at the time of this deponent’s examination, he did show and present.
To the 10th article he saith, that the duke of Somerset showed this deponent, that the said bishop was commanded in the king’s name, that he should not entreat or meddle of any matter being in controversy (as the Mass and the Sacrament of the Altar): which the said bishop did not obey, but did clean contrary, in speaking of the mass and sacrament, of this deponent’s certain hearing; being at the said sermon, as before he hath deposed.
Upon articles 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18 . and the last articles he cannot depose.
By me, Richard Coxe.
THOMAS WATSON.
Thomas Watson, bachelor of divinity, of the age of 33 years, or thereabouts, produced for witness, sworn, and examined upon the aforesaid articles.
Upon articles 1. 2. and 3. he saith, that they be true.
To the 4th article, he saith, that he cannot depose: howbeit he doth believe the said bishop was sworn.
To the 5th article: he supposeth the same to be true.
To the 6th article he saith, that he doth not know, that the said bishop was complained upon at any the king’s visitations, nor of any information made against him for his preaching. Nevertheless this deponent saith, that before this deponent was committed to the Fleet, he was sent for, by a letter, to come to the council, before whom he then was: but what was objected to him, this deponent knoweth not; but he saith, that from thence he was sent unto the Fleet — for this deponent was then, and now is, his chaplain, and waited upon the said bishop, his master, unto the Fleet.
To the 7th article he saith, he cannot depose.
To the 8th article, unto these words, ‘and for that,’ he cannot depose. And to the other part of the article he saith, that in the month of June, in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign (as this deponent doth now remember), master William Cecil came to my lord, this deponent’s master, being then at his house at the Clink. Upon a Friday (as he now remembereth), after the said bishop of Winchester, this deponent’s master, had been before the council, master Cecil came unto the said bishop from my lord of Somerset. And in opening to the said bishop the duke’s pleasure (as this deponent heard say), and that the said bishop should preach before the king’s majesty, and write his sermon, and in declaring of the said duke’s pleasure, the said master Cecil noted the said bishop as an offender, declaring how the said duke of Somerset’s grace had showed him favor, and not done extremity.
Whereupon the said bishop, being somewhat moved with the said master Cecil’s declaration, sent no answer to the said duke by master Cecil, but, the morrow after, sent this deponent to the said duke’s grace, with a letter, and, besides that, a message by mouth, which was this: That this deponent should show his grace, that the said bishop, this deponent’s master, was never so spoken to in all his life; and that this deponent thought master Cecil had misused his grace’s message, in that he noted the said bishop an offender; while the said bishop said, he knew that he had not offended. And that the said bishop, his master, mistrusted so much the more the message was not rightfully done, because that his grace refused to speak with the bishop himself. And as touching the preaching, he (the said bishop) could well be content to preach, but not to write his sermon; for that were like an offender. And after those words spoken by this deponent to the said duke’s grace in the king’s majesty’s garden, at the court at Westminster, master Cecil was called unto the said duke, in the presence of this deponent, to rehearse what he had said unto the said bishop; by whose rehearsal this deponent perceived, that the said master Cecil had said nothing but accordingly as the said duke’s grace had commanded him to do; and not so much, in all points. And the said duke’s grace willed this deponent to show to the said bishop his master, that he should not suspect the said duke’s trusty servants, whom he used to send unto him; and that he did not refuse to speak with him of any displeasure or disdain; but that it was thought he favored him over much; and that, if his grace had followed other men’s advices, he should have sent him to the Tower, when he was last before the council; and willed this deponent to show the said bishop, that it was the said duke’s pleasure, that he should preach; and, forasmuch as he refused to write his sermon, the said duke’s grace would send him articles of the matter whereof he should preach.
And, within two days after, this deponent was present when the said master Cecil came to the said bishop in the Clink, and went with the said bishop into his study; and there, as this deponent supposeth, delivered the said bishop certain articles, which the said deponent saw in the said bishop’s hand. And the bishop said unto this deponent (having the said articles in his hand), ‘Here be the articles, that my lord of Somerset hath sent me to preach upon:’ and so put up the articles, not reading nor declaring to this deponent the effect of them at that time; and otherwise he cannot depose. Yet, nevertheless, this deponent saith, that the said bishop, before his said sermon upon St. Peter’s day, before the king’s majesty, did commune with this deponent of certain of those articles, which he doth not remember.
To the 9th article he saith, that upon a certain day in the said month of June, after the delivery of the said articlcs by the said master Cecil to the said bishop, the same bishop was sent for to the court; and, as he came from thence in his barge homeward, asked, when should be the next holy-day. Then this examinate, after the said bishop’s coming home (suspecting that he should preach), asked of him, whether he should preach those articles afore to him delivered, in the same form as they were written. And then the said bishop said, that he, being in the lord great master’s chamber in the court, asked of master secretary Smith, what law he had to compel him to speak their form of words (meaning the article to him delivered); who answered, it was not meant he should preach in that form, but that he should speak of those matters.
And, moreover, he saith that he (this deponent) waited upon the said bishop at such time as he went to preach before the king’s majesty, the said St. Peter’s day, and was there present at the sermon-time among the throng, so that conveniently he could not hear the sermon. And otherwise this deponent cannot depose upon the said article.
Upon the 10th article being examined, he saith, that on St. Peter’s Even, before the said bishop preached, a servant of the duke of Somerset (as this deponent heard say) brought a letter from the duke’s grace to the said bishop; whereupon the said bishop, shortly after, sent for this deponent, and, after his coming to him, showed how that the duke had sent him a letter. Whereunto the said bishop said, he would write an answer, which this deponent should carry to his grace. And thereupon, the said bishop began to write; and, before he had written two lines, he stayed and said, he would send answer by word of mouth by this deponent. And beginning to tell this deponent a tale, what he should say for his message, [he] stayed before he made a perfect tale, and so this deponent withdrew himself. And shortly, the said bishop sent for this deponent again, and said to him, ‘You shall not go. I will do well enough, I warrant you.’ And, further, this deponent saith, that he doth know, that the said bishop had provided to have spoken much of the Sacrament of the Altar in that sermon; and thereof, to this deponent’s remembrance, spake something in his sermon; but what it was, this deponent remembereth not. And further he can say nothing to the matter.
Upon articles 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. and 19 . being examined, he saith, that he cannot depose of and upon the contents thereof. To the Interrogatories. — Upon the 1st interrogatory being examined, he saith, that he heard the said bishop, in his said sermon, after that he had spoken particularly of divers matters, say in a general sentence, in this sense: that he (the said bishop) agreed with the superior magistrates, and only found fault with the lower sort, and namely the preachers that were then abroad: likening them to posts, which carried truth in their letters, and lies in their mouths.
Upon the 2d and 3d articles he was not examined, because they did not touch him. Thomas Watson.
MASTER WILLIAM HONING.
Master William Honing esquire, of the age of 31 years, or thereabouts; sworn and examined, etc.
To articles 1. 2. and 3 . he saith, that they be true.
To the 4th article: he believeth it to be true.
To the 5th : he believeth it to be true.
To the 6th he saith, that he cannot certainly depose thereupon.
Nevertheless, he saith, that he was present at the court in the council-chamber at Hampton-court, at such time as the duke of Somerset’s grace was in Scotland, when the bishop of Winchester was committed to the Fleet, for certain complaints made unto the council against him, which this deponent now remembereth not.
To the 7th he cannot depose.
To the 8th article, he saith, that in the month of June, in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign, this deponent, upon a certain day of the said month, was present in the council-chamber at Westminster, when there were certain articles read and spoken of in the council-chamber there, partly by writing and partly by mouth, containing the effect of all the matters contained in this article, to his remembrance; which things the said bishop was commanded to entreat and speak of in his sermon, and he was appointed to preach before the king’s majesty. And, as this deponent remembereth, the articles in writing were offered unto him. And that article touching the king’s majesty’s authority in his tender age, was treated of with him the last matter before the bishop’s departure from the council; whereunto he made answer by these, or like words: ‘My lords, that should be as a child should take his lesson. Trust me with them, and I shall do them more fully, than I should do them by prescribed words.’ And otherwise he cannot depose but as before, in the article that goeth before; being then writing, as he remembereth, in the council-chamber.
To the 9th article he saith as he said to the 8th before.
To the 10th article he cannot depose, Howbeit he saith, that master Cecil was sent to the said bishop, with what commission he remembereth not; and likewise the bishop had a letter sent unto him.
To articles 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. and 19 . examined, he saith, that he cannot depose of and upon the contents thereof. Upon the Interrogatories. — Upon the said interrogatories examined, he saith, that he cannot otherwise depose than afore he hath deposed. William Honing.
DR. GILES AYRE.
Master Giles Ayre, doctor of divinity, dean of the cathedral church of Chichester, of the age of 42 years, or thereabouts, produced for witness, sworn and examined of and upon the articles above said.
Upon articles 1. 2. and 3. he being examined, saith, that it is true.
Upon the 4th article , being examined, he believeth the same to be true. Upon the 5th being examined, he believeth the same to be true.
Upon the 6th , being examined, he saith that he (this deponent himself) and master doctor Tonge, now deceased, did complain upon the said bishop unto my lord of Somerset, then being protector; for this deponent, and master doctor Tonge, were sent by the said duke of Somerset to preach at Winchester. And when they came thither, they desired the bishop, that they might preach accordingly, as they were sent to declare the king’s majesty’s proceedings. To whom the said bishop said, that he would occupy the place himself that day; whereby he stayed them from preaching on a Sunday before-noon, which was the second Sunday after Easter, in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign. And upon the said second Sunday the bishop did preach, and, in his sermon in the cathedral church of Winchester, did inveigh against new preachers which were there come down to preach; saying, ‘I understand there be new preachers sent down: but I suppose there is none of my flock so mad to believe them that they never saw before, neither that doctrine that they never heard before.’
Whereupon the people being at the said bishop’s sermon, turned their eyes towards the said Dr. Tonge and this deponent. And the said Sunday in the afternoon, Dr. Tonge preached in the said cathedral church; and, the Tuesday following, this deponent did preach there. And the Sunday after that, Watson, the bishop’s chaplain, did preach in the said church, and inveighed against the said Dr. Tonge and this deponent, as this deponent heard say. For which causes this deponent and the said Tonge, as before he hath deposed, did complain to my lord of Somerset’s grace; and this deponent gathered certain articles touching the misordering of the said Dr. Tonge and this deponent, by the bishop and his said chaplain; which articles this said deponent delivered, within these three days, to master secretary Cecil. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 7th article the examinate saith, that he knoweth nothing concerning the contents of the same.
To the 8th the examinate saith, that he was not privy to any commandment given to the said bishop to preach according to the effect of the said articles: nevertheless he heard say, he was commanded so to do. And moreover he saith, that he (this deponent) was present at the sermon which the said bishop made before the king’s majesty at Westminster, upon St. Peter’s day, in the second year of his majesty’s reign, as he supposeth; in which sermon this deponent [was] standing in a convenient place where he heard him very well, and noted certain things which the bishop entreated of. The said bishop did not treat so fully of the abolishing and taking away of the bishop of Rome’s authority, as he should have done: but referred him unto a book that he had set forth, touching the bishop of Rome’s usurped authority. And as touching the suppressing and taking away of monasteries, images, [and] chantry-masses, he spake, in his said sermon, but very coldly. And as for shrines, going-about with St. Nicholas, obits, colleges, hallowing of candles, holy water, ashes, palms, holy bread, beads, creeping to the cross, setting-forth of the king’s majesty’s authority in his young years, auricular confession, or common prayer in English, the said bishop did not entreat upon [them], as far as he now remembereth: nevertheless he did attentively hearken to his sayings and preaching, and heard him not speak of them; for, if he had, he should have heard him, as he saith.
To the 9th article he answereth and saith, that it is truth; for the said bishop spake doubtfully, in declaring the supremacy of the king’s majesty; and for images, he spake in such sort as though they might stand still. And touching the monasteries, he found no fault but in the persons; making no mention of their superstitiousness, and enormities of the religion and living. And in his so doubtful declaring of those things this deponent was offended therein, and so, he supposeth, likewise others of the audience were. And as touching the mass, he said, that the king had established the same in his book: meaning (as he supposeth) the book set out by king Henry the Eighth.
Being demanded concerning such things as, he said, the king might take away, whether he said, the king had done godly in taking the same away, this deponent saith, that the said bishop said no such thing, to his remembrance; for if he had so spoken, this deponent supposeth that he should have heard it, and noted it; because he was there from the beginning to the ending of his sermon, and gave attentive ear and noting, as before he hath said.
To the 10th he saith, that the said bishop spake of the Sacrament of the Altar in his said sermon; and said, that Christ did consecrate himself in the mass. But whether he were inhibited to speak of it or no, this deponent knoweth not.
To articles 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. and 19 . the examinate saith, that he can nothing say of the contents therein, saving that this deponent saith, the said bishop yet is disobedient, as appeareth. Upon the Interrogatories. — Upon the 1st interrogatory he being examined saith, that he remembereth no such words that the said bishop then did speak.
Upon the other interrogatories he, being examined, saith, that they concern not him, and upon them he cannot depose. Giles Ayre.
DR. ROBERT RECORD.
Master Robert Record, doctor of physic, of the age of 38 years or thereabout, was produced and sworn, etc.; and upon articles 1. 2. and 3. being examined, he saith, that the contents thereof are true.
Upon the 4th article being examined, he saith, that he supposeth the said bishop hath made an oath to the king’s majesty, of his grace’s supremacy. Upon the 5th being examined, he believeth the same to be true.
Upon the 6th being examined, he saith that he hath heard say, that the said bishop was complained on for maintenance of Hobberdine and Wigge, being evil preachers.
Upon the 7th being examined, he saith, that he hath heard say, that the said bishop was commanded to conform himself to the king’s majesty’s proceedings within a certain time, which this deponent remembereth not.
Upon the 8th being examined, he saith, that upon a certain day in the month of June, in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign, and before the day that the said bishop should preach before the king’s majesty at Westminster, this deponent saw certain articles in writing, containing the effect of the matter contained in the 8th article, whereof one of them was concerning the king’s authority in his tender age. And further, that there was certain communication among the king’s servants, of certain things that the said bishop was forbidden to entreat of or meddle with in his sermon, as the sacrament of the altar and the mass. Otherwise he cannot depose on this article.
To the 9th article he saith, he was present at the said bishop’s sermon, made upon St. Peter’s day, before the king’s majesty, at the court, and noted certain things in the said sermon; in the which sermon he did omit to entreat of certain articles before by this deponent specified, and which the said bishop was commanded (as he heard say) to declare and set forth. And specially he did omit to entreat of the authority of the king’s majesty in his tender age, and did not speak thereof: for this deponent was present at the said sermon from the beginning unto the ending, in such place as he might well hear and understand the said bishop; and gave attentive ear unto his preaching. And if he had, at that time, declared the same, this deponent should have heard it; because he was desirous to hear it spoken of the said bishop’s mouth. And said, that the said bishop, in the confuting of the bishop of Rome’s authority, spake in such doubtful sort, as this deponent and divers other of the audience, were much offended thereat.
And concerning the suppression of monasteries and religious houses the said bishop said, it was not prejudicial unto the mass, for so much as the efficacy of the mass stood not in the multitude of them. But, that the king did godly in the taking away the monasteries, this deponent saith, he doth not now remember that the bishop spoke any such words in his sermon; but the said bishop excused the king in taking away the monasteries, in such sort that he did thereby nothing prejudicial to the mass. But he spake nothing in commendation of the king therein; for if he had, this deponent thinketh surely he should have heard, and marked it, because he gave himself very studiously to hear his said sermon.
And as concerning pilgimages, relics, shrines, St. Nicholas bishop, St. Edmund, St. Katherine, St. Clement, holy bread, holy water, ashes, palms, beads, creeping to the cross, auricular confession, procession, and common prayer in English; this deponent heard not the said bishop speak of any of them in his sermon: for he should surely have heard them, and noted them; for he purposely went to hear and mark what the bishop would say.
Upon the 10th article being examined, he saith, that the said bishop, in his sermon, spake both of the sacrament of the altar, and also of the mass; and commended the king’s majesty in retaining the mass. And, touching the sacrament of the altar, the said bishop spake much, and said, that Christ consecrated himself, and left himself to be a memorial of himself: and that it was the same Christ that was offered then, and is now either sacrificed, or else remembered in the mass. Which words touching the sacrament were an offense to this deponent, and other auditors there. And otherwise this deponent cannot depose.
Upon articles 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. and the last article nevertheless he saith, that the said bishop, as this deponent saith, remaineth yet disobedient. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st interrogatory he saith, that the said bishop, in his said sermon said, that he liked certain things in the king’s majesty, and the higher powers; which he then named specially. But, that he thoroughly did agree, this deponent heard him not say so. And that he found in the lower part fault, in that they took upon them to alter any thing in the religion without the king’s authority. But that all the fault was in them, videlicet, the lower part, he heard him not say. And otherwise he cannot depose.
The 2d and 3d concern him nothing. Robert Record.
SIR GEORGE BLAGE.
Sir George Blage knight, of the age of 38 years, produced, sworn, and examined upon the aforesaid articles.
Upon articles 1. 2. and 3 . he saith, they do contain the truth in every part. To the 4th article he cannot depose.
To the 5th he saith, it is true.
To the 6th he saith, he cannot depose.
To the 7th he saith, he cannot depose.
To the 8th he saith, he cannot depose, whether the said bishop of Winchester was commanded to treat of any such things as is contained in the said article.
To the 9th he saith, that he was present at the sermon made on St.
Peter’s day, in the second year of the reign of king Edward the Sixth; at which time this deponent heard the said bishop preach upon the sacrament and the mass: wherewith this deponent, and divers others (as he saith), were then offended. But what specially the bishop spake of the sacrament and the mass, this deponent doth not now certainly remember.
To the 10th he saith, as before he hath deposed to the 19th article; and otherwise cannot depose.
Being examined upon the rest of the said articles, he saith, he cannot depose of any the contents in them specified. George Blage.
NICHOLAS UDALL.
Nicholas Udall, master of arts, of the age of 44 years or thereabouts; a witness produced, sworn, and examined of and upon the aforesaid articles. To articles 1. 2. and 3. he saith, they do contain the truth.
To the 4th article, he saith, he cannot depose.
To the 5th : he believeth the same to be true.
To the 6th he saith, that he hath heard say, that the bishop of Winchester was complained upon to the council.
To the 7th he cannot depose.
To articles 8. 9. and 10 . he saith, that upon St. Peter’s day, in the month of June, in the second year of the reign of king Edward the Sixth, this deponent, at the request of a noble personage of this realm, was, the same day, at the bishop of Winchester’s sermon made before the king’s majesty, at the court, the said St. Peter’s day, and diligently noted in writing the said bishop’s sermon; which writing, being by him conceived (containing the effect of the said bishop’s sermon), this deponent, at the time of his examination, did read and exhibit. And of other things not mentioned in the said book by this deponent exhibited, the said bishop, in his said sermon, did not treat of or speak of, to this deponent’s remembrance: for if he had, he thinketh he should have noted the same, for he was there, in the pulpit, diligently noting and marking the said sermon. And otherwise this deponent cannot depose upon the said articles.
To the rest of the articles, he saith, he cannot depose but by the report of others. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st interrogatory he answereth, that otherwise he cannot depose, than he hath before deposed.
The 2d and 3d interrogatories concern not him. By me, N. Udall.
SIR EDWARD NORTH.
Sir Edward North, knight, one of the king’s privy council, of the age of 47 years or thereabout; a witness produced, sworn, and examined of and upon the aforesaid articles.
To articles 1. 2. and 3 . he saith, they do contain the truth.
To the 4th he cannot depose.
To the 5th article he saith, it containeth the truth.
To the 6th article he cannot depose.
To the 7th article this deponent saith, that he was present in the council, when the said bishop of Winchester was so monished and advised.
To articles 8. 9. and 10. he saith, that he (this deponent) was present in the council at Westminster, when the bishop of Winchester was there, before the lords of the king’s most honorable council; and when certain articles in writing, containing much of the effect of those things specified in the said articles, as this deponent remembereth, were delivered to him; of which things he should entreat in his sermon, which he was commanded to preach before the king’s majesty. At the delivery of which articles, he required the council, that he should not be constrained to read them on the book, as a child should; but that they should refer it to his discretion: and that he would do them effectually. And so he then promised. But whether he declared those articles according to his promise, or omitted any of them, this deponent cannot tell; for he was not present at all his sermon, but a part thereof. Yet, afterwards, this deponent heard say of certain of the council, that the bishop did omit to entreat of certain of those matters; and after, the duke of Somerset’s grace declared to the council, in the presence of this deponent, that he had willed the said bishop not to entreat of certain matters, in his said sermon, touching the sacrament of the altar and the mass, which, notwithstanding, he did. And this deponent saith moreover, that, afore that time, sundry times it was declared in the council (this deponent being there present), of the disorder of the said bishop; where divers times it was devised and consulted by the council, how and by what means the said bishop might be brought to conform himself to such orders as they had devised.
To the 11th article this deponent saith, that the said bishop was sent unto (but what time he remembereth not) to know his opinion and conformity touching the Book of Common Prayer, and, as this deponent remembereth, my lord chancellor, my lord of Wiltshire, and sir William Peter, went to him; and, at their return they said, that the bishop said, ‘he, being discharged of those things that he was committed to ward for, would show his mind therein, and in any other thing, without delay.’
To articles 12. 13. and 14 . he saith, that sundry articles, with a submission, were sent to the said bishop of Winchester by certain of the lords of the council, by him to be subscribed. For this deponent was then present in the council, when it was determined that the said lords, and master secretary Peter, should go to the said bishop of Winchester.
To the 15th article this deponent saith, that he was present in the council when the said bishop was before the said council, when certain articles, with a submission, were exhibited to the said bishop of Winchester, by him to be subscribed; which he refused to subscribe at that time.
To the 16th this deponent saith, that he was present in the council, when the fruits of the bishopric were sequestered.
To the 17th this deponent saith, that he was likewise present after the said sequestration, when the said bishop was admonished to conform himself within three months then next following, under pain of deprivation.
To the 18th he saith, that the said three months are past, as this deponent supposeth.
To the 19th article he saith, that the said bishop, as yet, hath not conformed himself, as far as this deponent knoweth. Upon the Interrogatories. — Upon the said interrogatories he saith, that he remembereth no part contained in the said first interrogatory: whether he spake of it or not, he remembereth not; for he was not at all the sermon, as afore he hath deposed. And as touching the interrogatory concerning sir Anthony Wingfield and sir Ralph Sadler, he cannot depose any thing of them. By me, Edward North.
EDWARD, DUKE OF SOMERSET.
Edward, duke of Somerset, examined upon the articles objected against the bishop of Winchester, saith as here ensueth:
To articles 1. 2. and 3. his grace saith, they be true.
To the 4th : his grace cannot certainly depose thereof.
To the 5th : his grace thinketh the same to be true.
To the 6th and 7th articles his grace saith, that the said bishop hath been sundry times complained on to his grace, and sundry informations made against him, that he was not conformable to the king’s proceedings in matters of religion. Whereupon the said bishop hath been sundry times admonished by his grace to conform himself to the king’s said proceedings, as to his duty appertained.
To the 8th his grace saith, that the article containeth truth, for touching, first, the bishop of Rome’s authority, his grace well remembereth, that of himself he required the said bishop to treat of that matter according to that article. Who replied, ‘He thought it not necessary now, for that the same was long ago established in the king’s days that dead is; and that he also had written thereon before: and that he thought men were satisfied therein; and therefore better it were not to stir that matter now, than to speak thereof.’ Whereunto his grace replied, that it was more need to speak thereof now, than in the late king’s time; for that the said late king being a notable wise prince, and greatly loved and dreaded in his realm, it might of some be thought, that the laws of the realm, touching the supremacy and the abolishing of the bishop of Rome’s pretended authority, were rather done of power and will, than for justness of the cause. For which cause, thinking nothing more necessary to be spoken of than that article, the bishop was commanded to preach thereof, according as in the article is contained.
And touching the king’s majesty’s authority in his young years; because that some had not that just opinion of his majesty’s authority in those years as they ought to have, and thereupon showed themselves not so obedient to the laws and orders set forth by his majesty’s authority as their duty required, the said bishop was also willed to speak of that matter, and to set forth to the people, that his majesty’s authority was as great in these his majesty’s young years, as if his grace were of many more years.
But whether this one point were contained among the written articles, or no, his grace remembereth not. But his grace is well assured, that the bishop had commandment to set forth that point, for causes aforesaid; and, for the other particulars of the articles, his grace thinketh that those were contained in the written articles, commanded to the said bishop to preach.
To the 9th article his grace saith, the same containeth truth, for his grace was there present, and heard the sermon. And upon hearing thereof, his grace conceived that the bishop had not done the things aforesaid according to the commandment given to him as afore.
To the 10th his grace saith, it is true; for the commandment was given to the bishop in writing, as in his grace’s letters, that time written, more fully appeareth. And the breach of the said commandment was notorious in the presence of the king’s majesty’s grace, the council, and the whole audience there.
Whereupon, as his grace was credibly informed, much tumult and strife arose in the city of London, and more was like to have risen, in case the said bishop had not been committed to prison; as his grace hath afore more amply declared.
To the 11th his grace saith, that the bishop was sent unto, about the time articulate; with whom such order was taken, as his grace hath more fully declared in his depositions upon the 57th, and other articles ministered by the bishop.
To the 12th his grace saith, that it is true.
To the 13th his grace saith, it is also true; as it appeareth by the report of them that were sent to the bishop the same time.
To the 14th his grace saith, that he is certain of the sending the same time to the bishop; and that the bishop refused to subscribe, as appeareth by report of them that were sent to the bishop at that time.
To the 15th and 16th his grace deposeth as afore, in his depositions to the bishop’s articles.
To articles 17. 18. and 19 . his grace saith, that the bishop had such intimation and peremptory monition given, as is contained in this article; and that the said three months are long ago expired.
And his grace saith, that the bishop hath not hitherto reformed nor reconciled himself, but still remaineth in his disobedience as before; as far forth as his grace doth know. Edward Somerset.
WILLIAM, EARL OF WILTSHIRE.
The right honorable William, earl of Wiltshire, etc., examined upon the aforesaid articles, saith as ensueth:
To articles 1. 2. and 3. his lordship saith, they contain truth.
To the 4th : his lordship thinketh this article is true, but the certainty thereof he knoweth not.
To the 5th his lordship saith, it is true.
To the 6th his lordship saith, that he himself hath been present in the council, when the said bishop hath been complained upon, sundry times, for want of conformity in setting forth of the king’s majesty’s proceedings in religion.
To the 7th his lordship saith, that he himself, of good-will, hath oftentimes required and exhorted the said bishop to conform himself: and, besides that, knoweth that he hath been likewise, by the whole council, sundry times admonished, and required to use himself conformably in the premises.
To the 8th his lordship saith, that that article is true; for his lordship was present, among others of the council, when he was commanded to preach and make a sermon before the king’s majesty, and in the same to set forth sincerely his highness’s proceedings [according] to such instructions as were then given him in writing. Marry (his lordship saith) that the bishop, at that time, made suit, that he might not be forced to read the said instructions as they were upon the book, like a scholar; but that he might be credited in the setting-forth of them: promising that he would so open them as they should have good cause to be contented with him. And what the matters were particularly, that were given to the said bishop to treat upon in his said sermon, his lordship now thoroughly remembereth not.
To the 9th his lordship saith, that the said article is true, and remembereth well that as well the king’s majesty, and all others of the council that were present at the said sermon, as all the rest of the audience that he could talk withal, were much offended with his said sermon, insomuch as in the next session after, in council order was given, that for his evil behavior in the said sermon, he should be committed to the Tower; as indeed he was.
To the 10th his lordship saith, he remembereth nothing touching this article of his own knowledge; but he hath heard say, it is as is contained in this article.
To the 11th his lordship saith, that about the time articulate, the lord Rich lord chancellor, this examinate, and master secretary Peter, were with the bishop, by order of the council, to know his conformity touching the Book of Common Prayer, which they had then with them to show unto him: but for any persuasions that could then be made to him, he would not show his opinion therein, nor look upon the said book, during the time of his imprisonment; alleging, that it should be slanderous both to the council and him also, to have him show his opinion, being in prison.
To the 12th his lordship saith, that the said article is true; for his lordship was present at the delivery of the said letters and submission and articles: at which time the bishop refused to acknowledge the submission; but, to the articles, he subscribed his name.
To the 13th his lordship saith, this article is true, as he heard by report of those that were sent at that time.
To the 14th his lordship saith, it is true; for at the time mentioned in this article, the bishop of London, the master of the horse, sir William Peter, and Master Goodrick, were sent to the said bishop, to the Tower, with the said submission and articles; where the bishop refused to subscribe, as they reported at their return.
To the 15th his lordship saith, the article is true; for he was present in the council at the same time.
To the 16th and 17th his lordship saith, the articles be true; for he was present in the council at the giving of the said sequestration, and also the admonitions, intimation, and communication, mentioned in these articles.
To the 18th his lordship saith, the article is true.
To the 19th his lordship saith, that he doth not know that he hath submitted himself; but hath heard that he persisteth in his former obstinacy. William Wiltshire.
WILLIAM, LORD MARQUIS OF NORTHAMPTON.
William, lord marquis, examined upon the articles of office objected against the bishop of Winchester, saith as followeth:
To articles 1. 2. and 3 . he saith, they be true.
To the 4th he can say nothing.
To the 5th his lordship saith, the article is true.
To the 6th his lordship saith, the said article containeth truth; for he remembereth well, that in summer, in the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign, the said bishop, upon sundry informations and complaints made against him, was sent for to the council, the king being then at Hampton-court, where, in the presence of his lordship and others of the council, he (the said bishop) found fault with the homilies (and specially with the homily of justification), which were set forth before by special injunction of the king’s majesty. And at the same time found, also, fault with Erasmus’s paraphrase upon this text of Paul, ‘Nemini quicquam debeatis;’ [which paraphrase was likely ordered to be set up in every church by injunction before that time.] 130 And for his want of conformity at that time, and at other times, whereof advertisement had been given by the council, and for refusal to set forth the said homilies and paraphrase for the cause aforesaid, he was then committed to the Fleet.
To the 7th his lordship saith, he can say nothing: but that two several times in the Tower, and once at Westminster, he was seriously advised and commanded to conform himself; his lordship being present and hearing the same.
To the 8th and 9th his lordship saith, Of the commandment given him to preach and set forth matters contained in the 8th article, in such sort as is there mentioned, this examinate can nothing say of his own knowledge. But, touching the sermon, whereat his lordship was present, he saith, that in the matters of the supremacy, and taking away of abbeys, chantries, and such like, which, he heard say, was part of the said bishop’s instructions to preach upon, he (the said bishop) used himself in his sermon in such cold and doubtful sort, as both his lordship, and as many others as stood by him, were much offended withal; insomuch that immediately after the said sermon, as many as his lordship spake with, thought him worthy to be committed to ward for the same.
To the 10th his lordship saith, he was not privy to the inhibition; but of the matters articulate he heard the bishop speak in his said sermon.
To the 11th his lordship saith, the same is true, as he hath heard by credible report.
To articles 12. 13. and 14. his lordship saith, that there were certain of the council sent to the said bishop for the purposes mentioned in the said articles. And that, by the report of such of the council as were sent, it appeared that the said bishop was, at every of the said times, not conformable.
To the 15th his lordship saith, the same article is true; for he was present with others of the council, in the council-chamber at Westminster at the same time.
To the 16th his lordship saith, that it is true; for he was then present, and one of the council at the making of the said sequestration; and also when the king’s majesty gave commission to the whole council to that effect.
To the 17th his lordship saith, it is true, as appeareth more fully by the decree remaining in the council books of record.
To the 18th he deposeth it to be true.
To the 19th his lordship saith, as far as he knoweth it is true. William, lord marquis of Northampton.
JOHN, EARL OF BEDFORD.
The right honorable John earl of Bedford, lord privy seal, examined upon the articles ministered of office against the bishop of Winchester, saith, upon his fidelity to God and the king’s majesty, and upon his honor, as ensueth: To articles 1. 2. and 3. his lordship saith, that the same be true.
To the 4th his lordship saith, that he thinketh it is true.
To the 5th his lordship saith, that it is true.
To the 6th his lordship saith, it is true; for his lordship hath been present in the council when the said bishop hath been oftentimes complained of, for neglecting his office, and for lack of conformity to the setting forth of the king’s majesty’s proceedings in reformation of abuses in religion To the 7th his lordship saith, it is true; for he hath heard, when he hath been so spoken unto and admonished by the council as is deduced in this article.
To the 8th his lordship saith, he hath heard, that he was so commanded to do as is contained in this article; and otherwise he knoweth not.
To the 9th his lordship saith, that the said bishop used himself, in his said sermon, very evil, in the hearing of the king’s majesty, the council, and a great many besides; and so evil, that if the king’s majesty and the council had not been present, his lordship thinketh, that the people would have pulled him out of the pulpit, they were so much offended with him.
To the 10th his lordship saith, that he was present at the said bishop’s sermon with others of the council; at which time the said bishop did commend the use of private masses, and did teach the presence of the very body of Christ in the sacrament; of which two points he was before commanded by the duke of Somerset then [protector], in the kingmajestyname, not to meddle withal nor in anywise to speak thereof; as his lordship heard.
To the 11th his lordship hath heard, as is contained in this article; but otherwise he knoweth not.
To articles 12. 13. and 14. his lordship hath heard by report of those that were sent, at every time, as is contained in these articles.
To articles 15. 16. and 17 . his lordship saith, that he remembereth not perfectly whether he was present in the council at the same time, or no: but, he saith, he thinketh it is true; for he hath heard it so many times credibly to be reported.
To the 18th his lordship saith, that this article containeth manifest truth.
To the 19th his lordship saith, that it is true; for the said bishop persisteth still in his former obstinacy, as his lordship daily heareth. Bedford.
THE LORD PAGET.
The answer of the lord Paget to the articles ministered to the bishop of Winchester was as followeth:
To articles 1. 2. 3. 4. and 5.: the said lord Paget thinketh them to be true. To the 6th article he saith, that he hath heard, that at the king’s majesty’s visitation in Winchester diocese, there was complaint made, that the said bishop was against the king’s majesty’s injunctions and proceedings in religion, as appeareth more plainly by the answer to the next article.
To the 7th he answereth, that in the summer, in the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign, our sovereign lord that now is, — as well upon occasion of letters sent from sir John Mason knight, then one of the king’s majesty’s visitors, and other letters from the said bishop to him, before the arrival of the said sir John Mason at Winchester, as upon the complaint of divers gentlemen and others of that diocese of Winchester, whereby it appeared, that the said bishop bent himself against the king’s majesty’s and his council’s proceedings in religion, — the said bishop was sent to appear before the said. council at Hampton-court; and, at his coming thither, being much moved to conformity by the whole council then present, and by every man apart by himself, he (the said bishop) would in no wise relent, but stood wilfully in his obstinacy; and thereupon was committed to the Fleet.
To the 8th he answereth, that after the said bishop’s coming out of the Fleet, about Whitsunday, in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign, the said bishop (upon sundry new complaints of his doings and sayings against the king’s majesty’s proceedings) was sent for up again unto the duke of Somerset and others of the king’s majesty’s council. And, at his coming up — being charged with the said complaints, and denying the same; pretending, also, that no man desired more the setting-forth of the king’s proceedings than he, and that no man could do it better than he, with other good words of conformity — the said duke and council thought meeter to accept his conformity, than to go about to undo him with proof, by witnesses of his obstinacy. And further the said lord Paget saith, that the said duke and council gave order, that the said bishop should preach and set forth certain articles before the king’s majesty, concerning (as far forth as he remembereth) the just taking away of the usurped authority of the bishop of Rome: — item, to the just taking away of abbeys and other superstitious things mentioned in the said article: — item, of the maintenance of the king’s authority in his young years.
To the 9th he answereth, that the said bishop, in his sermon before the king’s majesty, spake not of the king’s majesty’s authority in his young years, neither, as he remembereth, of any ceremonies by name; but handled the king’s majesty’s authority in such sort, as he seemed rather to take away authority from his council, than to set forth the authority of a king in young age.
To the 10th he saith, that the aforesaid duke and council, having before been informed that divers men did diversely talk of the mass, of the sacrament of the altar, of the holy communion — some calling it one thing, and some another; some affirming transubstantiation, some the contrary; some the real, some the bodily, some the fleshly presence of Christ; and minding, as much as they could, to stay all things that might engender courage to one or other to dispute in that matter, till it were resolved upon by learned men to be for that purpose called together by the king’s majesty’s authority — thought good (the said duke) to send to inhibit the said bishop to preach thereof: who, nevertheless, preached much of the mass; of the maintenance of it: of the manner of Christ’s consecration; proving thereby a carnal presence, a transubstantiation: that private masses were good and godly; animating the king’s majesty (as far as the same lord Paget remembereth) to continue them still — that the audience was so much offended with him, that they were in great uproar; and, if it had not been for the presence of the king’s majesty and his council, would (as the said lord Paget heard say) have plucked the said bishop out of the pulpit.
To the 11th he answereth, that he heard certain of the lords, and others of the king’s majesty’s council, who were sent to the said bishop to the Tower, on the king’s majesty’s behalf, report the said bishop’s refusal to do, in some things, as they required him to do, for declaration of conformity to the king’s majesty’s proceedings.
To the articles 12. 13. and 14. he answereth, that he knoweth that, at the time mentioned in the articles, or thereabout, a letter of the king’s majesty, with a certain submission to be subscribed by the said bishop, was sent by certain of the king’s majesty’s council to the said bishop; and that certain of the council were sent unto him, at three sundry times, to require his conformity, and subscription to the said submission and certain articles: whereunto he, nevertheless, as the said councillors declared at their return, refused to subscribe as they required him. Which report he (the said lord Paget) heard them make, and was present when the commission was given them to go to the bishop, and to require his submission, as afore is said.
To the articles 15. 16. 18. and 19. he answereth, they be true; for he was present, as the bishop himself knoweth. By me, W. Paget. Upon the Interrogatories. — To articles 1. 2. and 3. he answereth, that he believeth verily, the late king of most worthy memory had the said bishop in suspicion of misliking his highness’s proceedings in some things of religion; for he hath heard him say so, upon sundry occasions. And that his majesty thought him (the said bishop) too wilful in his opinion, and much bent to the popish party. And, for that cause, he hath heard say, that his majesty left him out of the number of those, which his highness appointed to compile the last book of religion.
To the 4th and 5th he answereth, that he knoweth, that the said late king of most worthy memory, misliked the said bishop ever the longer the worse; and that, in his conscience, if the said king had lived any while longer than he did, he would have used extremity against the said bishop, so far forth as the law would have borne; his majesty thinking to have just and sore matter of old, against the said bishop, in store, not taken away by any pardon. And at divers times asked the said lord Paget for a certain writing, touching the said bishop; commanding him to keep it, save that he might have it when he called for it. And touching the putting of the said bishop out of his testament, it is true that upon St. Stephen’s day at night, four years now past, his majesty having been very sick, and in some peril, after his recovery forthwith called for the duke of Somerset’s grace, for the lord privy seal, for my lord of Warwick, for the late master of the horse, for master Denny, for the master of the horse that now is, and for the said lord Paget, at that time his secretary; and then willed master Denny to fetch his testament, who bringeth forth, first, a form of a testament which his majesty liked not after he heard [it], saying, ‘that was not it, but there was another, of a later making, written with the hand of the lord Wriothesley, being secretary.’ Which, when master Denny had fetched, and he heard it, he seemed to marvel that some were left out unnamed in it, whom, he said, he meant to have in, and some in, whom he meant to have out. And so bade the said lord Paget, in the presence of the aforesaid lords, to put in some that were not named before, and to put out the bishop of Winchester’s name; which was done. And then (after his pleasure declared in sundry things, which he caused to be altered, and entered in the will), his majesty came to the naming of councillors, assistants to his executors; whereupon the said lord Paget, and the others, beginning to name my lord marquis of Northampton, my lord of Arundel and the rest of the council not before named as executors — when it came to the bishop of Winchester, he had him put out, saying, ‘He was a wilful man, and not meet to be about his son (the king’s majesty that now is). Whereupon we passed over to the bishop of Westminster, whom his majesty bade put out also, saying, ‘he was schooled,’ or such like term, ‘by the bishop of Winchester.’ And so passing unto the rest, he admitted all the council without stop, saving one other man, at whom he made some stick; but, nevertheless, upon our suits relented, and so he was named as a councillor. This all done, the said lord Paget read over to his majesty what was written, and [when] he came to the place of councillors, reading their names, he began to move the king again for the bishop of Winchester; and the rest then present set foot in with him, and did earnestly sue to his majesty, for placing the said bishop among the councillors. But he would in no wise be entreated, saying, ‘He marvelled what we meant, and that all we knew him [the bishop] to be a wilful man.’
And bade us be contented, ‘for he should not be about his son, nor trouble his council any more.’ The said lord Paget, and the others, were in hand, also, for the bishop of Westminster: but he would in no wise be entreated, alleging only against him, that he was ‘of Winchester’s schooling,’ or such a like term.
To the 6th and 7th articles, the said lord Paget answereth, that no doubt he heard the said bishop of Winchester, divers times, to be against the reformation of religion, and to mislike such as were furtherers of it both in the court, and in his diocese. And that they, likewise, had been offended with him, and thought that he did much let, both in his diocese and elsewhere, the setting- forth of such things as the king’s majesty went about, for the reformation of religion; and for such a one he hath been always taken. And he believeth, that the said bishop himself hath thought, that he hath been so taken and reputed, and hath misliked himself nothing for it.
To the 7th and 8th he hath answered before in the 10th article; and yet nevertheless saith further, that he cannot remember any one point in religion to have been so much in controversy and disputation, as the matters of the mass, of the private mass, of the manner of consecration, and the manner of presence, and the transubstantiation, were, at that time that the said bishop preached; of all the which (as he remembereth) the said bishop preached in his sermon before the king’s majesty. William Paget.
THE ANSWER OF THE LORD PAGET TO CERTAIN INTERROGATORIES MINISTERED SEVERALLY UNTO HIM ON THE BEHALF OF THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER, AS APPEARETH IN THE THIRTEENTH SESSION To the 1st the said lord Paget saith, that he was present at one time, when the said bishop appeared, before the duke of Somerset, then protector, and others of the king’s majesty’s council, about the time (as far as he remembereth) expressed in the article.
To articles 2. 3. and 4. he answereth, that the said bishop, being charged by the said duke and council, with such matters as moved the calling-up of him before them, used then such manner of excuses and declarations of his meanings, and of his good will to the advancement of the king’s majesty’s proceedings, as the said duke and council were rather contented to accept the same, than to enter to further extremities with him by proof of the matters laid against him. Marry, whether the said bishop answered in those words mentioned in the 2d article, the said lord Paget remembereth not; but well he wotteth, it was thought then convenient, that the said bishop should not return to his diocese. And therefore order was given him to tarry at his house in London, with refusal of his request to have Esher, whereof the said lord Paget was then keeper: but the cause of the said bishop’s request to have Esher, the said lord Paget remembereth not; nor yet the cause then alleged by the said duke and council, whereby they refused his request.
To the 5th and 6th articles the said lord Paget answereth, that after the attainder of the duke of Norfolk, as he remembereth, in the upper and nether house of the parliament, the late king of most worthy memory willed him (the said lord Paget) to require the said bishop’s grant of the hundred pounds mentioned in the articles: but in such sort his majesty willed it to be required, as he looked for it rather of duty, than of any gratuity at the bishop’s hand; to whom, the said lord Paget saith, of certain knowledge, as men may know things, he (the said king) would have made request for nothing; being (the said bishop) the man, at that time, whom the said lord Paget believeth his majesty abhorred more than any man in his realm: which he declared grievously, at sundry times, to the said lord, against the said bishop; ever naming him with such terms as the said lord Paget is sorry to name. And the said lord Paget thinketh that divers of the gentlemen of the privy chamber are able to depose the same. Nevertheless it may be, that he (the said lord Paget) did use another form of request to the said bishop than the said king would have liked, if he had known it; which if he did, he did it rather for dexterity, to obtain the thing for his friend, than for that he had such special charge of the said king so to do. And also the said lord Paget saith, that afterwards it might be, that he used such comfortable words of the king’s favorable and thankful acceptation of the thing at the said bishop’s hand, as in the article is mentioned; which if he did, it was rather for quiet of the said bishop, than for that it was a thing indeed.
To the 7th article the said lord Paget saith, that it may be, that the said bishop was used, at the time mentioned in the article, with the ambassadors, for the council’s mouth; because that none other of the council that sat above him, were so well languaged as he in the French tongue. But the said lord Paget believeth, that if the said king that dead is, had known it, the council would have had little thanks for their labor. W. Paget.
ANDREW BEYNTON.
Received by the office to the information of the judges and commissioners minds at Greenwich, Andrew Beynton of Wiltshire esquire, of the age of 35 years, upon an oath to him referred by master secretary Peter, saith as followeth:
About eleven years past a Diet or Council was holden at Ratisbon, whither were appointed in legacy for this realm, the bishop of Winton, and sir Henry Knivet; upon the which sir Henry Knivet, sir John Bartley, sir William Blunt, and I, Andrew Beynton, the king’s majesty’s servants, were commanded to give attendance.
Towards the latter end of the council, it chanced one Wolfe, then servant to sir Henry Knivet, walking toward the emperor’s palace, to hearken some news (as his custom was often to do), met with a certain merchant-mercer, an exchanger, whose name, at this present, I do not remember; who required of Wolfe, for the familiar acquaintance he had of him, he would do him a pleasure, which the other granted. Then began the merchant to say on this wise: ‘Sir, the truth is that the pope’s ambassador departed yesterday towards Rome; and for that he had no leisure to end his business here himself, he hath put me in credit for the accomplishment of it.
And, among all other things, he hath charged me especially, that I should repair to the ambassador of England, and to require of him an answer to the letter which he received of the pope: and that I should, with all speed, send it after him. And forasmuch as I have no acquaintance, I do desire you, that you would help me to speak with him or else his secretary.’ Wherein this Wolfe granted him friendship, and so departed for that time. Wolfe, at his coming home, opened this matter privily unto master Chalenor, then being secretary to sir Henry Knivet; and desired him that, in the afternoon, he would go with him to the merchant, to hear him rehearse the whole matter again, to the intent they would make report the more assured: which thing they did; and according as you have before, the merchant repeated his tale. And after that, they opened the treason to master Knivet their master, who immediately made master Bartley, master Blunt, and me, privy to it; and forthwith determined, upon the morrow following, to send for the merchant, under color to buy some silks, and cause him, eftsoons, to make rehearsal of the matter before him and us. The next day, being holy day, at afternoon, this merchant brought velvet and satin, which after master Knivet had awhile perused, Wolfe said unto the merchant, in presence of his master, and all the company, ‘Seignior, is this the lord ambassador, of whom you demand to have an answer of the letter sent from the pope?’ The merchant made answer, ‘No, it is a bishop that I must repair unto; for I know no other ambassador.’ With that master Knivet, dissimuling the matter, turned unto the merchant, and asked him the matter: where he once again rehearsed the former tale. Which done, the merchant was directed to the bishop’s house, and commanded to require his answer there. Incontinent master Knivet prepared his letters, in which he made just and true declaration unto the king’s majesty lately deceased, willing master Bartley and me, to set our hands to the letter as witnesses to the same; which, as our duty was to do, we did. And, for my part, I am and will be record, that the premises be true, while the breath is in my body.
Now to write how the merchant declared his message to the bishop, and his cruelty showed unto the merchant; his crafty handling of the matter to make it to seem no truth; and also the answer made to the king’s majesty for his accusation; the king’s answer back to master Knivet, how he should proceed in the matter; how by friendship the matter was forgotten for a time, and afterward called to memory again, — I cannot well pen it: wherefore I humbly desire your pardon. But, if your pleasures be, I shall, as near as I can, rehearse it by mouth unto you, not failing the truth thereof as nigh as I can. Your orator, Andrew Beynton.
Hereafter followeth the above-named master Chaloner’s answer (then secretary to sir Henry Knivet) to certain interrogatories agreeing with the said master Beynton’s tale.
MASTER CHALONER’S DEPOSITION.
As touching the 3d and 6th interrogatories, the time so long since, and the small thought I had then, that the matter now at me demanded, should have required this special declaration, must needs in many points cause me not so ripely, nor exactly, to repeat the circumstance of each part of that, which, for the substance thereof, as I now yet remember, is this in effect: — What time the bishop of Winchester, and sir Henry Knivet (whose soul God have), joint ambassadors for the late king’s majesty with the emperor, were at Ratisbon in Germany, a good while after the Diet there kept, it chanced, as I learned afterwards, that one William Wolfe, servant and steward of the household to the said sir Henry Knivet, for the acquaintance he had with divers strangers of the emperor’s court (having been afore times steward also to sir Thomas Wyat, the king’s former ambassador there), to meet and fall in communication with an Italian merchant, a banker following that court, whose name, to my remembrance, was Ludovico; and what more I remember not. But, in process of their talk, as the said Wolfe did afterwards disclose to sir Henry Knivet, the said Ludovico required of him, when my lord ambassador, his master, would make ready his packet for Rome. ‘Wherefore?’ quoth Wolfe. ‘Marry!’ quoth Ludovico, ‘to answer those letters which the legate (the legate then with the emperor was cardinal Contarene) did late send unto him, addressed to him from Rome. So that if he will make answer by this courier, it is time ye may tell him; for he departeth away within a day or two.’ At this tale Wolfe, being abashed, and well guessing which ambassador he meant, thought not meet to tell him whose servant he was; but by other soothing talk ministered, perceived that he meant the bishop of Winchester.
So, to the end that Ludovico should nothing suspect, he gave him answer, ‘that he, not being his secretary, could yield him small answer; but he would not miss to put his secretary in remembrance thereof.’ And so then they departed.
This matter seeming to Wolfe of importance, he strait revealed it to sir Henry Knivet, his master; who, weighing also the greatness of the case, and the disadvantage it were, upon one man’s so bare a report, to attempt aught in a place and time, whereby such a person was to be touched, charged Wolfe to advise himself well, that no effect of hate, displeasure, or other passion, did move him this to disclose; but truth only. Wolfe replied, ‘that he weighed well the weightiness of the case, meeter, as to his own respect, to be passed over in silence, for avoiding of his private displeasure; if duty of allegiance bound him not otherwise.’ ‘But,’ quoth Wolfe, ‘if ye think not my hearing thereof, one to one, be sufficient, I warrant you to devise means, that some other of your servants shall hear the like words of Ludovico’s mouth, as well as I.’ Sir Henry devised whom he might send, and lastly rested upon me, then being his secretary; for that I could speak a little Italian. And this being past upon a Saturday, early upon the next Sunday Wolfe called me out of my bed, not telling me one jot of this former matter (for so it was concluded between sir Henry Knivet and him), to the end, in case I noted what Wolfe afore noted, not being afore made privy thereunto, it might then appear to sir Henry Knivet of more likelihood. So, therefore, when Wolfe had me called up familiarly, as he was wonted, having been of long acquaintance with me, and I with him, he prayed me to walk forth with him to the Piazza. or Merchanstede, before the emperor’s own lodging; over against the which, on the other side of the street, the Romish legate was also lodged.
Here (to let pass other things, and circumstances of other byematters, superfluous and impertinent to the point) it chanced, as Wolfe and I walked up and down, that Ludovico (the banker aforesaid) came also into the Piazza, and saluted Wolfe. And they two (I standing by), fell in talk of matters of exchange, which because they touched me not, I smally passed of; till at last (whether it were by Wolfe’s motion or the other’s, I do not well remember), Ludovico said, ‘The post departed on the morrow for Rome:’ and prayed Wolfe to remember our ambassador’s secretary, Hereat I began to give better ear, nothing witting (as God help) of any further purpose. ‘Yea, marry!’ quoth Wolfe, ‘I am partly in doubt which ambassador of ours ye mean; for here be presently two, the one being the bishop of Winchester, the other a gentleman of the king’s privy chamber.’ ‘No,’ quoth Ludovico, ‘I mean not him; but the bishop.’ ‘Well,’ quoth Wolfe, ‘I will not fail to put his secretary in remembrance.’ ‘Do so,’ quoth Ludovico.
And, by other talk that he then uttered to Wolfe, in my hearing — tending to this effect: That the bishop had, at the legate’s hands, received letters from Rome; and by him was solicited to send other letters for answer — I so much did mislike the matter, that when Ludovico was gone, I said to Wolfe, ‘that Ludovico had had but homely talk with him, to be passed over lightly.’ ‘Why,’ quoth Wolfe, ‘what note you in it?’ ‘Marry! I note,’ quoth I, ‘so much in it, that I will tell my master of it.’ ‘Do as ye list ‘ quoth Wolfe, ‘if ye think any matter thereto.’ So Wolfe, nothing disclosing to me what he had opened the day before to sir Henry Knivet, let me alone; and I, forthwith returning to sir Henry Knivet’s lodgings, told him apart, what I had heard of Ludovico’s mouth; whereupon sir Henry Knivet communicated this thing with sir John Bartley.
And (to omit many parts of the circumstance, which I cannot all remember, and though I could remember it, were here too long a process to recite) it was thought best between them, that Wolfe, under color of cheapening of silks, should procure Ludovico to come with certain sorts of velvet, to sir Henry Knivet’s lodging, to see, by that train, whether occasion might be taken to make Ludovico cough out as much as he had uttered before, to Wolfe and me. To be brief: the same Sunday at afternoon, Wolfe brought Ludovico to sir Henry Knivet’s lodgings, who, not only to master Bartley, but also to master Blunt, and master Andrew Beynton, the king’s servants, opened the case; to the end that they, also, upon occasion, might be as witnesses of that which Ludovico should say. [They] began to look upon the silks, and finding means, after what sort I remember not (whether it were by Wolfe or himself), to move Ludovico of the former matter, Ludovico in all their presences declared, that the letters sent from Rome, were not to his seignior (meaning sir Henry Knivet), but to the bishop, calling him ‘Reverendissimo;’ whereby it was easy to perceive whom he meant, and therewithal perceiving that both sir Henry and the other gentlemen beheld him somewhat fixedly, as I remember, he stayed; and sir Henry Knivet, to dissemble the matter, as though he noted nothing in it, prayed him, when he had received the bishop’s letters, to repair also to him for a packet, which he intended to send to a gentleman of England, being at Milan; which Ludovico promised to do; and so departed.
The next morning (being Monday), as sir Henry Knivet was making ready a letter to signify this much to the king’s majesty, the bishop of Winchester sent in haste for him to come to his lodgings.
For a little before, the same morning, Ludovico himself had been at the bishop’s, to demand, on the legate’s behalf, his letters to Rome.
And how Ludovico used his tale to the bishop, I cannot tell; but the bishop perceived, that in mistaking one for another (supposing Wolfe to be the bishop’s servant), he had uttered his message from the legate to Wolfe. Whereupon strait he caused Ludovico to be stayed in his house; and went himself to Granuella, by whose order Ludovico was committed to the ward and keeping of one of the emperor’s marshals. So when sir Henry Knivet, upon the bishop’s sending, came to his lodging strait (the bishop, falling into hot words, and saying that he had ‘poison in his dish’ and that ‘a knave was suborned to be his destruction,’ with other like words) sir Henry prayed him that Ludovico might, face to face, be examined in both their presences. ‘No,’ quoth the bishop, ‘I have declared so the case to Granuella (being indifferent to us both), that I will not meddle with Ludovico, nor speak with him: but the emperor’s council shall examine him, and try what he is, for me.
Thus far forth, as I remember, this matter then proceeded, with great words and objections made to the bishop by sir Henry — ‘that, in a matter touching the king their master, the bishop would use the aid or means of Granuella, a foreign prince’s minister, to make him privy to their question ‘But never since could sir Henry speak with Ludovico; and I ween a fortnight or twenty days’ controversy passed in this contention, till, at last, by letters from the king’s majesty, both the bishop and sir Henry were commanded to lay all things under foot, and to cease that matter; joining together in service, as before. And so they did, without further outward demonstration of any grudge or variance about this matter.
And within a two months after, it chanced [that] Wolfe, having been long sick of a cough of the lungs, died of phthisic, who, in his death-bed, in presence of sir Henry Knivet and divers of his servants, making his last will, took it on his death, that the matter aforesaid, by him first revealed to sir Henry Knivet, was true, as he had declared it; and not sought, nor by him procured by Ludovico’s hands; nor invented by him, for any malice or displeasure borne to the bishop; but only for discharge of his faith and duty to the king’s majesty. And therefore [he] willed in the end of his will, this his protestation to be inserted, as, according to his request, it was: whereunto (when he had read it) he subscribed it with his hand. — And thus much for the answer of master Chaloner to the 3d and 6th interrogatories. Thomas Chaloner.
And now hereafter follow all the depositions of all such as were produced, sworn, and examined, upon the Matter Justificatory laid in by the bishop; which matter is to be seen afore, in the fourth session, page 105.
EDWARD, DUKE OF SOMERSET.
The right honorable lord Edward duke of Somerset, being examined upon the articles ensuing, saith as followeth:
To the 1st article his grace saith, that it hath oftentimes appeared to his grace, by sundry complaints and informations made against the said bishop, that he hath not done his duty in setting forth the king’s majesty’s proceedings, in matters of religion, in such ample sort as his duty required. And as for his chancellor, his grace can little testify therein otherwise than that there hath been of late in him no towardness of conformity; for which he doth now remain in prison. And his grace, also, saith, that touching the bishop’s preaching against the usurped power of the bishop of Rome, he remembereth not of any sermon by him so made, saving one, whereof fuller mention is made in his depositions upon the articles, ministered against the said bishop, of office in this behalf. And as for the book mentioned in this article, his grace saith, he hath heard of such a book by him made; but to what effect it weigheth, his grace knoweth not, nor also of his defense made in the university of Louvain.
To the 2d his grace saith, that he hath heard say, that certain the bishop’s doings were not best liked in the king’s majesty’s days that dead is: but whether the bishop were called to answer thereunto, or not, his grace cannot tell.
To the 3d his grace saith, that the bishop hath been called before the council, and in trouble, before his committing to the Tower: but touching the rest of the article, his grace knoweth not.
To the 4th his grace thinketh, that he was used sometimes to answer the ambassadors because he had the languages, more than for any other respect.
To the 10th his grace saith, that his grace, upon promise by him (the said bishop) made to be from thenceforth a good subject, and conformable to the king’s proceedings, delivered him out of the Fleet: but whether by force of the pardon, or not, his grace remembereth not.
To the 17th his grace saith, that the said bishop, upon complaint made, was sent for to his grace and the council; and, after his coming, because it was thought that his being in his diocese might be hinderance to the king’s majesty’s proceedings, he was willed by the council to tarry about London; at which time his grace remembereth that the bishop desired to borrow a house in the country nigh London.
To the 23d article : his grace remembereth there was a consultation of certain men learned in the civil laws, tending to this effect: that a bishop, or other minister of the church, disobeying any injunction of the king’s majesty, might, after certain circumstances and admonitions, be deprived. Which consultation his grace showed to the bishop of good will; to the intent that he might be thereby the rather induced to do his duty obediently, and so avoid the danger which he might otherwise, by his disobedience, incur.
To the 23d his grace saith, that the said bishop said and promised, before his grace and the lord treasurer, that he would speak of the matters set forth in the said papers; praying his grace to trust him therein, and that he would so use him therein, as he would deserve his thanks. But as for the day hereof, his grace remembereth not.
To the 24th his grace saith, that he remembereth nothing of the contents thereof, otherwise than is contained in the 22d article.
To the 25th his grace saith, that the said bishop was sent to the lord great master’s chamber then being; for what cause specially, his grace remembereth not.
To the 26th article: his grace knoweth nothing thereof.
To the 27th his grace saith, that the commandment first given generally to the bishop, to set forth the said article, was given before the whole council: but, in the end, upon his promise to do and set forth as is aforesaid, his grace thinks the bishop departed in such gentle sort as is mentioned in this article. To the 28th his grace saith, that he can say nothing thereof.
To the 45th article: his grace remembereth that the bishop’s servants made suit divers times for their master’s deliverance, to whom his grace answered, that when that time came, so that he would be a conformable subject, his grace would do the best therein that he could.
To articles 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. and 62. his grace saith, that it is true, that his grace, and others mentioned in this article, had the bishop before them in the Tower, declaring unto him in effect, as his grace now remembereth, that they had been means unto the king’s grace for him; and trusted, that his majesty would be his good lord, and forget things past — so as he would submit himself, set forth all the king’s proceedings, and become a conformable subject to his majesty. And his grace remembereth, that the bishop was, the same time, required to show his opinion upon the book (set forth by parliament) of Common Prayer, and Ordering of Bishops and Priests, which, after some talk had therein, he promised to do. And thereupon order was taken, that the lieutenant should bring him the said books; and thereupon time was taken to hear his conformity therein. And this is the effect, as his grace remembereth, touching the contents of these articles.
To articles 63. 64. 65. 66. and 67. his grace saith, that to the book of Common Service the bishop said, that as he would not have given his consent to the making thereof, so, it being now made, he was contented both to keep it himself, and cause it to be kept of others: which his sayings being written, he, nevertheless, refused to subscribe; for that (as he said) he should thereby seem to yield himself an offender. And as to the other book (of Orders), he showed himself to mislike the same for such causes, in effect, as are mentioned in these articles. And, as his grace remembereth, the same bishop being the same time willed to submit himself to the king’s majesty, he refused so to do, and required justice.
Upon the 70th article his grace remembereth, that there was special commission given to the whole council, by the king’s majesty, to call the said bishop before them about the time articulate, and to require him to subscribe a submission, and certain other articles as appear in the Council Book; and, if he refused to subscribe to the same, then to proceed to the sequestration of his bishopric; according to the which commission, the said bishop was before them, in the queen’s great chamber at Westminster, and the said commission declared unto him, and he required to subscribe the same submission and articles, which he refused to do: saying nevertheless, that, as many of the said articles as were set forth by any law or proclamation, he would set forth. Marry, he said, touching divers things in the said articles, there was no law, nor other order for [them]: as for the submission, he refused to subscribe.
His grace saith also, that he thinketh the bishop required to have a copy of the articles with him into the Tower, to peruse them there, and to answer thereunto as he should see cause, and think convenient; which, forasmuch as the same articles were showed to him afore in the Tower, were not delivered unto him. Upon the Interrogatories . 131 — To the 1st his grace saith, it is true; for, a little before the death of the said late king, he, being then ‘in extremis,’ and then motioned by sir Anthony Brown to be one of his executors, and to be named, amongst others, to be of council to the king’s majesty that now is, refused expressly to have him so named; and for no respect he would be entreated therein, saying expressly these, or like words in effect: ‘That the said bishop was a troublesome man; and that he would trouble all the rest, if he were named among them:’ the duke his grace, the earl of Warwick, the lord privy seal, the lord Paget, master Harbert, and others, being present.
To the 2d his grace saith, that interrogatory is true; for, upon suspicion conceived by the late king, that the bishop did not favor his grace’s proceedings in matters of religion, he refused to have him named amongst other learned men for devising the said book.
To the 3d, his grace can say nothing.
To the 4th and 5th his grace can say nothing.
To the 6th his grace saith, that touching the bishop of Rome, his grace can say nothing; but, touching the opinion conceived of him in not favoring the king’s majesty’s proceedings in matters of religion, his grace saith, that the said bishop is commonly reported in the Court, not to favor the same: and that such is the talk and common saying, in the Court, of him.
To the 7th his grace saith, that he hath heard the said bishop so commonly reported.
To the 8th his grace saith, that the said bishop was commanded, first, by message from his grace by master Cecil, and after, by letters from his grace in the king’s majesty’s name, not to treat of any matter in controversy touching the sacrament and the mass; as by his grace’s said letters more fully appeareth: which commandment was given as well for conservation of quiet and peace in the realm, and avoiding of tumult and strife, as for divers other great considerations and respects. Contrary whereunto, the said bishop spake in his sermon of them, both before the king’s majesty, in presence of his grace, and of divers others of the council, and a great assembly of people. But in what words, his grace saith, he remembereth not.
To the 9th his grace saith, that there was, before his said sermon, and at the time thereof, great controversy and much strife, both in London and elsewhere in the realm, touching the matters mentioned in this interrogatory. And his grace was further probably informed, at that same time, that by reason of the said bishop’s preaching in such sort, there was much business and contention in London, so that it was thought that, if he had not been committed to the Tower, he should have been plucked out of his house. Edward Somerset.
THE EARL OF WILTSHIRE.
The right honorable the earl of Wiltshire, high treasurer of England (examined upon the aforesaid matter) upon his fidelity to God, and to the king’s majesty, and upon his honor, deposeth as followeth: — To the 1st article his lordship saith, that he hath heard fault found with him (the said bishop) as well in the king’s majesty’s time that dead is, as also since, for want of conformity to the king’s majesty’s proceedings in religion; and, if he had been so conformable in setting forth of such things as this article purporteth, he should not have needed to have come to this trouble he presently is in. And, touching his chancellor, his lordship hath heard him, also, complained upon, for not doing his duty in certain things concerning the king’s majesty’s proceedings in matters of religion. Whereupon he was of late sent for to the council, and by them, for his deservings, was committed to the Marshalsea, where he yet remaineth prisoner. And as for the bishop’s book, and his disputation in Louvain, mentioned in this article, his lordship knoweth nothing of it. And this is all that his lordship remembereth touching the said article.
To the 2d and 3d his lordship saith, that for his ill affection towards the reformation of abuses in religion, and for his doings and speakings against the same, fault hath been found with him sundry times; and especially once, his lordship remembereth, he was sent for to the council, then being at Hampton-court, for the same causes; and from thence, by the said council, committed to the Fleet, before his coming to the Tower, at the time mentioned in this article.
To the 4th his lordship saith, that because the said bishop could better speak the French tongue than many of the lords, and for that also he was learned in the civil laws, he was sometimes used to speak with the ambassadors, as is mentioned in this article. And this is all that his lordship knoweth, touching this article.
To the 10th his lordship saith, that the said bishop was delivered out of the Fleet about that time; but whether by the king’s majesty’s pardon, or otherwise, he remembereth not.
To the 17th his lordship saith, that at the coming up of the said bishop to the council about the time articulated, divers things were objected to him touching his want of conformity to the king’s majesty’s proceedings; whereunto the bishop said many things for his excuse (the particularities his lordship now remembereth not).
And yet in the end, for that he remained suspected in the matters laid unto him, it was thought good he should tarry in London, and not return unto his diocese. And so was he ordered by the council, to remain at his house in London; at which time, his lordship remembereth, the said bishop desired to borrow a house in the country; but none was granted him.
To the 22d his lordship saith, he can say nothing touching that article.
To articles 23. 24. 25. and 26. his lordship saith, that about the time mentioned in these articles, the said bishop, being sent for to the council, came to the same to Westminster; where the said bishop was moved and required to preach and set forth, in a sermon to be by him made, sundry matters contained in certain articles then showed unto him before the said council. And finding the said bishop not thoroughly inclined to do what was required of him, the duke of Somerset, then protector, minding to induce the bishop willingly to do the same, took the said bishop from the council-chamber to his own lodging, and this examinate with him, for the better inducement of the said bishop to conformity: where, after much talk, for that the said bishop did not yet thoroughly conform himself, he was sent from thence to the examinate’s chamber to dine: whither, after dinner, repaired to the said bishop sir Thomas Smith, and what talk passed betwixt them his lordship remembereth not. And this is all that his lordship remembereth, touching the said articles.
To the 27th his lordship saith, that he remembereth well, and was present, when the bishop, upon commandment given unto him, did promise to set forth the matters contained in the articles delivered him better than the same were there set forth; praying that he might be trusted so to do. And, further, the said bishop said, that he was loth to read them upon the book, like a scholar; promising (as aforesaid) that he would do it of himself, in such sort as the whole council should have good cause to be contented with it. And this is all that his lordship remembereth touching that article.
To the 28th his lordship answereth as to the next before; and other thing remembereth not.
To articles 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. and 54. his lordship saith, that he remembereth very well, that about the time mentioned in these articles, the lord Rich, lord chancellor, this examinate, and sir William Peter, were sent from the duke of Somerset, then protector, and the rest of the lords of the council, to the said bishop, to travail with him, and feel his conformity to the Book of Common Prayer set forth by authority of parliament a little before. Whereupon, repairing to the Tower according to their commission, they travailed with the said bishop a good space, and offered to show him the said book of Common Prayer, which they had then there with them. But all their persuasions notwithstanding, the said bishop refused to look upon the said book, or to say his opinion of the same, notwithstanding that he was required thereunto. And his lordship further saith, that upon occasion of talk of a pain limited for the not observing of the said book, the said bishop said, that if he were abroad, and kept it not, he required to be punished as the act appointeth in that case. And his lordship further remembereth, that there was much more talk by the said bishop of his long imprisonment, and that there had been divers breaches of commandments and injunctions in the realm, which, as he [the bishop] said. had not been so severely punished as he was in this case; the particularities of which talk his lordship remembereth not more than is before expressed.
To the 55th his lordship saith, that the said bishop, being demanded of the lord chancellor how he would conform himself, he answered that he would be sorry but to conform himself like an obedient subject, as far forth as reason and the laws required him.
And thereupon his lordship thinketh it was promised him, that he should hear from the council again shortly.
To the articles from 56. to 57 . inclusive, his lordship saith, that the duke of Somerset, and this examinate, with others mentioned in those articles, being sent from the council to know the bishop’s conformity touching the Book of Common Prayer, travailed with him in the Tower, about the time mentioned in those articles, to that effect: wherein the bishop a good while refused to show his opinion as long as he was in prison; saying, that it should be slanderous both to the council, and himself also: to the council, for that it should seem to the world, that they, by long imprisonment of him, might seem to cause him to say that which otherwise he would not, and to himself, for that it might seem that he redeemed his imprisonment by conforming himself. And therefore he desired that he might be at liberty, and if he kept not the law as others did, he was contented to suffer the pain appointed for the breach thereof. But, in the end, after much talk, the said bishop was content to say his opinion touching the said book, if it were sent unto him. Whereupon it was agreed, that the said book should be brought unto him by the lieutenant of the Tower; who, within a day or two, by order of the whole council, brought the said bishop not only that book of Common Prayer, but also the book for making of bishops, priests, and deacons. And after that, the said lords before specified, and with them the lord Cobham, came again to the Tower, to receive the said bishop’s answer touching the said books. At which time the said bishop, being called before them, said, that albeit at the beginning he would not give his assent to the making of the said book in such form as it is made, yet the same being now set forth as it is, he would both observe the same himself, and cause all others to do the like in all his diocese, and punish all such as should offend therein according to the laws. And being required, at that instant, to write his said answers himself, he refused so to do. And likewise, after the same was written by master secretary Peter, he refused to put his hand to it, although he confessed it was truly written as he had spoken the words: which thing was much misliked in him, at that time. And touching the Book of Ordering of Priests, etc., he saith, he misliked the same; alleging such causes as be contained in the sixty-six articles. And for the rest of the said bishop’s bye-talk, forasmuch as the same was not much material, this examinate remembereth not any more than is before said. And this is the effect, that his lordship remembereth, touching those articles.
To the articles from 69. to 73. inclusive, his lordship saith, that this examinate, the earl of Warwick, sir William Harbert, and master secretary Peter, being sent again to the Tower to the said bishop, about the time articulate, delivered to the said bishop the king’s majesty’s letters, which he received upon his knees, and read the same; and afterward, nevertheless, refused to submit himself according to the commandment given to him by his majesty; writing upon the margin of the first article that contained his submission, such words, in effect, as be mentioned in these articles.
And to the rest of the articles then sent unto him, he subscribed his name, as by the original thereof more plainly appeareth. And further this examinate cannot say touching the said articles.
To the 76th and 77th his lordship saith, that about the time mentioned in these articles, for that the said bishop had showed himself disobedient sundry times before, he was sent for to the council, being then at Westminster, and there required to subscribe to certain articles, which, before that time, had been showed unto him in the Tower, and were there read unto him again; which he refused to subscribe. And yet nevertheless he said, if he might have them in the Tower with him, he would at leisure make answer unto them. Which delay, for sundry considerations, was not admitted, but he was expressly required even then to subscribe; which forasmuch as he refused, and for sundry other his contempts and disobediences, he was then again sent to the Tower, and the fruits of his bishopric sequestered; and further, commandment given unto him, to conform himself within three months, upon pain of deprivation, as in the acts of the council book more fully appeareth. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st his lordship saith, that he hath heard the late king of famous memory, king Henry the Eighth, declare his misliking of the said bishop of Winchester sundry times.
To the 2d his lordship saith, he remembereth well the said bishop was left out, and not named among other bishops and learned men appointed for the making of the said book mentioned in this article.
To the 3d his lordship saith, that he hath heard the said late king declare, that he suspected the said bishop to be a favorer of the bishop of Rome’s proceedings.
To the 4th and 5th his lordship saith, that he hath heard divers of the council say as is contained in these articles; but he is able to say nothing of his own knowledge. And further his lordship saith, that he was present at the opening of the said late king’s majesty’s will, and found him not named there either among the executors or councillors.
To the 6th his lordship saith, that he commonly heard it reported and spoken, that the said bishop did not favor the king’s majesty’s proceedings for reformation of abuses in religion.
To the 7th his lordship saith, that he thinketh those of his diocese that favor the king’s majesty’s proceedings, have been and be offended with the said bishop, and think him a great hinderance of the said proceedings.
To the 8th his lordship saith, he hath beard that, for the considerations specified in this article, the said bishop was commanded not to treat of the mass or sacrament in his sermon: but what he said thereof in his said sermon, his lordship now remembereth not particularly.
To the 9th his lordship saith, that it is true that much contention there was, both in London and elsewhere through the realm, touching the matters contained in this article, as well before the time of the said sermon, and at the very selfsame time, as also after the same; and that, his lordship knoweth, by the common fame and talk of men. William Wiltshire.
THE MARQUIS OF NORTHAMPTON.
The right honorable lord William, marquis of Northampton, lord great chamberlain of England, examined upon the aforesaid matter, upon his truth and fidelity to God, and to the king’s majesty, and upon his honor deposeth as followeth:
To the 1st his lordship saith, that he hath heard the said bishop complained upon, before the time of his committing, sundry times, for want of good will to set forth the king’s majesty’s proceedings; and that, of most men, he hath been suspected for not favoring the same. As for his chancellor, his lordship saith, that he hath been noted of the same fault, and [his lordship] of late was present, when the said chancellor was before the whole council, upon complaint made against him for not doing his duty in setting forth the king’s majesty’s proceedings within the diocese of Winchester; and for those causes, and contemptuous behavior at that time, he was committed to the Marshalsea, where he yet remaineth prisoner. As touching the said bishop’s book, and disputation in Louvain, his lordship knoweth nothing thereof.
To the 2d : his lordship cannot say anything therein, saving that his lordship thinketh that, if the contents of this article were true, he (the said bishop) should have been in better credit with the king’s majesty that dead is, than he knew he was; and that the said king, who best knew his doings, would not have given express commandment, that in no wise he should remain a councillor to the king’s majesty our sovereign lord that now is, nor have put him out of his own will and testament (as his majesty did a little before his death), if he had been in such credit with him, as in this article is deduced.
To the 3d his lordship saith, he hath not been much acquainted with his doings, and therefore, touching this article, he can neither excuse him nor condemn him otherwise than that the said bishop hath been suspected, and reported, not to favor the king’s majesty’s proceedings in religion — upon complaint and trial whereof he was in some trouble, and committed to the Fleet, before his committing to the Tower.
To the 4th his lordship saith, that he never knew him have that credit, nor so used otherwise than for the tongue’s sake, wherein no other, peradventure, could supply so well as he, at such time as others, having languages, were absent.
To the articles from 57. to 62 . inclusive, his lordship saith, that he cannot call to remembrance all particular talks that passed between them at that time, the bishop having so much superfluous and vain talk beside the matter. But this he remembereth very well, that the bishop spent many words in justifying himself, and had many words at the same time touching his long imprisonment; and that ‘it would purge a man as well as the new diet,’ with such other words as were nothing to the purpose. But, that the said bishop should be moved to let all things bye-past be forgotten, or any such like motion, his lordship remembereth not. And this is all, in effect, that his lordship remembereth, touching the said articles.
To the 64th and 65th his lordship saith, that touching the Book of Common Prayer, his answer and communication was much, in effect, as is deduced in these articles: whereupon he was moved to write the effect thereof himself; which he refused. And likewise after the same being written by master secretary Peter, the said bishop refused to subscribe his name thereunto, which his refusal was, by his lordship and others of the council then present, very much misliked.
To the 66th and 67th his lordship saith, that he remembereth that the said bishop misliked and would not allow the said book mentioned in those articles for the causes specified in the same.
And as for any promise for discharge or enlargement out of prison, there was none made at that time, nor any likelihood of conformity that might give occasion thereunto; but rather the contrary. And thereupon only concluded with him to make report to the rest of the council, of his sayings and doings at that time.
To the 76th and 77th his lordship saith, that he doth remember well, that, in the time articulate, the whole council (whereof his lordship was one) having special commission from the king’s majesty to that purpose, did, for disobedience and want of conformity in the said bishop at that time, proceed to sequestration of the fruits of his bishopric, with commination within three months to proceed to deprivation, as in the decrees thereof, remaining of record in the council-book, more plainly appeareth.
And his lordship further saith, that he thinketh it to be true, that the said bishop required to have the copy of the articles with him to the Tower; and that he would there make answer. But, because he had been so often travailed withal before, and for that the very same articles had been showed unto him in the Tower before, and were then eftsoons read unto him in the council-chamber, he was moved and required, even then immediately, to subscribe the said articles; which he refused to do. Upon the Interrogatories . — To the 1st his lordship saith, that he remembereth not to have heard of the late king himself, any word spoken of misliking of the said bishop; but he hath heard of others, that were wont to have more secret conference with the said late king than his lordship was, that the said late king misliked the said bishop: but, for what cause specially, his lordship knoweth not, saving that his majesty took him to be a wilful and heady man, and specially in matters of religion set forth by his majesty.
To the 2d his lordship saith, that he thinketh the said late king took the said bishop to be a wilful and heady man; and that, when matters of religion did occur, his majesty did not use to commit any of them to the said bishop, as far as his lordship could perceive.
To the 3d: his lordship knoweth not thereof.
To the 4th and 5th his lordship saith, that he hath heard divers times reported for truth, by them that were privy to the said late king’s determination therein, that he expressly refused to have the said bishop to be any of the council with the king’s majesty that now is, or to have him named one of the executors of his testament.
To the 6th his lordship saith, that he hath heard it reported of the said bishop in the court, among very many, that the said bishop was suspected to favor the bishop of Rome in his proceedings, and to mislike the proceedings of this realm in matters of religion. And his lordship also saith, that by private talk with the said bishop, he knoweth that the said bishop hath been of contrary opinion in matters of religion to things set forth by the common orders of the realm: and further saith, that he is sure, that the said bishop hath most kept company with such persons as be noted and suspected not to favor the king’s proceedings; which also doth appear by choice of his own officers, both spiritual and temporal.
To the 7th his lordship saith, that he hath heard several gentlemen of Hampshire say and report so of the said bishop as is contained in this interrogatory.
To the 8th his lordship saith, that he well remembereth that the bishop, in his sermon, spake those words contained in the interrogatory; videlicet, that Christ consecrated himself to be a memorial of himself: and besides so spake both of the sacrament and the mass, as he was misliked of as many as favor the king’s proceedings.
To the 9th his lordship saith, that it is most true, for his lordship hath been present when the matters mentioned in this interrogatory have been in controversy, and diversely talked and contended upon in the city of London, in the court, and elsewhere. William Northampton.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR RICHE.
Sir Richard Riche knight, lord Riche, lord chancellor of England, of the age of 54, and above; examined upon articles 1. to 4.; also upon articles 45. to 55. inclusive, of the said matter justificatory.
To the 1st article this deponent saith, upon his honor and allegiance, as touching the diligence and endeavor of the said bishop for the setting-forth of the supremacy, and for the abolishing of the usurped authority and power of the bishop of Rome, that he knoweth not the certainty, whether the said bishop were diligent or endeavored himself to set forth the supremacy, or the abolishment of the usurped authority of the bishop of Rome; for this deponent saith, that he never heard the said bishop do the one, or do the other: but by report he hath heard say, that the said bishop did set forth the same beyond the seas; but in what place and country this deponent knoweth not. And whether the said bishop hath under him a circumspect learned chancellor, for the setting-forth of the king’s proceedings that now is, this deponent cannot tell; for he never heard the one, or the other. Also this deponent never heard the said bishop set forth the usurped authority of the bishop of Rome in any sermon, forsomuch as this deponent never heard the said bishop preach any sermon: but this deponent hath heard say (of whom he remembereth not), that the said bishop did set forth a book in maintenance of supremacy to be in the king that dead is, his heirs and successors. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 2d article this deponent saith, that he never knew any dishonesty by the said bishop, until such time as he was committed to ward for his offenses.
To the 3d he deposeth that, to his knowledge, he hath been counted a man just of his promise, until such time as he thinketh that the said bishop brake promise in not setting forth such things as he was commanded: and otherwise he cannot depose, saving that this deponent was present at Hampton-court, at such time as the said bishop, for certain offenses laid unto him, was committed to the Fleet.
To the 4th he saith, that the bishop of Winton, for that he was skilled in the language, was appointed by the council to make answer and commune with the said ambassadors; but at what time and how often he hath been so appointed, he cannot now certainly depose. and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 45th he saith, that the bishop of Winchester’s servant took him in a bill, to be put into the parliament house, on the behalf of the said bishop; unto whom this deponent made answer, that he thought it not convenient to put in such a bill, seeing that he was a prisoner, and the king the party, until he had made the king and his council privy thereof: which said bill was delivered to the lords of the council then sitting at Somerset-place; at which time some of the council (whom he remembereth not), declared that they had the like bill: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 46th he saith, that the contents of this article are true.
To the 47th he saith, that the said bishop spake the words contained in this article, or the like in effect.
To the 48th he saith, that the contents of this article are true.
To the 49th he saith, that this article is true.
To the 50th he saith, that the said article is true; and saith, that he made answer to the said bishop, that if he would stand to the trial of the matter, and therein be condemned, he were not worthy to have mercy. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 51st he saith, that the contents of the said article are true; and saith, that he replied again, and said again to the said bishop, ‘Now, I perceive, you know the act as well as I.’
To the 52d he saith and deposeth, that the contents of this article are true.
To the 53d he deposeth, that the said article is true.
To the 54th he saith, the contents of this article also are true.
To the 55th he saith, that the said bishop was demanded whether he would submit himself to the king and council. And the said bishop said, he would be ordered by the laws; this deponent saying, that was no submission: and that at the request of the said bishop, alleging one to be sick near him, this deponent, and the other his colleagues, promised that they would procure license that he might go to the gallery. And, according to heir promise, they made suit for him so to do: and otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the lnterrogatories. — To the 1st this deponent saith, that he hath heard divers times of sundry persons whose names he remembereth not, that king Henry the Eighth did think the said bishop not to be well pleased with the proceedings of the realm in matters of religion; and therefore this deponent hath heard say, that the said late king did mislike the said bishop.
To the 2d this deponent saith and affirmeth it to be true, as he thinketh; because it was so commonly reported.
To the 3d this deponent affirmeth, that he thinketh that the late king Henry the Eighth did take the said bishop to be vehemently suspected to favor the bishop of Rome.
To the 4th this deponent saith, that he hath heard it sundry times reported by the duke of Somerset, the earl of Warwick, master Denny, and others, that king Henry the Eighth would in no wise have the said bishop after his death to be of the council of the king our sovereign lord that now is.
To the 5th he saith, that he can tell nothing thereof.
To the 6th this deponent saith, that by common bruit and fame (as well of certain of the council, as others whose names he remembereth not), the said bishop was taken to be such a one as favoureth not the king’s proceedings. To the 7th he knoweth no more than be before, in the interrogatories, hath deposed.
To the 8th he saith, that he hath heard divers say and report, that the said bishop was commanded to do as in the said interrogatory is mentioned. But what he said or published in that behalf he knoweth not, because he was not at the sermon, but at that time was at Lees: and there it was reported, by one of this deponent’s servants, that the said bishop was committed to the Tower for the breaking of the king’s commandment which he was enjoined and commanded to do in his said sermon.
To the 9th he saith, that he heard that there was such contention within the realm, and that, as well before the said sermon as since; and upon the presence of the body of Christ in the sacrament. And otherwise he cannot answer. Richard Riche.
THE EARL OF WARWICK.
The right honorable lord John, earl of Warwick, examined upon the articles under mentioned, ministered by the bishop of Winchester, saith, upon his fidelity to God and to the king’s majesty, and upon his honor, as followeth:
To the 1st article the said earl saith, that whether the said articles be of efficacy, virtue, and strength, he knoweth not; nor is he able to say any thing therein, for that he is not learned in the law. And therefore, whether they be of effect and prejudicial against the said bishop, or not, he referreth to the wisdom, learning, and dexterity, of the judges appointed by the king’s majesty to hear the bishop’s cause. But, if the bishop have no other matter to allege for the disallowing the said articles, than such as he allegeth, for justifying of himself, as in the same article doth follow (all which is most untrue in most points), then the said earl thinketh, that the said articles be good and effectual.
To the 2d the said earl saith, that he hath heard, that the said bishop was sundry times charged and commanded by our late sovereign lord, to execute and set forth divers things devised by his majesty and his clergy for the uniting and establishing of godly religion among his people; wherein the said bishop, of all others, was most vehemently suspected by his highness to be a chief and principal hinderer. And [he] never did hear that the said bishop at any time did advance his grace’s proceedings; but rather to be a manifest and stout disturber and hinderer of the same. And so our late sovereign lord did report him, and take him, as in the 4th article (confessed by the said earl) more plainly shall appear.
To the 3d the said earl saith, that whether the said bishop hath always kept his word and promise with any his private creditors, bankers, factors, or such like, he knoweth not; but he marvelleth not a little that the said bishop, without shame, doth advance himself to have been hitherto always reputed, esteemed, and taken, and yet is, to be a man so just of his doing, that he was never called, troubled, or vexed until the time he was sent to the Tower the morrow after he preached before the king’s majesty, at his palace at Westminster; seeing that all men know, that not fully a year before he so preached, he was, for other like offenses, called before the council at Hampton-court, the duke of Somerset and he (the said earl) being then in Scotland; and was at that time, by the said council, committed to prison, to the Fleet, where he remained a good space after; so that it may appear by the said article, that the said bishop is forgetful and shameless.
To the 4th : whereas the said bishop saith, that he was in such reputation and estimation with the councillors of our late sovereign lord that dead is, that commonly they committed unto him the speech and answer to all ambassadors, as well those of Scotland, of France, as of the emperor’s; and that within fourteen days before the death of our late sovereign lord, they did so use him, the said earl saith, that forasmuch as the answers to ambassadors commonly required to be done by a man learned in the civil law, and specially when it was to be done in the Latin tongue, the said council did use the said bishop’s speech; and not for any other credit or estimation that they had of him. And the said earl further saith, that more than three weeks before the death of the late king, his grace, then being very sick, did send for divers of his privy council, whereof the said earl was one, the duke of Somerset (then earl of Hertford) another, the lord privy seal, the master of the horse (that dead is) and the lord Paget, then one of the secretaries — all they five were present at the establishing of his last will; and, when the bishop of Winchester was named to be one of his executors, he did put him out, and would in no wise have him named in his will. And at that present time he gave us strait charge and commandment, that he [the said bishop] should never be of his son’s council — meaning of our sovereign lord that now is: ‘For,’ said his majesty, ‘he is so wilful and contentious, you shall never be quiet, if he be among you;’ with such like words. Such was the opinion that his highness had of the bishop at that time and long before; whereof the said earl taketh record of those lords before named, and also of the master of the horse that now is; for he and master Denny were present at the same. And after this commandment, the said earl doth not remember that the council did use him in any matters of council.
To the 69th article the said earl saith, that within ten or twelve days after Midsummer last, or thereabouts, the treasurer and he (the said earl), the master of the horse, and master secretary Peter, were, by the appointment of the king’s majesty and the rest of the council willed to repair to the Tower,and there to call before them the bishop of Winchester, and to deliver unto him the king’s majesty’s letters, which imported (as the said earl remembereth) an express commandment, that he should subscribe certain articles, which, in the king’s majesty’s name, together with the said letters, they delivered unto him, and used him with as gentle persuasions and exhortations as they could; to the intent he should the rather have showed himself conformable and obedient. But, when he had read the letter, and perused the articles, he seemed to be much disquieted; and specially with the 1st article. And after a little pausing he began to say, — ‘My lords, I will never say otherwise of myself than my conscience will suffer me:’ — ‘and would rather tumble himself desperate into the Thames,’ or such like words; and there refused to subscribe to the 1st article, the king’s majesty’s letter of commandment, or any thing that they could say in his highness’s name notwithstanding.
To the 70th article the said earl saith, that after the said bishop had thus stormed with himself, and that by no means he would subscribe to his submission, perceiving also that they should but consume the time in vain with him, the said earl (as he remembereth), demanded of him, what he would say to the other articles following. Whereunto he answered, saying; ‘That is another matter, my lord;’ and with little difficulty subscribed his name to them, saying, ‘Lo, my lords, this you have won of me now,’ or such like words; as though he seemed to have done that which was worthy of thanks: whereupon it was said unto him, ‘My lord, we mistrust not, but this which you have done (meaning by subscribing his name), you have done willingly, and without grudge of conscience.’ ‘Yea, my lords, assure yourselves; or else I would not have done it.’ And after some other bye-talk, which he, at that time, used very much, it was demanded of him what he thought touching the king’s majesty’s authority in his young and tender years. ‘Marry,’ said he, ‘as to that, I can say as much as any man in England; for,’ said he, ‘my lord chancellor that now is [‘then master Riche] and I, with the lord Wriothesley, were commanded to confer together on that matter. And, after deliberation and good advice taken with other learned men in the realm, the said lord Wriothesley and I made report to the late king.’ Then it was said to him again, ‘Whatsoever report or advice they then made, it was certain, by the laws of the realm, that the king’s majesty is of as ample authority, and his acts as good to all purposes, as though his highness were of many more years, or as the doings of his father, or any other king, how old soever he were.’ ‘Yea,’ said the bishop, ‘I grant he is a full king; and as much a king at a day’s age as at forty years old. Marry if he shall pass anything now, which his highness shall see prejudicial to him, he may use therein the benefit of his young years.’ And here the bishop said, that master secretary Peter would say as he said; whose answer, as the earl remembereth, was this: ‘My lord, I must say that your saying, in a common person, is true; but, in a person of a king, I never read any such law. And my opinion is,’ said he, ‘except a king, in his tender and young years, be bound to his doings, as well as at full man’s estate, it would be impossible to have that realm and state well governed.’
Whereupon the bishop said little.
To the 71st article the said earl saith as he hath said in the beginning of 70th article.
To the 72d article he saith, that a little before their departing from the bishop, the said bishop, after his accustomed gesture, bare them all in hand that he took them all to be his very familiar friends, and thought to find great friendship at their hands: ‘But yet,’ said he, ‘I remain still in prison.’ And said further, that, by his faith, at the late being of the duke of Somerset and others of the council with him, he thought by the gentle handling of him, he should have been discharged out of prison the next day: ‘Whereupon,’ said he, ‘I did make my jubilee.’ And from this talk he fell into other communications, as touching divers things wherein it seemed he could give advice; and said, that ‘he knew some of our near neighbors, that misliked our doings.’ And here the master of the horse would fain have known, what he meant by those words: but thereto he made no answer. And thereupon it was said to him, ‘My lord, if you will follow counsel, you should show yourself first to be an obedient subject, and then you may the better find faults with others.’ These or such like words, as the earl remembereth, were said unto him.
To the 73d the said earl saith, he can say no more than is comprehended in the last article before written; nor remembereth that any of the council, being then with him, willed him to come into the gallery for any such intent as the bishop allegeth: neither was there any such occasion given on his part, that they should so use him, for he remained still as a wilful and disobedient subject.
And so they left him, being sorry they could do no more good to him. And this is all the said earl remembereth.
To the 66th article he saith, that about the time related in the same article, he remembereth that the said bishop was brought before the council to the king’s palace of Westminster, they sitting then in the queen’s great chamber. And then and there it was declared unto him, that by special commission from the king’s majesty, they were all appointed to be his judges in the matter for which he was at that time called before them; and there commanded him, in the king’s majesty’s name, to subscribe certain articles, being then read unto him, which he refused to do; like as at sundry times before he had done to others, being sent by the king’s majesty and the council to him into the Tower, only for that purpose.
To the 67th article, the said bishop — being, eftsoons, commanded by the council to make peremptory answers whether he would subscribe the said articles or no — said, that the said articles were of sundry natures, and that if he should subscribe them without declaring what he meant in them, it might be dangerous: but, if they would deliver him a copy of them, to have in the Tower with him, he would make particular answer to them. The which his request the said council, for divers good considerations, and having commission only of the king’s majesty to proceed to his indelayed answer, did deny; whereupon the said bishop, eftsoons, denied to subscribe them, showing himself thereby, (as it appeared to him and others then conning of his demeanor) rather to be obstinate and wilful, than conformable and obedient. Whereupon the council then and there proceeded to his sequestration, according to such commandment as they had received of the king’s majesty in that behalf. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st the said earl answereth as is more fully contained in the depositions to the matters justificatory of the said bishop; and further saith, that about three or four years before the late king’s death, his highness — being advertised that certain of his privy chamber were secretly indicted of heresies (that is to say, master Carden and others), whereunto his majesty was not made privy, and suspecting the said bishop to be one of the greatest workers therein — commanded the earl of Hertford, the lord privy seal, and him (the said earl, then lord admiral), and the lord Paget, to examine the matter. Upon the examination thereof it was found, that the said bishop had been a secret worker; and therewith the said late king was much offended.
To the 2d his lordship saith, that he heard it so reported of divers; but, of his own knowledge, he can say nothing therein.
To the 3d the said earl saith, that he (the late king) had the said bishop much suspected to favor the bishop of Rome’s authority and proceedings, as well for that one Gardiner, nearest about the said bishop, of his own bringing up, and most in favor with him, was attainted of high treason, and suffered death for maintaining the said bishop of Rome’s authority. And also, for that the said late king was informed before, of a certain secret practice between the said bishop of Winchester and the bishop of Rome’s legate at Ratisbon in Almain, at such time as sir Henry Knivet was there ambassador joined with the said bishop. Upon which suspicions, and for other secret informations that the said late king had touching the said bishop’s favor to the bishop of Rome, his grace caused, in all pardons afterwards, all treasons committed beyond the seas to be exempted; which was meant most for the bishop’s cause, to the intent the said bishop should take no benefit by any of the said pardons.
To the 4th and 5th: his lordship referreth himself to his sayings upon the matter justificatory of the bishop of Winchester.
To the 6th his lordship saith, he heard many times, of very many men so reported, and commonly said, that the bishop was, in the late king’s days, and since, commonly among most men, reputed for a man much favoring the bishop of Rome, and an adversary to the king’s proceedings for reformation of abuses in religion in this realm.
To the 7th his lordship answereth as to the 6th interrogatory.
To the 8th his lordship saith, he was not present at the bishop’s sermon, and therefore can say nothing of this interrogatory, of his own knowledge.
To the 9th his lordship saith, that before the said sermon, at the time thereof, and long after, there was much controversy and variance in London, and many other places of the realm, for the matters mentioned in this interrogatory. And that his lordship knoweth to be true, by the common report of most men that he spake with about that time; and also for that the council were many times troubled with complaints about those matters. And his lordship further saith, that the contention was so great, that (as he heard of very credible persons) if the king’s majesty and lords of the council had not been present, the people would have plucked the said bishop out of the pulpit; they were so much offended with him. By me, John Warwick.
THE EARL OF BEDFORD.
The right honorable John earl of Bedford, lord privy seal, examined upon the said matter, deposeth as followeth:
To the 1st [article] his lordship saith, that like as the said bishop was complained of to the council for those matters, whereof he justifieth himself to be willingly inclined, and also to have chosen his chancellor for the better setting-forth of the king’s majesty’s proceedings, at all times, as well as in those points his duty required; even so the said bishop, and also his chancellor, contrary, were not so forward, but otherwise stiff and contrary; and specially since the reign of our sovereign lord that now is. And the said bishop, of all such men as truly favored the king’s proceedings, was much noted to be of no good disposition towards the same. — Touching the book made by the said bishop, and his disputations at Louvain, they are unknown to his lordship. And for his chancellor, upon information given to the council, of sundry things done by him in his own parish-church, contrary to the king’s proceedings, he was sent for to the council, and by them, for his offenses and disobediences, committed to the Marshalsea, where he yet remaineth. And this is all that his lordship remembereth touching that article.
To the 2d his lordship saith, that his estimation with the king’s majesty that dead is (when he had fully perceived his evil inclination towards the abolishing of certain enormities in the church), was not so good as he speaketh of, insomuch that sir Anthony Brown, late master of the horse, desiring his grace, with some commendation of the bishop, that he might be in his testament, utterly refused to have him in his will, or to be named one of his executors; saying, ‘that the said bishop should be a disturber to the whole council, if he were: further commanding, that in no wise should he remain a councillor with this king’s majesty; which also others of the council can further declare in that behalf, as his lordship saith, as well as he.
To the 3d his lordship saith, he can say nothing to the contrary against him, nor any thing with him; for that there were no occasions to prove him then, as since hath proceeded, by the king’s authority and by his high court of parliament: whose zeal and judgment hath been of late much more suspected, not without good cause, of his own declarations before the whole council; and the greatest blame reported by divers, in the lack of his conformity, to the encouraging of many to bear out in the like manner, without consideration of their duty to God or the king’s majesty. And touching the bishop’s trouble, his lordship remembereth that he was in trouble before his committing to the Tower, for he was in the Fleet before that time. And his lordship further saith, that upon complaint made to the council, in the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign (his grace being at Hampton-court), that the said bishop favored not the king’s proceedings, he, being sent for thither by the said council which were there present, the said bishop found fault with the Homilies, and specially that of Justification: likewise with the Paraphrase of Erasmus upon the text of Paul, as his lordship remembereth, which is ‘nemini quicquam debeatis:’ and a little before, as well the said Paraphrase, as also the said Homilies, were set forth, by the king’s majesty’s injunctions, to be read in every church. Where-upon, for want of conformity as well then, as divers other times before reported of him, it was then, by the whole council, thought meet, upon those considerations, to commit him (the said bishop) forthwith to the Fleet.
To the 4th his lordship saith, that albeit the councillors of the king’s majesty that dead is, used the said bishop sometimes, for the tongue’s sake, when others were absent, yet they did not best like his doings in matters of religion: which also the late king himself did disclose to his lordship once at Greenwich, as the same bishop can partly of himself call to remembrance, if he will.
To articles 57. to 59. his lordship remembereth not divers of the matters in those contained, for that the said bishop was more occupied with other superflouous talk, than with those things that were objected against him; spending many words of his long imprisonment; saying, ‘that it would purge a man as well as the new diet;’ with such like matters and taunts, clean out of purpose. — Touching his conformity, whereof their coming to the Tower was purposely to see at that time, his lordship perceived not much towardness thereof in him.
To articles 60. to 64. inclusive, being asked how he liked the Book of Common Prayer, his lordship remembereth the said bishop said, ‘if he should have made it, he would have otherwise done it than it was. But, seeing it is made, if he were out of prison he would both keep it himself, and cause it to be kept of others:’ which his saying he both refused to write himself, and afterwards, the same being written by master secretary Peter, he refused to subscribe his name to it, upon certain pretensed excuses of no importance, which were much misliked of the lords then present there. As for any words of bye-past, or such like, to his lordship’s remembrance there were none.
To articles 65. and 66. his lordship saith, that the bishop, being demanded how he liked the Book of Making Priests, said, ‘he did not like it;’ and alleged the same reason in effect, that is mentioned in these articles; videlicet, ‘Cessabit nnctio vestra:’ meaning, and also declaring in his words, that unction was necessary both to be used in priesthood, and in the consecration of kings: speaking more words thereof. And [that he] did mislike the said book; which his misliking, considering that the said book was set forth by the learned men of the realm, by authority of parliament, the lords thought it to proceed of great wilfulness, and were offended for the same. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st his lordship saith, it is true, for he hath so heard sundry times declared by the said king of famous memory.
To the 2d his lordship saith, he well remembereth that the said late king would in no wise have the said bishop named among the bishops and learned men appointed for making the said book.
To the 3d his lordship saith, that he can say nothing touching this article, saving that he hath heard the said bishop was somewhat suspected concerning that point, at his being in Germany with sir Henry Knivet.
To the 4th and 5th his lordship saith, that the said late king, in the hearing of his lordship and divers other of the council, said expressly, that he would not have the said bishop either to be one of his executors, or to be of the council with the king’s majesty that now is. And albeit that sir Anthony Brown, then being present, moved the king for the said bishop, yet his highness (expressly refusing to have the said bishop either executor or councillor, as is aforesaid), commanded the said executors and councillors then present, that in no wise should they admit him in again to the council, saying, ‘he is a wilful heady man, and will disturb and trouble you all.’
To the 6th his lordship saith, that for the suspicions conceived of the said bishop to favor the bishop of Rome, his lordship can say no more than he hath before said; but, touching the common opinion of him not to favor the king’s majesty’s proceedings in matters of religion, his lordship saith, that he is of many men commonly so reported and taken.
To the 7th his lordship saith, that he thinketh so as is contained in this interrogatory.
To the 8th his lordship saith, that the said bishop, contrary to the commandment given by the duke of Somerset, then protector, in the king’s majesty’s name, did openly speak, in his sermon, both of the mass and sacrament; but what were the particulars of his sayings in those matters, his lordship now remembereth not.
To the 9th his lordship saith, that there was great strife, controversy, and contention, both in London, and in other sundry parts of the realm, as well at the time articulate of this interrogatory as before and after, about the use of private masses, and whether that they might stand with God’s law or no; also whether the very body of Christ was present in the sacrament or no. John Bedford.
GEORGE, LORD COBHAM.
George, lord Cobham, examined upon the articles 63. to 67. inclusive, of the aforesaid matter, deposeth as followeth:
To the 63d and 64th articles the lord Cobham saith, that although he doth well remember how he was present with the duke of Somerset, and my lord marquis of Northampton, at such time as they talked with the bishop, whose particular sayings and conference of matters he is not able wholly to express, yet, among other things, he saith, that he remembereth well the bishop’s answer for the Book of Common Prayer to be such, or like in effect, as the article saith; that is to say, how he would keep it, and cause it of others to be kept: which answer was accepted. And he, being required to write it, refused to do it, but was contented that master secretary should write it, who then wrote it faithfully: howbeit the bishop would not set his hand unto it; wherein the lords noted much obstinacy in him. And further, as touching the very presence of Christ’s body in the sacrament of the altar, the said lord remembereth the bishop’s communication to be such as in the article appeareth, saying, moreover, how he never preached more for the confirmation of that parcel, than the same book doth make for it.
To the 65th article he saith, that he remembereth not whether such, or the like answer, was then made by the bishop, or not.
To the 66th and 67th articles he saith, how the bishop would by no means allow the Book for Making of Priests, alleging for his defense, as the article showeth. And in the end of that communication being moved with a little melancholy, he demanded justice; whereunto, as the lord marquis said, how they liked his sayings better at their other being there (of the new diet), so the lord Cobham remembereth how it was further said unto the bishop, that it was not the part of a wise man to ask the extremity of justice in that case, so as — notwithstanding the persuasions of the lords moving him to show himself conformable to the said book being allowed throughout the realm — yet by no means he would condescend or agree to it: wherein the lords took him to be very obstinate and wilful. And more the lord Cobham to these articles cannot say By me, G. Cobham.
SIR WILLIAM HARBERT.
Sir William Harbert knight, examined upon the aforesaid matter, deposeth as followeth:
To the 1st article he saith, that whereas the bishop alleges himself always to have been ready to set forth the king’s majesty’s supremacy with all laws, injunctions, and proclamations concerning religion, this examinate hath always heard, by a common bruit, that the bishop had small affection to his highness’s proceedings in religion; specially to those that have taken effect since the beginning of the king’s majesty’s reign that now is; insomuch that no man hath been more suspected than he, having so great charge and authority as he had. And as for the chancellor, whom he allegeth to have executed every thing, it should seem to be otherwise; for, when the same chancellor was of late called before the council, for permitting of certain particular things within both the church of Winton, and of other places under his charge, because he could not so excuse himself but that the things appeared manifestly to be suffered contrary to the king’s proceedings, the whole council committed him to the Marshalsea for his disobedience where he remaineth still in prison. What book or work the said bishop hath set forth against the usurped power of the bishop of Rome, or defense he made in the university of Louvain, this examinate knoweth not.
To the 2d article: he remembereth well that the said bishop, in the days of our late sovereign lord the king that dead is, was one of the privy council, and many times had doings in matters: but what commandments or charges were given him, or whether he executed them well or evil, or how they were accepted or taken, this examinate knoweth not; but this he remembereth, that the said late king, a little before his death, put him out of his will.
To the 3d article he can say nothing, but thinketh that, as it is every man’s part to deal justly, so, in men of honor and reputation, it were much more worthy of infamy, to deserve dishonor and reproach in their private doings, having no more power and ability to deal uprightly, than the meaner sort have. And where he allegeth never to be vexed before his sending to the Tower, this examinate remembereth, that he was in the Fleet before that, for matters of religion.
To the 4th article he saith, that he knoweth nothing either of his reputation or doings in the council at that time; but he thinketh that because of the tongues, it might be true that he oftentimes answered the ambassadors, not of office, but of the place and occasions, as many times meaner men do.
To the 69th article he saith, that the lord treasurer, [then] lord great master, this examinate, and master secretary Peter, being sent unto the said bishop with the king’s majesty’s letters, the same indeed were delivered unto him by the lord treasurer’s hands, and that, as he thinketh, the bishop both received and read them on his knees; but when he had read them, he would not yield that he had offended, alleging, that he was no evil man; wherefore he would not condemn himself, but rather tumble into the Thames if he were bidden.
To the 70th article he saith, that when the lords saw the bishop so precise and obstinate in the first point, concerning his justification, one of them (who, as he thinketh, was my lord of Warwick), asked him what answer he would make to the rest of the articles, willing him to write his answer to the first article in the margin; which he then did as in the same appeareth.
To the 71st article he saith, that it is true that the earl of Warwick entertained him very gently, and so did all the rest, in hope to bring him to some good conformity, and that pen, ink, and paper, were given him, with the which he wrote these words (that appear yet of his own hand) in the margin to the first article; and afterwards subscribed all the rest, his name indeed being so placed as he allegeth.
To the 72d article he saith, that the lords and others entreated the bishop well, and used him so familiarly that he burdened them with many requests, specially for his enlargement; bearing them in hand, that he took them for his friends, with many circumstances that seem to this examinate not much material: whether the lord treasurer promised he should not be forgotten, but should hear from them the next day, this examinate doth not remember, but, that the bishop was commanded to follow them out of the chamber, this examinate denieth. Indeed, as far as he can remember, the bishop followed them out of the chamber, and so took his leave. But that was not done of any purpose to persuade the world that the bishop and they were so great friends as is alleged. And where the bishop allegeth ‘this is an argument of no contempt or disobedience,’ the writing itself declareth the refusal; and this examinate never perceived so much conformity in the bishop, as of reason ought to move him to think he had made so clear a satisfaction as he pretended.
To the 73d article he saith, that he remembereth not that any such thing was spoken.
To the 74th article he saith, that the morrow after the lords had been with the said bishop at the Tower, upon their report of proceeding with him to the council, because it appeared he sticked upon the commission, which was the principalest point — to the intent he should [have] no cause to say that he was not mercifully handled, the council commanded this examinate, and master secretary Peter, to repair to the bishop again with the same submission; exhorting him to look better upon it; and, in case the words seemed too sore, then to refer it to himself, in what sort, and with what words, he should devise to submit him; that, upon the acknowledgment of his fault, the king’s highness might extend his mercy and liberality towards him. Accordingly this examinate, and master secretary Peter, repaired to the said bishop, and proceeded with him in manner and form as is rehearsed. But the bishop stood precisely in justifying of himself, affirming, that he had never offended the king’s majesty, and therefore utterly refused to make any submission, but prayed he might have justice, and so be tried.
And for the long discourse the bishop maketh in this article, touching the condemning of himself, and his conscience, this examinate doth not precisely remember it; but the effect of his whole answer consisted of that which is rehearsed before.
To the 75th article he saith, that upon report made to the king’s majesty’s council by them, of their proceedings with the bishop, and of his answer, it was thought necessary, for the more surety of his refusal, and more authentic proceeding, that a new book of articles touching the king’s majesty’s proceedings should be devised, with which they two, and one divine, with one temporal lawyer, should soon repair to the bishop, to receive his direct and definitive answer. The bishop of London was appointed to be the divine, and master Goodrick the temporal lawyer. According to which order the said bishop of London, with this examinate, master secretary Peter, and master Goodrick, repaired to the said bishop of Winton, requiring him not only to submit himself in acknowledging his errors and faults, but also to subscribe these articles, containing matter already published and set forth by the king’s majesty’s authority, and by the advice of his highness’s council, for many great and godly considerations; and, among others, for the common tranqullity and unity of the realm.
Whereunto the said bishop of Winton made answer that, first, to the article of submission he would in no wise consent, affirming, as he had done before, that he had never offended the king’s majesty in any such sort as should give him cause thus to submit himself; praying earnestly to be brought unto his trial, wherein he refused the king’s mercy, and desired nothing but justice. And for the rest of the articles, he answered, that after he was past his trial in that first point, and were at liberty, then it should appear what he would do in them; not being reasonable (as he said) he should subscribe them in prison. Indeed with much ado he read the articles: but when he had done, and they persuaded him all that they could, he would make no other answer than is rehearsed.
To the 76th article he saith, that the 19th day of July last, the council had access to the king’s majesty; and, among other matters, declared unto his highness the circumstances of their proceedings with the bishop of Winton, who, the same day, was appointed to be brought before them. Whereon his majesty commanded them, that, in case he would this day also stand to his wonted obstinacy, they should proceed to the immediate sequestration of his bishopric, and, consequently, to the intimations. Whereupon the said bishop was brought before the council, not in the chapel of Westminster, but in the council-chamber there, commonly called the queen’s Great Chamber, where the said articles were read unto him; to the which he made answer, as he did the other times before, refusing either to subscribe or consent unto them.
To the 77th article he saith, that because the bishop of Winton used many circumstances in answering to the council, therefore it was directly demanded of him, whether he would subscribe the said articles or no. Whereunto the effect of his answer was, that in all things that his majesty would lawfully command him, he was willing and most ready to obey; but, forasmuch as there were divers things required of him that his conscience would not bear, therefore he prayed them to have him excused. And, for these circumstances and words that he allegeth in this article, this examinate doth not remember; but the effect was and is here rehearsed. William Harbert.
SIR JOHN BAKER.
Sir John Baker, knight, one of the king’s majesty’s council, of the age of 62, or thereabouts; sworn and examined upon articles 1. to 4. of the matters justificatory, deposeth as followeth:
To the 1st article he saith, that he cannot depose on the contents of this article of his certain knowledge: howbeit, he saith, that he hath not heard that he hath spoken against the king’s supremacy, nor with it, for he never heard him preach but one sermon, the which was at St. Mary Overy’s, before the house was suppressed.
And whether he treated of such matter, yea or no, he doth not remember.
To the 2d he saith, that certain things have been commanded the said bishop of Winchester to be done in the king’s time that dead is, as he hath heard say, but whether the king found any fault in him of the doing of them, he cannot tell. And otherwise certainly he cannot depose.
To the 3d he saith, that he doth not know but that the said bishop hath been, and is, a just man of his promise, until such time as he was committed to the Fleet and Tower. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 4th he saith, and thinketh, that he is not bound to make answer to the contents of this article, for that he was then attendant upon the king’s council that dead is, and sworn not to disclose any thing that should be done in the same council.
Nevertheless if he be further compelled to declare his knowledge, he is ready to do the same. John Baker.
SIR EDWARD CARNE.
Edward Carne, knight, of the age of 55 or 56, sworn and examined upon the 1st, 2d, and 13th articles of the said matter first exhibited, deposeth as followeth:
To the 1st he deposeth, that in king Henry the Eighth’s time, this deponent saith, that he never heard otherwise but that the said bishop did always to the uttermost of his endeavor, set forth the king’s proceedings; as his supremacy, and the abolishment of the bishop of Rome, according to his bounden duty: also, in the king’s majesty’s time that now is, until such time as the said bishop’s committing to the Fleet and Tower; at which time, and three years before and more, this deponent was resident ambassador in Flanders; and there being, was advertised by the lords of the council of the said bishop’s contemptuous and seditious preaching.
And as touching the said bishop’s chancellor, he is a man that he knoweth; but what he hath done in his proceedings, he knoweth not. And to the rest he saith, that he heard say, that the said bishop did make a book for the king’s supremacy, and against the bishop of Rome’s authority. And further this deponent saith, that he, being ambassador in Flanders, heard say, that the said bishop of Winchester, going in an ambassade to the emperor of Germany through Louvain, communing with certain learned men, there offered to dispute openly touching the defense of the said book, upon occasion ministered by the said learned men against the said bishop, touching the said book. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 2d he saith, that touching this article, he never heard the contrary, till such time as he was committed to the Fleet and Tower. And, whether he be now faithful and just, and how he is reputed and taken now, he cannot tell. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 3d article: he never heard that the said bishop was troubled in any court by any manner of means, until such time as he was committed to the Fleet and Tower; but that, until that time, he hath been well esteemed just of promise, and so reputed and taken, as far as ever he heard. And more than this he knoweth not, touching the contents of the said articles; for he was never much conversant with the said bishop, but at such time as he was appointed by commandment to confer with the said bishop, or in commission with him. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st interrogatory he answereth, that he cannot depose upon the contents.
To the 2d he answereth as afore; and otherwise he cannot depose, for he heard nothing of it.
To the 3d : he heard a talk at the time the said bishop of Winchester made the book afore deposed of, that he was loth to write against the said bishop of Rome; but, whether the talk was true, he cannot tell. And otherwise he cannot depose than before.
To the 4th : he heard say he was not named one of the king’s executors: wherefore, he cannot tell.
To the 5th : he heard nor knoweth nothing thereof, for he was beyond the seas the same time.
To the 6th and 7th he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. To the 8th he cannot depose otherwise than before.
To the 9th he saith, he heard nothing unto the time that he, being resident ambassador in Flanders, was advertised by the lords of the council’s letters, that, by reason of the said seditious sermon, made by the said bishop on St. Peter’s day, the people were likely to draw to a tumult. And otherwise he cannot depose. Edward Carne.
SIR THOMAS SMITH.
Thomas Smith, knight, a witness sworn and examined upon the said matter, deposeth as followeth:
To the 17th article he thinketh it to be true.
To the 22d he saith, he procured no consultation otherwise; but, it being commanded to my lord Paget and to him, at that time, by the duke of Somerset (then protector), and the rest of the council, to know the opinion of the learned men in both laws, used in this realm, upon certain articles touching the king’s majesty’s authority in giving an injunction to an ecclesiastical person (to such as were seen in the ecclesiastical laws), he went himself; and (upon their view and examination) to articles for declaration of the said authority made, they set to their hands; as may appear by their writing, to which he referreth himself. And the learned men of the common law, were called to my lord Paget’s chamber in the court, and there, in the presence of the said lord Paget, this deponent, and others, they agreed and set to their hands, likewise, to articles, as may appear by the said writing or copy thereof. The intent of this doing appeareth by the thing itself to be, to know what the king’s majesty’s authority were, in giving an injunction to any bishop in this realm, subject and obedient unto his majesty.
To the 23d he saith, he knoweth the said bishop was sent for; but of the day, he is not certain. But, he thinketh, it was about the same time mentioned in these articles. Touching that part of the article, that for just and lawful causes, and according as he ought to do, the said bishop refused to preach the said articles as they were then penned, he thinketh surely the said bishop had no just cause so to do.
To the 24th : he knoweth not of it, but by hearsay.
To the 25th : he thinketh it true, that the said bishop was brought to my lord great master’s chamber then; for there he spake with the said bishop. But, of the offering to dine, or of any threatening, he knoweth not; nor was any such thing spoken to the bishop in his presence.
To the 26th he answereth as before he hath deposed, in his answer at his first production; to the which he referreth himself: that is, that my lord treasurer, then being lord great master, and this deponent (to wait upon the said lord treasurer) were sent unto the said bishop, then in the said lord great master’s chamber, from the lord protector, and the rest of the council to move him, if they could, to show himself conformable, and to do and preach as he was commanded. And so they did both together; the said lord great master, and this deponent waiting upon him to that part of the article, — which master Smith then defended not. He saith that, contrary, this deponent did both defend and contend, that the said bishop should preach the said articles as they were then penned unto him; and defended them to be true, laudable, good, and godly, as they were then propounded for him to do — and that to do, was the chief cause, why this deponent was sent unto him. And upon divers reasonings betwixt the said bishop and this deponent upon them, the said bishop seemed to condescend, that he would agree to the articles, and to preach all the effect of them. Marry, he required, that the said lord great master, and this deponent, should move my lord of Somerset and the rest of the council, to be content with him if he did declare and set forth, in a sermon, the effect and meaning of every of them, though he did not express the very form of the words; for, he saith, then he would do it much better. For, whereas in the 1st article it was contained, that the late king’s majesty did, for just causes, abolish the usurped authority of the bishop of Rome, although the same hath been received of the more part of all christian princes, and was confirmed by some general councils; the bishop said, ‘he would not say so much of the bishop of Rome, for he would not grant him; that his authority was allowed of the most part of christian princes;’ nor that he was received generally, he said, would he grant.
Then this deponent reasoned, how England, France, Germany, Spain, Hungary, Denmark, Sweden, and so forth — in manner, till now of late, all christian princes — have received his authority.
And further, till the bishop of Rome had made an emperor in the West, the Eastland and Greece had received his authority, and were all deceived with his usurpation: and therefore he might well say so. And, touching general councils this deponent saith, that the general council at Constance (which was the greatest council that ever was, in number of bishops, abbots, and princes) did so establish his authority, that in the same council Huss and Jerome of Prague were condemned for denying such authority. And other and all general councils since that time, and also a good while before, did all to maintain that usurpation, so that he might well grant so much, and yet defend and affirm, that they were all deceived. And the bishop answered, that he would not grant the bishop of Rome so much, and he could take that away otherwise; and so showed himself very forward in that matter.
Likewise, where another article was, that monks and friars were justly abolished, he said, he never liked friars in his life; and he took them ever for flattering knaves; and, for monks, they were but belly-gods; he could well away with the taking away of them, and could say as much of those matters as needeth to be said.
And where there was an article of St. Nicholas, bishop, and St.
Katherine, and St. Clement, he said it was children’s toys; he said it needed not to speak of them; it would but make the auditors laugh.
And generally, in all the articles he showed himself very forward, as allowing them all; adding that men were much deceived in him, and had a worse opinion of him than he deserved. Only this he required, that my lord treasurer (then lord great master), and this deponent, would move my lord of Somerset and the rest of the council, that he might not be enjoined to speak them word for word; but to set forth the sentence and meaning of them after his device, and as he should bring them into his sermon; that he should not seem to have his lesson taught him like a boy, or read it upon the book, as though it were a recantation. And this message had the said lord great master and this deponent from the said bishop to the lords of the council, and so made their report: whereat some of them did marvel that he should condescend to all, considering the opinion that else was spread of him. And it was debated whether he should be trusted, or no, to do it after that sort — the form of words not prescribed, but only the matter and article, whereof he should entreat in his sermon, to be those that were written; so that he did affirm and set forth the effect of them as they were written, though he did not speak the prescript words. For the one way, they might be sure what he should do, and have copied out the very words that he should say. The other way it should be doubtful, and come in controversy, whether he had performed his promise or not; he saying he had done all as he was commanded; others, peradventure, upon just occasion denying it: wherein he might have good cause to make controversy afterward, in that the manner of speaking the thing appointed, was committed to his discretion. In fine, it seemed to go that way, that he should be brought to the prescript words, if it could be: if not, then at the least to preach the effect. This deponent, seeing it would go that way, moved my lord of Somerset (then protector) in his ear, that his grace would be so good then as to call him (the said bishop) before all the lords of the council, lest that if it should chance the said lord bishop to swerve, it might be laid to this deponent’s charge, as though the controversy did arise by the doubtful acceptation of this deponent of his words and promise to the said lord treasurer and him: and therefore he required that his answer of conformity should be heard by all the lords. So my lord of Somerset seemed then to like that motion, that he should then, before them all, affirm the same that he had promised to the said lord treasurer and this deponent. And he doth well remember, that the said bishop did use all those reasons before rehearsed, and others, to the said lord protector and others of the council, to move them to put it to his trust; videlicet, ‘that he hath been trusted more in ambassade,’ etc., and ‘that he would do much better than they looked for; and, if he did not, he were in their power to order him as they thought good;’ with other attestations [as]‘I pray you trust me:’ — ‘When have I deceived you?’ — and, ‘If you mean not to deface me, but that I should help to set forward the opinion which you would have set out, let me alone; else I shall seem to set out your words, not mine:’ — and, ‘Find fault, I pray you, when I deceive you:’ — ‘I will do it better than you look for; ye have known me a long while:’ — ‘What! will you not trust me with so small a thing?’ — and such other like, with so many reasons and arguments as he could devise, whereby to persuade them to commit it wholly to his discretion. So the matter was committed to his discretion, upon condition, that in effect he should, in his sermon, declare all the said articles; the which he promised to do. And upon this the day was appointed unto him to preach the said matters; he requiring a longer, but, in fine, concluding upon a certain day that he should preach.
To the 27th he answereth, that the said bishop was brought, as he hath before declared. Into what chamber precisely he was brought, or who was more present than the said lord Somerset [then] lord treasurer, and this deponent, he cannot surely by name affirm; but he thinketh rather before the council yet sitting. But well he knoweth, to the duke’s privy chamber he was not brought, but, if it were to any of the duke’s chambers, it was to that that the whole council many times did use to sit in. — For the friendly departure, it was true he departed friendly upon the occasion of conformity showed as before is declared; and it is truth that the said bishop said, when he was required to give his sermon in writing, that he never wrote sermon. And therefore the said duke said, he would have it written after he had made it. The effect of the articles the which he should declare in his sermon were, the matters mentioned in the 8th article. Whether the article of the king’s majesty’s minority was one of them, or no, this deponent cannot tell, but, in that, he referreth him to the writing; of the which articles divers copies were given forth, as to Dr. Coxe and to others, who should view whether he preached them as he ought or no. To all the rest he hath answered sufficiently before, as he thinketh.
To the 28th he saith, as it lieth, it hath no sentence; nor he cannot understand it. But, he saith, he supposeth that the article should be, that the bishop reasoned thus with sir Thomas Smith (then being secretary): that if it were meant to defame the said bishop, then were it well done to enjoin, that he should, word by word, recite the said articles as they were written upon the book, so that it might seem to be either a recantation or satisfaction of some evil doing. But, if they would have men who doubted of his judgment, brought to their opinions which wrote the articles, then they should suffer him to do it, and to declare the said matters in his sermon of himself: and so it should appear as his own words and mind, and not a thing prescribed unto him. And if that he the meaning of the article, he saith it is true; for both that reason and that which followeth. And divers others the said bishop used, both to my lord treasurer, and this deponent, and to my lord of Somerset and those that then were present; to persuade that it might be permitted to his credit as it is here before declared. And so finally it was, upon condition before written. Thomas Smith.
THE LORD BISHOP OF DURHAM.
Cuthbert, bishop of Durham, one of the king’s most honorable privy council, of the age of 76; examined upon the 1st, 2d, 3d and 4th articles of the aforesaid matter, deposeth as followeth:
To the 1st the said bishop deposeth and saith, that the said bishop of Winchester, being with the cardinal in service, and being with him at such time as the French king was in captivity under the emperor, when the said cardinal, and the said bishop (being the cardinal’s secretary), did pen a league of the treaty at Moret, which was then between the French queen’s mother, and the king’s majesty that dead is, for payment of great sums of money which the French king did owe to the king’s majesty that dead is; by reason of which league, so penned by the said bishop of Winton, the king that dead is took the said bishop into his service before, the deposing, of the said cardinal. And when the bishopric of Winton was void, the king gave the same unto him. And afterward, and also somewhat before, he was of the said king’s council, and so continued still during the king’s life, and especially in matters concerning France.
And further this deponent saith, that the said bishop, being ambassador in France, hearing cardinal Pole then being come unto France to stir the French king to make war against the king that dead is, after advertisement given by the said bishop to the king, procured the said cardinal to be expelled out of France; and so was.
Which said cardinal intended to stir war, for that the king had abolished the bishop of Rome, and his authority, out of this realm.
And saith moreover, that in the king’s time that dead is, the said bishop, as one of the council, did set forth for his part, all such articles, statutes, injunctions, and proclamations, as were then decreed and determined; and did set forth at all times the same accordingly. And deposeth further, that the said bishop did make a book against the usurped power of the bishop of Rome, and setting forth of the king’s supremacy; which book this deponent hath seen. And all the premises before deposed, he saith, are true, notorious, and manifest to them that were of the council at that time; and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 2d he saith, that the said bishop of Winton, after he came out of France, was sent ambassador to the emperor, for certain articles in the league being in debate: which debate the bishop of Norwich that now is, and sir Edward Carne, being then there present, could not bring to the effect; but afterwards, the said bishop of Winton being sent thither, the matter was ended. And this deponent saith, that he never heard or knew, that any thing was objected unto the said bishop; but that he was always taken among the council for a true, just, and painful man in the king’s affairs, and served as becometh. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 3d he saith, that the said article is true, as far as he ever knew or heard; for he hath been always taken for a true and just man, and he hath not heard the contrary. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 4th he deposeth, that when anything was in contention or in debate between the French king, the emperor, and the king’s majesty that dead is, for leagues, the said bishop, if he were present, was always called to make answer, because he had the French tongue perfectly, and knew the affairs that were between them and us. And saith, that before the king’s majesty’s death, David Panter and Otheborne, ambassadors of Scotland, bringing with them the ambassadors of France, came to the council, desiring the Scots to be comprehended in the league made between the French king, and the king that dead is; and likewise the Scots desired the same, offering no promise on their part to keep the said comprehension; unto which ambassadors the bishop of Winton was appointed to make answer, and did so. And, a little before the king’s death, the ambassadors of France came unto the court, where the said bishop of Winchester and this deponent did accompany them, and brought them up to the king’s outer chamber, the said ambassadors being conveyed unto the king where he lay; the said bishop and this deponent not being suffered to enter in. And the premises by this deponent declared, are true, as he saith, and are notorious; and otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st , he cannot answer otherwise than before.
To the 2d he doth neither know, nor yet hath heard as is contained in that interrogatory.
To the 3d he deposeth as before; and never knew that the king that dead is, suspected the said bishop for favoring of the bishop of Rome.
To the 4th he answereth as before; and that he did not know that he himself was named executor, until such time that the king was dead; nor did he know that the said bishop was left out, until he heard the testament read after the king’s death. Nevertheless this deponent saith, that, shortly after the king’s death, and before the coronation of the king’s majesty that now is, the lord Wriothesley, then being lord chancellor, willed all the council to come in except the bishop of Winton. But upon what occasion the said lord chancellor spake the said words, he saith, he cannot tell. And the premises spoken by the lord chancellor were spoken in the Tower of London.
To the 5th he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 6th he answereth and saith, that he never knew that the said bishop was an adversary to the king’s proceedings. And otherwise he cannot answer than he hath before.
To the 7th he doth not know, nor yet hath heard say, as is contained in the said interrogatory.
To the 8th he cannot answer upon the contents of the same.
To the 9th he answereth, that since the time that the said bishop preached, he hath heard more of the said controversy, than before the same sermon made by him. Cuthbert Durham.
THE LORD BISHOP OF NORWICH.
Thomas, bishop of Norwich, of the age of 47 years or thereabouts, sworn and examined upon the articles from 1. to 4. inclusive, of the matter justificatory, and to the fourth and sixth of the positions, saith as followeth:
To the 1st article: unto that part of the article, ‘Because, etc.,’ he referreth himself therein to the law, and to that that may be proved in the matters purposed; the whole contents whereof this deponent knoweth not. And to the rest of the article, he saith, that although the said bishop of Winchester (very loth to condescend to any innovations) was earnest against alterations as well concerning the bishop of Rome, as other orders in religion, yet, after those matters were established and set forth, by the acts, statutes, and laws of this realm, and the king’s majesty’s injunctions and proclamations, this deponent hath known and heard the bishop of Winchester publish, declare, and set forth, as well the supremacy, or supreme authority, of the king’s majesty’s father of famous memory, as the abolishing of the usurped power of the bishop of Rome, accordingly as he was bound: and did set forth a book concerning the same, as by the contents thereof may appear, which this deponent hath heard. But how the said bishop of Winchester, and his chancellor (whom this deponent hath of long time known to be wise and learned), have executed, in his diocese, the king’s majesty’s injunctions and proclamations, he knoweth not; for he hath not been conversant there. Which things, before by this deponent deposed, be true, notorious, manifest, public, and famous. And as touching the defense of the bishop’s book at Louvain, he hath heard reported, that he offered to defend the said book then and there; and, before certain of the doctors, did defend the same, as he heard say. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 2d he saith, that the contents of the article are true, as far as he knoweth; and, for his own part, he hath ever so taken him and reputed him. What the matters be that he now laid against him, this deponent knoweth not certainly.
To the 3d he thinketh that the contents of the same article are true; for he never heard or knew the contrary, until such time as, being beyond the seas ambassador, he heard, by strangers, that he was committed to the Fleet. And, requiring of them for what cause he was so committed (this deponent having no knowledge thereof of the council here), they made answer unto him, that the king’s majesty was so gracious, that he would not commit him thither, without great and reasonable causes.
To the 4th : that as long as this deponent was in council, and here in England, the said bishop of Winchester was of the privy council in reputation and estimation; and used to have the speech with the ambassadors from the emperor, the French king, and the Scots, in sundry and divers conferences that this deponent was present at.
But what was done in the council after this deponent was ambassador to the emperor (which was, as he remembereth, in the year of our Lord God 1545), he cannot depose. And, after this deponent was sent ambassador in residence to the emperor, the said bishop of Winchester was sent over with commission, in which this deponent and sir Edward Carne were joined, to entreat as well with the emperor, for the clearing of the late treaty passed between the king’s majesty that dead is and the emperor, as also to entreat with the French king’s ambassador, for a peace to be had between the said late king, and the French king, by the mediation of the emperor; wherein the said bishop was the chief doer, and chief in estimation. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively, understanding the article in matters of religion determined by orders of the realm. But when such matters were in debating, he hath heard say, that the king that dead is, was displeased some time with the said bishop of Winchester, for his earnestness in the same.
To the 2d he answereth negatively; for this respondent, being one of the six that were appointed to the framing of that book, knew divers that the late king favored, left out, and never heard of any such cause.
To the 3d negatively; otherwise than he hath deposed upon the articles.
To the 4th negatively; saving, after his return from the emperor, one told him that the late king’s majesty, a little before his death, was displeased with him for another matter than religion, and had left him out of his will; as in this interrogatory is contained.
To the 5th he answereth as he hath before to the 4th interrogatory; and otherwise he cannot tell, for at that time this deponent was out of the realm.
To the 6th he answereth negatively, understanding the proceedings in matters determined by the laws and statutes of this realm.
To the 7th he answereth negatively, as he hath in the next answer before. To the 8th he cannot depose or answer; for that the said bishop of Winchester was committed to the Tower before this respondent was returned into England from the emperor. And since his said committing and the return of this deponent, he hath heard say, that the said bishop of Winchester was committed for the causes in this interrogatory contained, but not so fully opened to this deponent.
To the 9th he cannot certainly depose, for that he was then out of the realm. Thomas Norwich.
SIR RALPH HOPTON.
Sir Ralph Hopton, knight marshal, of the age of 41, examined upon the articles 68. and 81. deposeth as followeth:
To the 68th article he deposeth, that he doth not know of any communication or agreement, as is laid and preponed in the beginning of the article, made between the council and the said bishop, of certain knowledge; but only of the report of the said bishop. And he saith, that he heard of such a bruit both within the Tower and the Court, as is contained in the article: and deposeth, that the said bishop, after the council’s being with him, made a supper, at which he had the lieutenant and his wife, this deponent and his wife, and sir Arthur Darcy and his wife; which said supper the said bishop named to be his farewell supper: but of any custom of any such farewell supper in the Tower, of the prisoners to be made, he knoweth not. And saith, that the said bishop showed this deponent, that he looked afterward, within short space to be delivered. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 81st article he deposeth, that after the said supper, and after the said bishop’s being with the council at Westminster, the said bishop spake unto this deponent, that he would make means for him to be heard, or else to be bailed: whereunto, indeed, this deponent made no answer, nor had the said bishop any knowledge given him by this deponent of his coming to Lambeth, until the hour of his coming thither. And otherwise he cannot depose. Ralph Hopton.
SIR JOHN MARKHAM.
Sir John Markham knight, lieutenant of the Tower of London, of the age of 60 years, examined upon articles 40. to 44. inclusive, and also upon articles 56. 68. and 81. of the aforesaid matter, deposeth as followeth:
To the 40th he deposeth, that the same article is true, as he doth remember. To the 41st he deposeth, and thinketh the same article to be true.
To the 42d he saith, that he (the same bishop) had license granted unto him by the duke of Somerset, that he might write; which license this deponent signified to the same bishop. And thereupon the said bishop did write one letter, sealed, to the duke’s grace, which this deponent did carry, and deliver; but had no answer thereof, that he doth know. But what was contained in the same letter sealed, and so written by the said bishop, this deponent did not know. Howbeit, he saith, the said bishop, within these three or four days, delivered him a copy, and said, it was the very true copy of the letter sent by the duke’s grace. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 43d article he saith, that he doth not remember he delivered him any such bill; but he saith, if he did deliver any, he did deliver the same. Howbeit, he saith, that he heard the said bishop speak, and say unto him by mouth, why he might not have the liberty of an Englishman, many times. And otherwise he cannot certainly depose.
To the 44th article he saith, that the said article, and the contents thereof, are true.
To the 56th he saith, that he cannot depose upon the contents thereof.
To the 58th he deposeth, that he cannot depose upon any communication, agreement, or conformity, made between the council and the said bishop. Howbeit he saith, that the said bishop had this deponent, and the lady his wife, and sir Arthur Darcy and his wife, master Hopton and his wife (after the council had been with him), to supper: and, sitting at supper, the said bishop spake then of the said supper, and named it ‘his farewell-feast.’ Touching the bruit, or common custom supposed to be used in that behalf in the Tower, he cannot depose.
To the 81st article: he deposeth the contents of this article to he true; for he had no knowledge by this deponent. By me, John Markham.
WILLIAM COPPINGER.
William Coppinger, servant to Stephen, bishop of Winchester (with whom he hath been in service these seven years and more; and, before that, at his exhibition, since the time he was of the age of 10 years), being of the age of 27 years, or thereabouts; a witness sworn and examined of and upon articles 40. to 44. and also upon articles 55. 56. 68. 69. 80. and 81. of the said matter:
Upon the 40th article examined, saith, that within two months next after that the said bishop was committed to the Tower (which was upon the last day of June, in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign that now is), this deponent, by occasion of one Thomas Crowte, then being the said bishop’s servant who went with him at his going to the Tower, was placed in the room of the said Crowte; and there hath continued ever since, continually attending upon the said bishop; and never lay out of the Tower any one night in the same space. Deposeth, that from the same time of this deponent’s coming to the said bishop, unto seven or eight days before Midsummer then next ensuing, there was none of the council, nor any other person, that came unto the said bishop, saving the lieutenant and his jailors, who, at certain times, came unto him; and also Dr. Wotton the physician, being appointed by the council to come to the said bishop, being sick of a fever; who came unto him twice or thrice. And saith, that master William Medowe, his chaplain, upon Easter day only, was with the said bishop. And, as for any others that did resort to him, with whom he might talk or declare any particularity of his offense, which he omitted in his sermon, there did not, or that declared any thing to the lieutenant; for, if there had, this deponent should have seen them, for that he was always attendant upon the said bishop. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 41st this deponent saith, what he hath before, to the XLth article: and saith moreover, that on the same time afore by him deposed, this deponent was present with the said bishop, when he heard the said bishop, divers times, require master lieutenant, that he would be a suitor to the duke of Somerset, that the said bishop might write to the said duke: which thing could not be obtained, as this deponent saith, within one quarter of a year. For, as soon as the said bishop had license, the said bishop did write; the copy of which writing the said bishop caused this deponent to write; the copy whereof this deponent, at the time of his examination, did exhibit, affirming the same to be written with this deponent’s proper hand.
To the 42d he saith, that the contents of this article be true; referring himself to the said copy of the letter now by him exhibited.
To the 43d he saith, that about a month after the writing of the aforesaid first letter (the copy whereof he hath exhibited afore), the said bishop, having no answer of his letter which he wrote to the duke of Somerset, made a bill of remembrance, according unto the form contained in this article, the copy whereof the said bishop caused this deponent to write; and now this deponent doth exhibit it at the time of his examination. Which said bill of remembrance, contained in this article, was delivered to the lieutenant, for his better remembrance to the said duke, to this deponent’s certain knowledge.
To the 44th this deponent saith, that the contents of the same article are true; for this deponent, and John Davy, sundry times were present when they heard the said bishop so complain to the lieutenant· To the 55th he deposeth, that about six or seven days before Midsummer-day, immediately [or next] after the said bishop was committed to the Tower, which was almost a year after his committing, this deponent was in the Tower when the lord chancellor, my lord treasurer that now is (then being lord great master) and sir William Peter, secretary, came unto the said bishop, and were in communication with the said bishop. But what their communication was, he cannot depose, other than that he heard the said bishop, after their departing from him, show and declare to him (this deponent), and John Davy, as is contained in this article in effect.
To the 66th this deponent saith, that the contents of this article are true. Showing the cause of his knowledge, [he] saith that he wrote the copy of both those letters out of the originals, which he saw so sent to the council by the bishop’s commandment; the copies of which letters this deponent, at the time of his examination, for declaration of the truth upon his sayings, doth exhibit; being written with his own hand, as he saith.
To the 68th he deposeth, that immediately after the duke of Somerset and others of the council being with the said bishop about Midsummer last past, the said bishop and his servants had liberty to walk in the garden and gallery; which he had not before: and after, the said duke of Somerset and others of the council being with the said bishop, the said bishop declared unto this deponent, and to his fellow John Davy, that within two or three days next following, he should be delivered out of prison. And so it was bruited commonly in the Tower. And thereupon, the same night, or the next night following (as he doth remember), the said bishop made a supper, which he called ‘his farewell-feast;’ whereat were present the lieutenant and his wife, sir Arthur Darcy and his wife, the knight-marshal and his wife, and divers others, to this deponent’s knowledge; for he did attend upon the table the same time. And immediately after, the said bishop, and this deponent, and others of his servants, looked daily for his deliverance out of prison, as he saith.
To the 69th he deposeth, that since such time as the said bishop was before the council (which was in July last past), at Whitehall, after the sequestration made there, there was no intimation, monition, or commination, made after, to the said bishop being in the Tower; nor also was there any pen and ink offered him, nor had [he] the use of pen and ink (for it is the order of the house, that no prisoner should have any without special license to write), to see whether he would subscribe to the said articles; nor did the said bishop hear any thing from the council from the said time that he was before the council at Westminster, until his coming before the commissioners at Lambeth, to this deponent’s certain knowledge; for he was always attendant upon the said bishop, as he hath before declared.
To the 80th article: that the same day sevennight next after the said bishop being at Whitehall with the council, after the decree of sequestration, the said bishop called this deponent and John Davy to him, and said unto them these words, or the like in effect; videlicet, ‘I have no commodity to use any other witness, but only you; nor can I, being a prisoner here, have the use of a notary before whom I may appeal from the matter I shall declare unto you, which is this: This day se’nnight the council gave sentence of sequestration of the fruits of my bishopric. Now, according to the order of the law, if I will appeal and take benefit thereby, I must make my appeal within ten days next after the same sequestration.
Wherefore this present day, being the seventh day after the sequestration, because the sentence thereof is ‘nulla,’ that is to say, of no force in the law; or if it be of any, ‘quia iniqua,’ because it is unjust, I do appeal from it to the king’s majesty, my sovereign lord (therewith pulling off his cap), and his justice evermore; the council’s honors in this my appeal reserved on my behalf unimpaired; and I here require you to be witness with me. I say, also, that as soon as I may have access to the council, I will intimate the said appeal unto them myself.’ ‘And remember,’ quoth he, ‘that I make this my appeal within ten days.’ And touching the residue of the said article, he saith, that the same is notorious, that he did intimate his appeal before the commissioners at Lambeth.
To the 81st he saith, that the contents of the same article are true; for he was present when the said bishop made request as is contained in the said article; whereunto he had no answer until such time as he came to Lambeth: upon whom this deponent did then attend. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth, that he is the bishop’s servant, having four pounds wages, meat and drink, and livery, and fifty-three shillings yearly in reward; and ten pounds fee, which he had at Michaelmas last, by the death of William Gardiner the bishop’s brother, and the reversion of the bailiwick of Wargrave.
To the 2d : he hath none other affection, but that he might have justice in his cause.
To the 3d : he would that he should obtain according to justice, and none otherwise.
To the 6th he answereth as before. And otherwise he cannot depose. William Coppinger.
JOHN DAVY.
John Davy, servant to the bishop of Winchester, of the age of years; being a witness sworn and examined upon the articles following’, saith:
To the 40th article, unto ‘and to declare,’ etc, he saith, that the same day that the said bishop of Winchester was conveyed from his house at the Clink, to the Tower, by sir Anthony Wingfield, upon Saturday next following the Friday when the said bishop last preached before the king’s majesty, this deponent, by the said bishop’s commandment, brought his bed after him to the Tower of London. And there the said bishop was committed to lodge in a place called the Garden Tower, where he continued secret prisoner the space of three weeks or a month, or thereabouts, next after, fast locked in, without coming abroad in all that space; having, in that space, commonly this deponent, and one Thomas Crowte, the said bishop’s servants, to wait upon him there, without coming abroad; saving that this deponent, and the said Thomas Crowte, had license of the keeper within a fortnight, or thereabouts, after their first coming thither, to walk in the garden there adjoining an hour afore noon, and an hour after noon, daily, at their pleasure: but the said bishop, all that space, could not be suffered to come into the said garden or abroad. And saith, that after the said continuance in the Garden Tower about a month’s space, by reason that one died of the pestilence in a lodging (being, as he thinketh, about twelve feet from thence), and that the said Crowte also, fell sick there, in the said Tower, the said bishop was removed from thence to a place in the said Tower called the King’s Lodging, where he remaineth at this present. And by reason that the said Crowte fell sick, he departed thence about six or seven weeks after his first coming thither, and, in his room, came William Coppinger, who hath continued there ever since. And saith, that in that lodging the said bishop remained secret prisoner, without coming abroad, until the king’s majesty’s council, videlicet the lord chancellor, the lord treasurer (then lord great master) and master secretary Peter, came to the Tower to him; which was within six days, or thereabouts, of a whole year, counting from his first committing to the Tower, as afore. And saith, that in all this space of one year within six days (as afore), there came no other person to the said bishop at any time, but only the lieutenant and the jailors, and his said servants.
And the premises he knoweth to be true, for that he hath been, by all that space, continually attendant upon the said bishop in the said Tower, and never came out of the Tower in the said space.
And upon other the contents of the said article, he saith, he cannot depose.
To the 41st article he:saith, that after the said bishop was committed to the Tower (as afore), the said bishop, having no other person coming to him besides his said servants and jailors, but only master lieutenant at certain times, the said bishop desired the said master lieutenant divers times, in this deponent’s hearing, to sue for him to have license to write to the duke of Somerset’s grace: and saith, that about the end of a quarter of a year next after his first committing thither, upon his said often request: master lieutenant came, and brought unto him pen and ink, and a sheet of paper; declaring to him that the duke’s grace was content that he should write his mind. And this he deposeth of his own hearing.
To the 42d he saith, that after the said pen, ink, and paper, delivered (as afore) to the said bishop, he saw him write a letter to the said duke’s grace, containing in effect, as is in this article contained; for this deponent read it, and brought it to the lieutenant, to be sealed and delivered to the duke’s grace: whereunto there was no answer made, as far as he knoweth, and as the bishop told him.
To the 43d he saith, that as far as he doth now remember, he read such a schedule written by the said bishop, which was also, as he remembereth, delivered to the lieutenant, to be sent to the duke’s grace of Somerset: but otherwise, he saith he cannot certainly depose.
To the 44th he saith, the bishop, very many times, complained to the said lieutenant, of the straitness of his keeping; and commonly that was one of his complaints, as often as he came. And likewise desired him to sue that he might be heard according to justice, whereunto, and to the king’s laws, he did submit himself. And this he deposeth of his own hearing.
To the 55th article, until ‘and yet,’ etc., he saith, that about the end of one whole year next after the said bishop’s imprisonment, the lord chancellor, the lord treasurer (then lord great master), and master secretary Peter, came to the Tower, and called before them the said bishop into a chamber next to the bishop’s lodging; and there had certain communication with him: but what it was, he cannot certainly depose, for that he heard them not speak together.
But, he saith, that within one quarter of an hour next after the said bishop returned to his chamber, he told this deponent, that there was like talk had, as in the article is contained. And as for the rest of the article, he saith, that the said bishop was not, within the space articulate, spoken withal concerning that matter, as far forth as this deponent knoweth. Yet, he saith, that the said bishop wrote two letters, directed to the council, of humble request to be heard; which this deponent read, and had the true copies of them: but, to whom the said bishop delivered them, either to the lieutenant, or the jailor, he saith, he cannot tell.
To the 56th he saith, as he hath next afore deposed; adding, that the said bishop had no answer again of his said letters, as far as he knoweth, and as he heard the bishop report.
To the 68th he saith, that this last summer, the duke of Somerset, the lord treasurer, the earl of Warwick, the lord great chamberlain, and divers other of the king’s most honorable council, came at sundry times to the Tower, and called the bishop before them into the council-chamber; and saith, that one day, after their being there, the said bishop, at his return to his lodging, told this deponent, that he was at a thorough point, and at an end with the council; and that he should be delivered within three days after: insomuch that he caused this deponent to write a letter to Thomas Crowte, yeoman of his chamber, (then being at Farnham,) to come with all haste to the bishop’s house at the Clink, and to make ready his chamber there. And also commanded this examinate to write the rewards, duties, and gifts, due to master lieutenant, and the knight-marshal, and the king’s servants, such as he intended to bestow at his departing. And also caused him to send for a piece of satin; to be divided among the lady Markham and others, as he should think meet: which satin was brought, and this deponent hath now the most part thereof in keeping.
Also the said bishop, about the same time, made his farewell-feast (as they then called it), in the council-chamber in the Tower, containing two or three dinners, whereat he had the lieutenant and the knight-marshal, and their wives, with divers others; as sir Arthur Darcy and the lady his wife, sir Martin Boys, sir John Godsalve, with divers others, such as it pleased the lieutenant and knight-marshal to bring. And saith that, by reason hereof, there was a common voice in the Tower, of this deponent’s hearing, that the bishop should be delivered from thence to his house. And otherwise he cannot depose upon the said article.
To the 79th article, until ‘and of truth,’ etc., he saith, he cannot depose any thing certainly of the said decree, nor under what condition and effect the same was made; for that he was not with the said bishop at the decree. But, touching the rest, he saith that, as he heard after by report of the said bishop, the said decree was made against him on a Saturday in summer, and after Midsummer last; on which day the said bishop was conducted from the Tower, to the court, by the lieutenant, and returned the same night: which day otherwise (he saith) he cannot specify. But he is well remembered, that the same Saturday se’nnight then next following, the said bishop, being in his lodging in the Tower, called this deponent and William Coppinger to him, and declared to them, that the same day se’nnight next after (which day, he said, he was before the council at Whitehall), the said council had read a sentence of sequestration of the fruits of his benefice against him, which, he told them, he took to be of none effect. And therefore, forasmuch as he had no other reed, as he said, that he durst trust, he would therefore use this deponent, and the said Coppinger, as witnesses, that he did, before them, appeal from the said sentence (as being of none effect), to the king’s majesty, according to his bounden duty. And so did then and there, by word of his mouth, appeal from the said sentence, as being of none effect, to the king’s majesty; saying, also, that as soon as he could come to the king’s majesty or his council, or [to] any that came from them, he would report and signify unto them his said appellation. And further deposeth, that from the time of the return of the said bishop from the Whitehall to the Tower, on the said first Saturday, until the day that he first appeared at Lambeth in this cause, the said bishop remained continually as prisoner in the Tower, and never, in all the said space, went out of his chamber: for, if he had, this deponent should have known thereof by reason he was by all that time continually attendant upon him; in all which time, also, the said bishop had neither pen and ink brought unto him to the intent articulate, nor any copy of the said articles delivered unto him, nor yet [was] required, willed, or commanded, to subscribe them, nor also came to the presence of the council, as far as he knoweth and believeth; for, if he had, he thinketh he should have known thereof, for causes above by him deposed.
To the 80th article, unto ‘and intimated,’ etc., he deposeth as of the next article before. To the rest of the article he cannot depose, because he was not at Lambeth with the said bishop.
To the 81st he saith, that very many times in the said space, he heard the said bishop to make suit to the lieutenant and marshal, to the effect contained in this article; but what answer he had, he cannot tell: and saith, that the same day that the bishop first appeared at Lambeth upon this commission, as he heard say, the lieutenant and marshal came to the said bishop’s lodging after seven of the clock in the morning (the bishop then being in his bed), and willed this deponent to signify to the bishop, that he must prepare himself forthwith to repair to Lambeth, before my lord of Canterbury and other the king’s commissioners. Whereupon the bishop, forthwith, prepared himself, and went with him to Lambeth. And saith, that he knoweth of no other warning that the said bishop had in this behalf. The said Davy, at his repetition, declared that he now remembereth, since his first deposition to the XLth article, that within the first year of the said bishop’s imprisonment, Dr. Wotton, the physician, was with the said bishop when he was sick; and master Medowe his chaplain was there on Easter day, and no longer: which he required to be added to his former depositions. — Whereunto Dr. Oliver made answer to him, that he would not insert that in his said former deposition, because he came so long after his deposition, and after the witnesses were published (but no copies thereof delivered as the actuary testifieth, but referreth this to the lord’s commissioners). Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he saith, he is the said bishop’s servant, and hath fifty-three shillings and four pence wages, meat, drink, and livery. And he hath had certain advantages, as the reversion of Tracy, which he hath sold. And otherwise negatively.
To the 2d : he hath no affection to his cause, otherwise than justice and right require.
To the 3d : he would that he should overcome according to justice and right, if his matter be just and right; and no otherwise.
To the last he deposeth as afore; and otherwise he cannot depose.
The said John Davy, being examined whether the letters whereof he maketh mention in his examination contain the same thing that master Coppinger did exhibit, and which he seeth now (at the time of his examination), he saith, that they contain the selfsame thing, and do agree. John Davy.
JACQUES WINGFIELD.
Jacques Wingfield, gentleman, servant to the bishop of Winchester, in whose service he hath continued above these twenty years, being a witness sworn and examined upon the articles of the said matter, saith as followeth:
To the 16th article of the matter justificatory he saith, that the contents thereof are true; for he (the said deponent) was personally attendant upon the said bishop in his chamber the same month and year, and saw and read the letters mentioned in the said articles; at which time, he saith, the said bishop was much diseased in his body, and specially of a disease which ran, and grieved him very much; and also had a great rheum fallen out of his head, which caused the one side of his head to be much swollen. And saith, that being so sick as he was, he declared to this deponent, and other of his chamber and servants, that, notwithstanding, he would up to London, seeing he was sent for. And forthwith commanded a horselitter to be prepared, and cloth bought to cover the same; and with convenient speed repaired towards London, in the said horselitter, till he came to Kingston-upon-Thames; and there, taking his barge, repaired to his house at the Clink, and shortly after to the council. And this he knoweth, for that he was present and attendant upon him all this time, as he saith.
To the 33d he saith, that upon Thursday at afternoon next before the said bishop preached last before the king’s majesty, this deponent saw a servant of the duke of Somerset’s come to the said bishop’s house at the Clink; and, bringing a letter with him (as appeared), required to speak with the said bishop: whereupon this deponent caused one to advertise my lord bishop thereof. And forthwith he was conducted to the bishop, but what he delivered or said to him, he saith, he cannot tell; but, within an hour or thereabout next after, this deponent came to the said bishop’s study, where he perceived the said bishop, by his accustomed gesture, to be much troubled and unquieted. And waited about the said study and the bishop’s dining-chamber all the said day following, till about ten of the clock at night, in all which time the said bishop neither ate nor drank, as far as this deponent could know or perceive. And he is assured he came not to his supper, as he was accustomed; for, if he had, this deponent should have seen him, by reason that he was so continually attendant. And, leaving the said bishop at his book in his study about ten of the clock the same night, this deponent went to bed. And, in the morning (he coming to wait on the said bishop in his chamber, as he was accustomed) one of his fellows told him, that the said bishop came in no bed that night. And saith, that from that morning till the said sermon was ended, the said bishop neither ate nor drank, as far as this deponent could perceive or hear; for, if he had, he should, by reason of his continual attendance upon his said master by all that space, have seen or perceived it.
To the 36th article he saith, that in the said month of June articulate, shortly after the said bishop was come from Winchester to the Clink, as he hath before deposed, the said bishop repaired to the king’s Court of Whitehall at Westminster; and there entered into a chamber, where it was then said commonly, that the lords of the council were. And this he knoweth, for he waited on his said master thither, and saw him enter into the said chamber. And he (the said deponent) being occupied otherwise the rest of that day, at night repairing to the said Clink, found the said bishop come home from the said court. And upon another day not long after, this deponent, likewise, waited upon the said lord to the said court; and saw how the said bishop landed at the king’s privy stairs. And there, one that this deponent knoweth not, met with the said bishop, and conducted him from thence into the court, by a back way, as appeared; and, as it was then and afterwards reported, to my lord of Somerset’s chamber; for otherwise, he saith, he cannot depose, for none of his servants went with him further than the said stairs, but tarried in the court abroad for him till dinner time.
And then, a servant of the earl of Wiltshire (the lord great master) came to them; and, saying that the said bishop was in the said earl’s chamber, willed them to go home and to repair thither again at afternoon. And so they did, at which time the bishop returned in his barge, to his said house at the Clink, this deponent waiting upon him. And in the barge homewards this deponent said to the bishop, that he and his fellows, at such time as he repaired to the council, feared his return, lest he should be committed to ward (or like in effect), and that they rejoiced when they saw him return.
Then one of his fellows, being master Basset as he remembereth, said, that the fear was well past when they saw the emperor’s ambassador, the same day, go to the duke of Somerset’s chamber the common way; whereby they thought, that the said bishop had been sent for to him, to treat with him for other affairs. Whereunto the bishop answered, that he neither saw the emperor’s ambassador, nor any of the council; but only the duke of Somerset, the earl of Wiltshire, and master secretary Smith. And saith, that any other more times than only these two, the said bishop was not at the court, or from his house at the Clink, from his coming thither (as afore), but only when he preached on St. Peter’s day; for, if he had, this deponent saith, he should have known thereof, by reason of his continual attendance upon the said bishop as afore.
To the 38th he saith, the article is true, as he doth verily believe; for he, being with the said bishop in his study immediately after his coming home from the said sermon, and talking of the said sermon, he told this examinate that he was assured that he had so preached as no quarrel or displeasure might ensue to him thereupon; but rather looked to have thanks for his labor.
To the 45th he saith, that towards the winter time next after the said bishop’s imprisonment, this deponent, on behalf of his said master, went to the duke of Somerset, then lying at Sion, and made humble request to his grace to be good lord unto his said master, and to consider how winter drew on, and what a dankish and uncomfortable house the Tower was, and his said master a man much given to rheums, or such like words in effect. Whereunto he answered, that he was but One of the council; and that as soon as the time served, they would consider it, which would be at their next meeting. This deponent requiring his grace, that he the said examinate might, the mean time, have access to his said master, the said duke answered, that he should not need, for he should see him abroad within ten days. And so departed for that time. And saith, that after this, very many times (in manner every fortnight, or thereabouts, for a twelvemonth space afterwards) he was a like suitor for the said bishop his master’s deliverance, to the duke’s grace, as he thought opportunity served; at whose hands he received no discomfortable words, but the duke’s grace would commonly say, that the time served not. And saith, that in all these times the said deponent, with his contest 132 James Basset, spake with his grace in his gallery at his house at the Strand; and there required his grace, after long and sundry suits to release their master. Whereunto his grace gave answer to this effect: that their said master was better there in the Tower, than abroad; for since his being there, there were such laws made, as (he right well knew) the said bishop would not agree unto; and that if he would not agree unto, he should be answered to abide the punishment thereof.
And saith, that for all the suits that he and his fellows could make, their master could not be delivered. And saith, that he remembereth that his contest Basset, replied to his grace thus in effect: that the said bishop had not, as far as he knew, broken any law made; and that in case he were abroad, he would not break any that should be set forth by the king’s majesty.
To the 68th he saith, that in summer last, after the same time that certain of the king’s most honorable council had been in the Tower with the said bishop as it was reported, a common voice and fame was spread both in London and the suburbs thereof, of this deponent’s hearing, that the said bishop should be delivered out of prison within two days after; insomuch that the said bishop’s caterer reported, that he had bought store of meat for the bishop’s farewell in the Tower. And the bishop sent to this examinate, that he should forthwith send to Farnham for Crowte, one of his chamber, and one other named Cliffe, to come with speed to the Clink, and there prepare his chamber; and to keep it privy from the rest of his household, for fear lest they, being stricken with gladness thereof, would come straggling up. Which commandment this examinate fulfilled, and the said Crowte and Cliffe came at the time appointed, and prepared his chamber. And he looked for every hour when he should come to his house from the Tower.
And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories . — To the 1st he answereth as afore, adding that he hath four pounds by year wages, and a livery, of the said bishop. And in fee forty marks a year besides.
To the 2d and 3d he saith, he hath such affection to the said bishop, as it becometh a servant to have to his master; which is, that he would his master should do well, and would his matter to prevail according to equity and conscience, and not otherwise; and to have victory therein, according as the law and justice will; and not else.
The 4th is answered as afore in the depositions. Jacques Wingfield.
JOHN SETON.
John Seton, bachelor of divinity, parson of Hinton, in the county of Southampton (of the patronage of the bishop of Winchester), and chaplain to the said bishop, with whom he hath continued these seven years, being of the age of 42; a witness sworn and examined 133 upon the articles 15. 29. 34. 35. and 38. of the said matter.
Upon the 15th article examined, he saith, that he hath been at divers and sundry sermons that the said bishop of Winchester hath made, and in a manner at all, as he remembereth, that he made within the cathedral church of Winchester, by the space of three or four years next before his committing to the Tower. And, in one of those sermons which he made after he was delivered out of the Fleet, as he remembereth, he entreatead of obedience, in manner and form as is contained in this article in effect. For this deponent was attending then upon the said bishop, and did attend, observe, and hear the said sermon, so by the said bishop preached in the said cathedral church. And saith, that the said bishop did, in the said sermon more largely touch obedience unto the superiors, than is contained in this article; and said, that if the king should command any of his subjects to go to the wars, he ought immediately to go, not requiring what the cause should be; but straightway to go, supposing the king to have a just cause to command him. At which said sermon was a great audience, among whom Nicholas Lentall, Richard Hampden, master Medowe, clerk, as he remembereth, with others of the said bishop’s servants; and divers inhabitants of the city of Winchester were present, as he saith. And otherwise, upon the contents of this article, he cannot depose.
To the 29th this deponent saith, that on St. Peter’s day, videlicet, the selfsame day that he preached afore the king’s majesty at Whitehall, after the sermon done, the said bishop of Winchester, walking in his garden at the Clink, had communication with this deponent of his said sermon; saying, that he trusted that he had satisfied the king’s majesty and the council, and had nothing omitted in his remembrance that he was willed to do: at which time no other person was present, but only the said bishop and this deponent. And moreover this deponent saith, that on the morrow after, being Saturday, the said bishop at dinner, at his said house at the Clink (with whom then was present at the table the lady St.
Leger, master William Warren, this deponent, and certain others), by occasion ministered there and then, of his sermon said, that he trusted that he had so satisfied all parties, that no man ought justly to be offended, and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 34th he saith, that he was present at the said sermon made by the said bishop on St. Peter’s day, when he heard the said bishop entreat and speak of ceremonies; saying, that whatsoever ceremonies there were, that concern time, measure, and place (as beads, ashes and images and such other), as long as they served man, they were good; and as ‘man served them, it was an abuse, which might be mended two ways: one, by bringing them to the right use, and the other, by taking them away; which, he said, the powers might do. And he said, that it was not like [as] in the abuse of all such things as were instituted by God; as, for an ensample, in baptism, if the water be misused, it [neither] may nor ought to be taken away; but be brought to the right use again. And further said, that he did agree in all alterations of matters of religion with the king and the powers, such as were set forth by acts, proclamations, and injunctions. But he did disagree with the inferior sort, which, like unto posts, carried truth in their letters, and lies in their mouths (expressing thereby, certain rash and light preachers).
And this deponent, being examined whether he saw such articles as were contained in the two papers mentioned in this article, he saith, he never saw them: howbeit he heard of them by master Watson; and, so much as the said master Watson showed him, the said bishop did speak, partly specially, and partly generally, in his said sermon, to this deponents hearing. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 35th article he deposeth as he hath before to the 24th article; and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 38th he deposeth as before he hath deposed To the 29th article; and otherwise he cannot depose, saving that he was present when the said master Wingfield came to the Clink, and had the said bishop to the Tower. And then this deponent heard the said bishop say, to one Henry Francis then weeping for his going to the Tower, ‘Weep not for me: there is no cause why; for I shall do well enough.’ And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth as before, and that he hath no wages, nor livery; and otherwise he answereth negatively.
To the 2d : he hath no affection at all to the bishop, but prayeth that truth may prevail.
To the 3d he answereth, that if this cause be true, he would he should obtain: and otherwise he desireth not.
To the last he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose or answer. John Seton.
NICHOLAS LENTALL.
Nicholas Lentall, servant to the bishop of Winchester, with whom he hath continued twenty years or thereabout; having his livery, wages, and fee; of the age of 63 years; a witness sworn and examined upon the 15th article of the matter.
To the 15th article he saith, that after the time that the said bishop of Winchester was delivered out of the Fleet, the said bishop, in Lent season then following, preached sundry sermons in the cathedral church of Winchester, whereat this deponent was present, and heard him so preach. And, at one of the said sermons (which was to this deponent’s remembrance on Palm Sunday last past was two years), the said bishop entreated of obedience, and declared and spake thereof in manner and form as it is contained in effect in this article, whereupon he is examined: there being present at the said sermon, Richard Hampden, his contests, this deponent, and what other he remembereth not. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth as before, and that he hath five pounds wages, and meat, drink, and livery; and ten pounds annuity out of the bishop’s manor of Downton; and otherwise negatively.
To the 2d and 3d he saith, that the said bishop, being the kinds true subject, he desireth he may have justice.
To the 4th he deposeth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. Nicholas Lentall.
RICHARD HAMPDEN.
Richard Hampden, servant to the bishop of Winchester, with whom he hath continued these sixteen years; of the age of 40, or thereabout; examined upon the 15th article of the matter saith and deposeth as followeth: That at sundry sermons that the said bishop of Winchester made at Winchester, after his delivery out of the Fleet, this deponent was present, and heard the said bishop (at the sermon made by him in the church of Winchester, on Palm Sunday last past was two years, as he doth remember), entreat of obedience; and said therein, that the life of a christian man consisteth chiefly in suffering of another man’s will, and not his own; and declared the duty of the subject to the rulers, which was (as he said), to obey their will, and suffer their power. Which said words, or the like in effect, he heard the said bishop, in his said sermon, speak and declare. At which said sermon was a great multitude, among whom he remembereth well that Nicholas Lentall was one; and otherwise he cannot depose. Richard Hampden.
MASTER WILLIAM BELL.
William Bell, clerk, parson of St. Mildred’s in Bread-street, in the city of London; where he hath been parson sixteen years; of the age of 52 years; a freeman, testifieth.
To the 34th article and 35th this deponent saith, that concerning the said papers specified in these articles, he knoweth nothing of the contents thereof; but saith, that he was present on the said day articulate, and heard the said bishop of Winchester preach at Westminster before the king’s majesty; in which said sermon, among other things by him touched, he spake and said these words, or the like in effect: ‘That he did agree with the superiors, and allowed all acts, statutes, injunctions, and proclamations, concerning religion, set forth by the king and the council.’ And, in his said sermon, heard the said bishop preach touching certain abuses in ceremonies, wherein he said were two manner of reformations to be made by the magistrates: one to reform the abuses, and the other to take them away clean; making a demonstration thereof of images, which (he said) for the abuse of certain, the whole were taken away: which he said was godly and well. And certain other things, as preaching and baptism, although they were abused, yet they could not be taken away, but the abuses of them to be reformed. And further he saith, that he heard the said bishop speak of certain light preachers, which he resembled to posts, having truth in their letters, and lies in their mouths: for that, by their license, they are commanded to preach obedience; and they preach disobedience. And saith, moreover, that the said bishop did declare his mind concerning ceremonies, that so long as they served us, and we not them, they may stand; and when men serve them, they were not necessary, but ought to be taken away. And he misliked the lower part, in that parsons, vicars, and curates, of their own heads made sundry alterations and orders in their parish. And that divers private men took upon them the king’s office, in that they altered things at their pleasure, otherwise than was set forth by the king and his council. And the premises, or the like in effect, the said bishop declared, in his said sermon, to this deponent’s certain knowledge; for he was present all the time of his said sermon. And otherwise he cannot depose upon the contents of the said articles; saving, as he saith, that over and besides the premises, he beard the said bishop speak of the king’s supremacy; and bring in Scripture for the same sufficiently, and in this deponent’s conscience. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth, and denieth the contents thereof.
To the 2d : he hath no other affection than equity and justice require.
To the 3d : he wisheth, and earnestly desireth, that the said bishop may obtain that justice willeth; and no otherwise.
To the 4th : he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. By me, Wm. Bell.
MASTER WILLIAM MEDOWE.
Master William Medowe, clerk, chaplain to the bishop of Winchester, and master of the hospital of Holy Crosses, beside Winchester; of the age of 60 years, being produced and sworn upon the aforesaid matter.
To the 1st article of the matter this deponent saith, that the space of this twenty years he hath been with the said bishop of Winchester, and is his chaplain, and all the said space, he saith, that the said bishop, to this deponent’s sight and knowledge, hath always set forth, to the uttermost of his power, the king’s supremacy, and the abolishment of the bishop of Rome’s authority. And saith, that at five several times he hath attended upon the said bishop, when he was sent beyond the seas for ambassador, as well to the emperor, as to the French king; at one of which times, the said bishop was at Louvain, when there was a commencement, wherein proceeded two doctors of physic; at which said commencement, the said bishop was desired to be the father of the Act, and was at the same Act present. And after the said Act done, on the selfsame day, after dinner, the rector of the university, accompanied with four or five learned men, came to the said bishop, to his house. And, there and then, the rector brought with him the book, which the said bishop had set forth, concerning the supremacy of the king’s majesty, and the abolishment of the bishop of Rome’s authority; with the which book, the said rector, and the other persons, were offended, and came to the said bishop, to see what he could speak for the defense of the said book. Unto whom the said bishop said, that he would gladly hear what they could object against it, and he would make them answer. And thereupon, the said bishop, with the said rector, and the other persons, went unto his chamber, and there continued in disputation; wherein this deponent heard the said bishop very earnest and loud in the defense of the said book; which said book, this deponent saith, he hath seen and read, and was in the house with the said bishop, when he did make the same book. And further he saith, that the said bishop, within his diocese, hath set forth all such acts, statutes, injunctions, and proclamations, as have been made and set forth by the king’s majesty that dead is, and the king’s majesty that now is. And further saith, that for the settingforth of the same, he hath had an expert chancellor, Dr. Steward, who hath caused the same accordingly to be set forth within the diocese, and specially within the city of Winchester, and within the hospital of the Holy Crosses, whereof this deponent is master; and for such a man, the said chancellor hath been and is commonly reputed and taken, within the diocese of Winchester, to this deponent’s knowledge. And saith, that the said bishop, at divers and many of his said sermons whereat this deponent hath been present, hath set forth the king’s majesty’s supremacy, and the abolishment of the bishop of Rome’s authority. And otherwise he cannot depose upon the statutes of the said article.
To the 2d article he saith, that the said bishop, being ambassador as he hath before deposed, did execute such commandments as were given him diligently and painfully; and that at his return home from the parts beyond seas, his doings there practiced, and here in England, were well accepted and taken, and never fault objected unto him for the same; but that it appeared that the king’s majesty did well account him and his doings at his coming home; as it did always appear to this deponent, for he never knew or heard the contrary, as he saith.
To the 3d article he saith, that the said bishop — all the space that this deponent was his chaplain, and before, by the space of ten years — hath always been commonly taken and reputed for a man just of promise, and hath not been called or troubled in any court or before any judge, before this suit and trouble, saving his committing to the Fleet and the Tower, as far as this deponent ever heard or knew.
To the 10th article this deponent saith, that the day specified in this article, the said bishop was delivered out of the Fleet, to this deponent’s certain knowledge; for he was, by the space of a month next before his said delivery, with the said bishop in the Fleet. And he saith, that the said bishop, at his said delivery said, that he was delivered by force of the king’s majesty’s pardon. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 15th article he saith, that he was present among divers and sundry sermons made by the said bishop of Winchester after his said committing to the Fleet, and at the said sermon made in the cathedral church in Winchester on Palm Sunday as he remembereth: in the which said sermon the said bishop did much entreat of obedience, declaring that the life of a christian man did chiefly consist in suffering; that is, in doing of other men’s will, and not our own. As Christ came to do the will of his Father, and not his own, even so must we do God’s will, which is to obey the superiors, or else willingly to suffer their power, thinking that best, always, that is commanded by the power: as for example, quoth he, where the king hath set forth the homilies, and any of you think to serve God better in hearing of a mass, you must think that best, that is set forth by the superiors. And saith, that at the same sermon were a great company, and divers of the said bishop’s servants, whom he remembereth not.
To the 29th article he saith, that the said bishop, after the time that he was appointed to preach, showed this deponent, that he should entreat, in his sermon, of the king’s supremacy, and the extinguishing the bishop of Rome’s authority, and certain ceremonies which, he said, he intended to speak of. And after his sermon done, the said bishop declared to this deponent and others, that he had so preached, that he thought no man was offended withal, nor ought to be offended. And otherwise he cannot say.
To the 33d article this deponent saith, that he, upon the Thursday, being the day next before St. Peter’s day, and in the evening of the aforesaid day, came unto the said bishop to say evensong, as he was accustomed to do; whom he perceived to be somewhat unquieted by reason of a letter, as the said bishop said, sent the same day from the duke of Somerset, by the which he was commanded, not to speak of the sacrament or the mass; by reason of which letter he was so troubled, that he took no refreshing that night, as he was accustomed, nor the next morrow, until his sermon was done, as far as this deponent knew; for he was accustomed to be with him at his table. And otherwise be cannot depose.
To the 34th article this deponent saith, that the said bishop showed this deponent, that in his sermon which he should make on St. Peter’s day, before the king, he should entreat of certain things contained in papers delivered by master Cecil, which were of the king’s supremacy, the abolishment of the bishop of Rome, the communion under both kinds, suppressing of monasteries and chantries and certain ceremonies: upon all which things the said bishop did entreat and speak, in his said sermon, to this deponent’s certain knowledge; for he was present at the said sermon, and heard the treating of the same.
To the 35th this deponent saith, that the said bishop said, in his sermon, that he did agree with the superiors, and did allow all proclamations, statutes, and injunctions set forth by them; and he did not agree with the lower part, for that they did preach, and did things, contrary to the same proclamations, statutes, and injunctions; and did resemble certain preachers, and other persons, that did not according to the same, unto posts; for that they carried truth in their letters, and lies in their mouths. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 38th article he saith, that immediately after the said bishop had preached, this deponent came home with the said bishop, in his barge; at which time, it appeared, the same bishop was merry and quiet, and said, that he trusted that he had satisfied what was commanded him. And the next day following, this deponent sat at dinner with the said bishop, the same being then merry, and suspecting no trouble that should ensue for his sermon-making, or any other thing, until the time he saw master Wingfield come with the guard, as far as this deponent saw or heard. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth as before, and that he hath neither livery, nor yet stipend, of the said bishop, but was promoted by the said bishop and his mean, to the hospital of Holy Crosses, a prebend in Winchester, and the benefice of Stoke.
To the 2d he answereth, that he hath affection unto the said bishop no otherwise than justice requireth.
To the 3d : he earnestly desireth that the said bishop may declare himself in this matter, whereby the king may be his good lord, and that he might come out of trouble.
To the last he answereth as afore, and otherwise he cannot depose. By me, William Medowe.
ROBERT WILLANTON.
Robert Willanton, master of arts, vicar of Haddenham, in the county of Bucks, of the age of 37; sworn and examined upon articles 34. 35. and 37. of the matter, deposeth as followeth:
To the 34th and 35th he deposeth as followeth: that he doth not know what was contained in the papers; howbeit he saith, that he went purposely to hear the said bishop of Winchester preach at Westminster, on the said St. Peter’s day; and he intended to note his sermon. Howbeit, he saith, that he could not note as he did intend, because of the throng. When the said bishop, coming to the gospel, in declaring this text ‘Quem dicunt homines esse filium hominis,’ he there noted two kinds of people, the one of Christ’s school, and the other not of Christ’s school. They that were not of Christ’s school, had but a vile opinion of Christ, calling him carpenter’s son, a drinker of wine, and so forth. The other, of Christ’s school, though they were not his disciples following him, yet they had an honorable opinion of him, some saying, that he was Elias, some Jeremias, or some one of the prophets. Yet among these, there was no agreement in opinion until he came unto his own disciples, saying unto them ‘Quem vos dicitis me esse,’ etc.
Peter answered as one for all, ‘Tu es Christus,’ etc. Christ said, ‘Tu es Petrus,’ etc. And here Christ said, that upon the confession of Christ’s faith (and not of Peter’s), he would build his church.
Whereupon he inveighed against the usurped power of the bishop of Rome learnedly. For first he declared by the very text of the Scripture, that the bishop of Rome could challenge no such power unto him by that text; for Christ’s church was builded of man, but by the confession of Peter’s faith. And Peter, in answer, spake in the voice of them all, as by other texts of Scripture it may appear; for when, as he said unto Peter, ‘Pasce oves meas,’ it was not to Peter alone, but to them all. And where the keys were given, they were given generally to them all. And he further gathered of this text, notwithstanding ‘Pasce oves meas,’ was said to Peter, yet he could not justly thereby claim any supremacy; for, if St. Austin should teach a king, it followeth not that he is above a king, or, if a physician should give council to a king, it doth not follow that he is above, or better, than the king. And, for further confutation of the usurped power, he did allege the doctors, who did mention those words spoken to Peter, [as] generally spoken to them all: and yet, where some of them called him ‘Principem apostolorum,’ or ‘Caput apostolorum,’ they spake that by him, as a foreman of the quest; and oftentimes it happeneth, that the foreman of the quest is not the best man. And in further counting of the said bishop of Rome’s power, he noted how it should come to pass, that the world should take him to be the head; which, he said, was either for the singular virtue or learning that they did see in him. And further he proceeded, saying, that if any man would have any further proof against the said usurped power, he referred himself to his book, which he had written in that matter.
And, in his said sermon, the said bishop spake of the mass, saying, it profiteth both the living and the dead; but, as for masses of ‘Scala Coeli,’ ‘masses satisfactory,’ or ‘masses in number,’ he could not find them by Scripture. Whereunto he annexed, If masses did profit the dead, it might be objected, that the king did not well, in putting down of monasteries, chantries, and colleges. To that he answered, that it was lawful, and the king lawfully might put them down; for masses stand not in number, but in devotion. Further, this deponent heard the said bishop entreat of reformation of things, and divided them in two kinds: the one to be of that sort, that the reformation did only stand in taking away of the abuse — as in the sacrament of the altar, and baptism — and likewise in other sacraments. ‘For, if water,’ quoth he, ‘be abused in baptism, yet we cannot take away the water. The other sort, as ceremonies (speaking generally only) be reformed either by taking away the thing itself, or else, by taking away the abuse only, as were images.’ And there he noted how we should know the abuse of them: ‘for so long (quoth he) as they be our servants, to put us in remembrance of our further duties towards God, they be in their right use: but, if we be their servants, we abuse them.’ And here he put three examples, as praying in place, number, or time, saying, so long as we be admonished, coming to the place of prayer, what is our duty there, or the time put us in remembrance to pray, or the number (for prayer must be in some number), we use the time, the place, and number. But if we think not praying in that place, that time, or that in that number our prayer is not valuable, nor heard of God, we become their servants, and abuse them.
Further, proceeding in his said sermon, speaking of the receiving of the sacrament in both kinds, he did allow it, and commend it: although whole Christ were in either kind. And did allege a constitution provincial of Peckham, for the receiving of the same in greater churches, at every great feast; and said, that it was also used in the order of Cistertians, here in England. And moreover, the said bishop said, that he did agree with the higher powers in all things, but he did mislike in the inferior sort, and subjects, the running before a law. And here he noted two things; the one was, the railing of preachers having the king’s license to preach abroad, and who, in their said license, were willed to use themselves honestly; yet in their preaching abroad — both contrary to the tenor of their license, and also to the king’s proclamation, that no man should use of the sacrament any such words or terms, but that were specified in Scripture — gave themselves to rail. And therefore he likened them to posts, having truth in their purse and lies in their mouths.
And he did rather commend the said proclamation, calling it a godly proclamation. The said thing that he misliked, was the marriage of priests; and said that he had labored the thing, and had been written unto in it, and had also written again in the same. All which the premises by this deponent declared and spoken of, or the like in effect, he heard the said bishop declare in his said sermon, made on St. Peter’s day. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 37th article he saith, that at the time that the said bishop did preach, there was no contention, nor controversy, of the presence of Christ’s body in the sacrament, as far as this deponent knew or heard, among learned men. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d he answereth, that he beareth affection to him, as he doth to a christian man; and no otherwise.
To the 3d he desireth that right might take place, and no otherwise.
To the last he deposeth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. By me, R. Willanton.
THOMAS WATSON.
Thomas Watson, clerk, bachelor of divinity, chaplain to the bishop of Winchester, and parson of Wike in Dorsetshire (of the patronage of the said bishop whose chaplain he hath been these five years and more), of the age of 34 or 35 years; a witness sworn and examined upon articles 7. 11. 12. 14. 16. 18. 19. 20. 29. 31. 33 36. 38. and 68. of the said matter, deposeth as followeth:
To the 7th article: that the said bishop of Winchester, after the death of king Henry the Eighth, and before the committing of the said bishop to the Fleet, did write certain letters unto the archbishop of Canterbury; in which letters, or in some of them, was contained what danger and discords might arise upon innovations in religion, and, specially, this danger, the denial of the presence of Christ in the sacrament. Which letters this deponent did see and read and confer, after the bishop had first drawn them, and delivered them to Francis his secretary, to write, by the commandment of the said bishop; to the intent they should agree with the originals, made by the said bishop. And otherwise he cannot depose upon the contents of this article.
To the 11th article this deponent saith, that about thirteen or fourteen days (as he doth remember) after the delivery of the said bishop out of the Fleet, he was committed to prison, to his own house in Southwark; which was; for not subscribing certain articles of justification (as the said bishop showed this deponent): the answers of which articles, made by the said bishop, this deponent did carry, by his commandment, to sir Thomas Smith (then secretary), and also to the council, divers times. Which said answers, and also articles, this deponent did read; and had instructions from the said bishop to answer for the defense of his said answer. And, at length, the council was satisfied with his answers, and so delivered and went to Hampshire. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 12th he deposeth, as he hath before to the 11th. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 14th this deponent saith, that after the said bishop’s delivery out of his house, as aforesaid, the said bishop taking his journey to Hampshire, lay at Farnham; upon whom this deponent did there attend, and lay at the vicarage of Farnham: at which time the vicar showed this deponent, that the people were something offended for alterations of divers things done in the king’s visitation. Wherefore he required this deponent to preach, or else to procure the bishop to preach, for the quieting of the people. At whose request, the said bishop did preach in the said church of Farnham, on St. Matthew’s day articulated, taking for the theme the gospel of the said day, in the 11th chapter of Matthew. And upon these words, ‘Revelasti ea parvulis,’ he made this division of ‘parvuli sensibus,’ and ‘parvuli malicia.’ And upon these words, ‘parvuli malicia,’ he exhorted the people to obedience, as the child to the father; not asking the reason of the thing commanded, but thinking that best, that they were by them commanded to do. Even so the said bishop willed the subjects to conform their wills to the wills of the superiors, and think that best they order. And therein touched the homilies and injunctions set forth by the visitors, saying, that if any think they might be better occupied to hear mass, than in hearing of homilies, or in doing of other things set forth by the superiors, therein they do not well; for their obedience concerning orders in the church, doth please God more than to think they [can enact] better themselves. At which sermon, divers of the said bishop’s servants were present, the vicar of Farnham, the suffragan of Winchester, and divers of the said town of Fernham.
To the 16th this deponent saith, that about a three weeks after Easter, in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign, the said bishop, being then at Winchester, received letters from the council to repair to them: unto which letters the said bishop, being then diseased, made answer of his said disease, and sent the letters up by the servant of the council. Which notwithstanding, he received other letters from the council, not to abuse his liberty, but to come as soon as he might. Whereupon he came immediately in a horselitter to Kingston, and from thence by water to his house. And the premises he deposeth of his certain knowledge, for he did see the said letters, and did attend upon the said bishop at his said coming to London. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To articles 18. 20. he deposeth as he hath before to the 8th article of the articles ministered by the office against the said bishop; to the which he referreth himself. And otherwise cannot depose.
To the 29th article he deposeth, that the said bishop, at his coming home from the said duke of Somerset, showed this deponent, that he had concluded with the said duke, and that he should speak of those articles: but not after the manner and form contained in the papers, but of the chief of them. And saith, that after his said sermon-making, he (the said bishop) accounted, that he had satisfied that thing he was appointed, and had done accordingly, in such wise, that no man ought to be offended; and thought not that he had offended. For this deponent, being abroad in the city on the morrow after the said sermon-making, heard the bruit and noise, that the said bishop should go to the Tower; which thing he declared the same day to the bishop; unto whom the said bishop said, it was but tales, for he thought that he never pleased the council better in all his life, than he did in his said sermon.
To the 31st this deponent saith, that the said bishop showed this deponent, how that master Cecil, on the said Wednesday, came to the said bishop, and advertised him, in the duke of Somerset’s name, that it was the duke’s advice, that he should not speak of any doubtful matter of the sacrament, and of the mass. And that the said bishop made answer again, that he would speak of no doubtful matter, but of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, which was without all doubt. And the premises he deposeth of the report of the said bishop; and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 32d and 33d he deposeth as he hath before to the 10th article of the matter objected against the said bishop whereupon he was examined; and saith moreover, that by reason of the same letter, sent so near the time of his sermon, the said bishop was much unquieted for that, to satisfy the same letter, he was compelled to alter that thing that he had purposed before to speak; insomuch that the same bishop did not eat any meat at his table, as he was wont, from the time of the delivery of the letter, until the sermon was done, forasmuch as this deponent knoweth: for he was always wont to keep his company at his table, as he saith. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 36th article he deposeth, that upon Saturday in the Whitsun-week, in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign, the said bishop of Winchester being newly come out of Hampshire unto his house in Southwark, went to the court at Whitehall; upon whom this deponent did then attend, with the other of his servants; and saw him in the queen’s closet; and was there a certain space, with the council, and went to his house again merely. And the said bishop said, that he had answered all things fully.
And afterward, within a certain space, master Cecil came to the said bishop, and declared unto him, that it was the duke’s pleasure, that he should preach and write his sermon, the said bishop granting to preach, but denying to write his sermon. And the morrow after the said bishop sent this deponent with a letter unto the said duke, with instructions, to make the answer aforesaid; the said duke giving this deponent in commandment, that, seeing the said bishop would not write his sermon, he should have articles to preach upon. Which articles (about two days after) the said master Cecil brought, first in one sort and form, and after in a larger form.
And not long after that, the said bishop, being sent for, went to the court (upon whom this deponent, and many of the said bishop’s servants did attend), and landed at the Privy Stairs, and so conveyed to the duke of Somerset’s chamber; where this deponent and the rest of the servants left him. And from thence, as this deponent and others heard reported, the said bishop was conveyed to the lord great master’s chamber, where he was appointed to dine. And this deponent, and others of the servants of the said bishop, as well before dinner, as after, waited for him at the council-chamber door, and could not hear of him there. And, shortly after, the said bishop took his barge at the Privy Stairs.
And when he was in the barge, one of the bishop’s servants said, that he thought he had been sent for to speak and to treat with the emperor’s ambassador, who was then there: and to whom the said bishop said, that he saw him not, nor was not afore the whole council the said day. And saith, that any other time or times in the month of June articulated, than is afore by this deponent declared, the said bishop came not to the council, nor yet forth of his house, until he made his sermon. For if he had, this deponent, always lying within his house, should have had knowledge thereof; and should have attended upon him, as he was always accustomed to do, as he saith. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 38th article he deposeth as before To the 29th ; and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 68th article he saith, that he, lying at Farnham aforesaid, had a letter from one Somerset, one of the bishop of Winchester’s servants, declaring, that the said bishop should be delivered within two days; and therefore willed him to come up. And so he came to London, and, at his said coming (which was in June last), he heard voice of the people so that he should be delivered. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth as before, and that he is his household chaplain, and hath two benefices of the said bishop’s patronage. And otherwise he denieth the contents of this article.
To the 2d he saith, he hath affection unto him as a servant ought to have to his master; and to his causes no otherwise than justice and equity requireth.
To the 3d he answereth, that he desireth that the said bishop might overcome according to justice, and no otherwise; and so he prayeth.
To the 4th he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. Thomas Watson.
HERMAN BILSON.
Herman Bilson, of the town of Winchester, brewer, where he hath dwelled these six years; of the age of 37; a witness sworn and examined upon the 15th article, saith as followeth:
Examined upon the said 15th article, saith, that a certain day in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign (on what day he cannot now certainly declare), the said bishop of Winchester made a sermon in the cathedral church of Winchester, whereat this deponent was present, and heard the same: in which sermon, he saith, the said bishop did entreat much of obedience. And, after he had declared the power and authority of the superior to come from God, and that whosoever resisteth that power did offend God, and resisteth his ordinance, he did openly and fruitfully declare and set forth the office and duty of a subject and christian man to consist in two points; that is to say, in doing, and in suffering: and if the superiors command a thing that is godly and lawful, the subject ought to obey it and do it. If the superior command things ungodly and unlawful, the subject ought not to resist it, nor reason against it, but willingly to obey, by suffering; that is, to be content that the power of the superior should be executed and done upon him. And the cause why that this deponent did bear away these things spoken at the said sermon was, for that he was in doubt of this proposition, ‘Oportet obedire potestatibus in rebus licitis et illicitis;’ considering that this text in the Acts of the Apostles, ‘Oportet obedire Deo magis quam hominibus,’ satisfies us fully how to understand, ‘Obedire potestatibus in rebus illicitis,’ that is, by suffering his power to be executed upon the subject. And at which said sermon there was a great multitude of people. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he denieth the contents of the same for his part, in all points.
To the 2d he answereth, that the said bishop is his ordinary; and other affection he hath not to him, but for truth’s sake.
To the 3d article: he desireth that in his doing well, and his duty to his prince, he would wish him to obtain; and not otherwise.
To the 4th he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose or answer. Herman Bilson.
JOHN READE.
John Reade, of Farnham, chandler; where he hath dwelled from his infancy; of the age of 49; sworn and examined upon the 14th article, saith as followeth:
That on St. Matthew’s eve last past was two years, the said bishop of Winchester, then going from London towards Hampshire, lay at Farnham, and, on the day, preached there. And in his sermon he (the said bishop) spake much of obedience; and there exhorted the people to be content with such things as the visitors, and the superior powers, had done and set forth: and that no man should grudge or murmur thereat, but take it as the ordinance of God. And the cause why the said bishop did then preach (as this deponent heard say) was, for that divers of the town were offended with that thing the visitors had done and altered; and thereupon he exhorted the people willingly to obey all such doings as were set forth by the superiors, and that they should think that best, that they set forth: by reason of which sermon, the said bishop did quiet the mind of divers people. And the premises he deposeth to be true, for he heard the said bishop’s sermon, and so did many of the town of Farnham; and otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d he saith, he hath no affection.
To the 3d he answereth, that he coveteth no other, but that which right and equity shall require.
To the 4th he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. John Reade.
WILLIAM LAURENCE.
William Laurence of Winchester, weaver, where he hath dwelled from his birth; of the age of 37; examined upon the 15th article, and saith as followeth:
That on a certain day after the coming of the said bishop out of the Fleet (what day certainly he cannot depose), the said bishop did make a sermon in the church of Winchester, at the which this deponent and divers others were present. And, in the said sermon, the same bishop spake and entreated much of obedience, and that very earnestly and fruitfully, which supposed, verily, that forsomuch as the said bishop was then lately come out of the Fleet, he had in commandment to touch obedience so largely as he did.
And among other things of obedience he did declare, that the subjects were bound to obey the powers, and to make no resistance; but rather to suffer the power of superiors in things although they be not lawful; but not to do the thing that is unlawful as they command. And these, or the like in effect, with much other words concerning obedience, the said bishop did speak in his sermon. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he saith, that he hath a patent of the bishop of Winchester’s gift, for keeping of a court called Chenie Court, having for the same fifteen shillings yearly, of which he hath received no profit these four years, but giveth the fee to him that keepeth it. And otherwise he answereth negatively.
To the 2d and 3d he answereth, that the bishop, being a true man to the king, he wisheth him to prevail; and if not, not to prevail. W. Laurence.
PETER LANGRIDGE.
Peter Langridge, clerk, bachelor of divinity, prebendary of Winchester, of the age of 40 years, examined upon articles 1. 8. and 15., deposeth as followeth:
To the 1st article of the matter he deposeth, that by the space of thirty years he hath continued in the town of Winchester, and hath heard very many and sundry sermons that the said bishop hath made at Winchester; and hath heard the said bishop many times, and often very earnestly, in divers of his sermons, set forth the supremacy of the king that dead is, and his posterity; and the abolishment of the bishop of Rome’s authority — and that so earnestly as need to be, to this deponent’s judgment. And also hath heard him many times, in some of his said sermons, preach earnestly of obedience of the subjects to the superiors. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 8th article, he deposeth, that all such innovations as have been set forth by the king’s majesty’s commandment, proclamations, laws, statutes, and injunctions, have been quietly and obediently and conformably received, set forth, and executed and willed, by the said bishop and his chancellor, to be observed and kept in all times, to this deponent’s knowledge, in the church of Winchester, and also within the whole diocese, as far as this deponent hath heard. Otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 15th article he saith, that on Palm Sunday, or else on the Sunday after Easter, as he remembereth now, the year specified in this article, this deponent was present in the cathedral church of Winchester, and heard the said bishop preach on the said day; and touched earnestly due obedience towards God, and the king’s majesty, alleging St. Paul: ‘Omnis anima subdita est,’ etc. And further alleged obedience by the subjects to the king’s majesty, bringing in this text, ‘Rex non sine causa gladium portat;’ and declared chiefly the term of obedience by the term of suffering, in manner and form contained in this article in effect; and bringing in for an example, that in case a christian man were underneath the power of an infidel, his duty were to obey his external laws, keeping his conscience strong, and his faith steadfast to God. And other wise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d negatively.
To the 3d : he wisheth that victory be had according to justice. And otherwise he willeth not. By me, Peter Langridge.
GILES WHITE.
Giles White of Winchester, of the age of 38, examined upon the 15th article deposeth as followeth:
That in the sermon that the bishop made at Winchester, he remembereth (in one of the last sermons that he made there, at which sermon this deponent and a great number were present) the said bishop spake earnestly of obedience, and exhorted the people to obey their prince; saying, that if the king’s majesty were an infidel — as he is a very true and faithful prince — and did command any thing to be observed which was unlawful, and against God’s law, we are not bound to do it; but to suffer such punishment willingly, as the prince shall put unto us for not doing of the same, and not to resist in anywise. And the premises, or the like in effect, with other exhortation concerning obedience, the said bishop did declare. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d , that he hath no affection but as truth requireth.
To the 3d he answereth, that if he be a true man to his prince, he wisheth he might obtain according to truth; and not otherwise. By me, Giles White.
ROGER HURD.
Roger Hurd of Winchester, verger in the cathedral church of Winchester, where he hath continued, and within three miles of the town of Winchester these twenty years; of the age of 34. A witness sworn and examined upon the 1st and 8th articles.
To the 1st he saith, that he hath been at divers of the bishop of Winchester’s sermons made at Winchester, wherein he hath treated of the supremacy of the king, and the abolishment of the bishop of Rome’s authority. But by what kind of words he hath set forth the same, he doth not now remember. And saith, that the said bishop did set forth a book entituled ‘De Vera Obedientia,’ which this deponent hath seen; and, by report of master Coppinger, who hath the same, the said bishop by the same hath set forth the king’s supremacy, and the abolishment of the bishop of Rome’s authority, as he saith. And saith, that all such acts, statutes, proclamations, and injunctions as have been set forth by the king and the superiors, and sent to the church of Winchester, have been with expedition duly set forth, executed, and observed, in the church of Winchester, to this deponent’s sight, at all times; for he is an officer of the same church, as he hath before deposed. And that the chancellor, master doctor Steward, hath duly, in such sort as becometh, set forth the same as much as in him lieth; and he hath been very diligent in doing them, of this deponent’s sight and knowledge. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 8th he deposeth as before, for such innovations as have been sent to the church. And concerning the diocese, he hath been present in the consistory of Winchester, when he hath heard master Steward, the chancellor, command the apparitor with speed to go abroad in the diocese with the same. And he hath not heard the contrary but all those things were duly observed in the diocese abroad, as they were in the cathedral church. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d he hath none affection, but wisheth that right may take place.
To the 3d he answereth, that if right will, he would desire he might obtain, and none otherwise.
To the 4th as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. Roger Hurd.
WILLIAM LORKING.
William Lorking, vicar of Farnham, where he hath dwelt sixteen years; of the age of 60, or thereabouts.
Examined upon the 14th article he deposeth, that upon St.
Matthew’s eve last past was two years, the bishop of Winchester, going home to Hampshire from London, lay at Farnham, and master Watson his chaplain lay all night with this deponent at the vicarage, unto whom this deponent declared, that divers of the town murmured and grudged at things done in the visitation by the king’s visitors; specially, for images, and other things contained in the injunctions. And thereupon desired the said master Watson to preach on the morrow, to quiet the minds of the people. And then Watson declared the same to the bishop (as he supposeth), and, on the morrow, being on St. Matthew’s day, the bishop of Winchester preached, himself, in the church of Farnham, and, in the same sermon, declared much matter of obedienee, when he came to this part of the gospel ‘Revelasti ea parvulis.’ And, upon the same, extolled and set forth the king’s majesty’s power, bringing in ‘Omnis potestas a Deo est,’ and saying, he that resisteth the powers, resisteth God. And then did exhort the people to be contented with such things as, by the king’s authority, were taken away; and to receive such things as were, by his majesty’s authority, set forth; and to think those things best, that the king had set forth: the said bishop bringing in for the same, divers places of the Scripture. And the premises, or the like in effect, this deponent heard the same bishop speak and declare; and so did much people after: at which preaching this deponent did not perceive the people to murmur or grudge afterwards. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d : no otherwise he affecteth, than right requireth. To the 3d he answereth as before; and no otherwise.
To the last he deposeth as before. And otherwise he cannot depose. W. Lorking.
JOHN SMITH, John Smith, master of arts, and provost of Oriel College in Oxford; of the age of 40 years; sworn and examined upon articles 34. 35. and 37. of the matter.
To which articles of the matter he deposeth in manner and form contained in his depositions, written with his own hand, exhibited at the time of his examination, with also certain articles which, he saith, were delivered unto him at Oxford, when he received the commissioners’ letters; which said articles (as it was declared to the bishop of Winchester by master Cecil, before the time that the said bishop did preach before the king) this deponent hath made answer unto; as it appeareth by his said depositions. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d and 3d he hath no affection, nor coveteth that he should overcome otherwise than justice requireth.
To the 4th , as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. John Smith.
THOMAS WILLIAMS.
Thomas Williams, master of arts, vicar of Andover, where he hath been vicar these two years; of the age of 45, or thereabouts; sworn and examined upon the 14th article, saith and deposeth as followeth:
That on St. Matthew’s-eve last past was two years, as he doth now remember, the bishop of Winchester lay that night at Farnham, and forasmuch as this deponent, being then curate, had before put down the images in the church, according as the king’s visitors commanded, and the people (with that and other things then put down, and other things established by the king and the superiors), were much offended, the said bishop, for cause to stay the murmuring of the people, was desired to preach, as this deponent heard credibly reported.
Whereupon the bishop of Winchester, on St. Matthew’s day, preached in the church of Farnham, and declared the gospel for that day. And when he came to that point ‘Revelasti ea parvulis,’ he took occasion to speak of obedience, wherein he would every man should consider his own state and vocation, and quietly walk in the same. And, in effect, he declared, that it is the office of a true subject to be obedient in any manner of wise to such laws and ordinances as the king and the powers had set forth unto them; and not to ask why or wherefore we should do this or that, but do things as we are commanded; and thinking those things best, that the king and his council had set forth; and not to resist the powers in any wise. And declared further much matter of obedience besides, so as it could not have been better set forth, to this deponent’s judgment; for he was present and heard the same sermon, and so did much people: by reason of which sermon (in that he touched obedience so earnestly) the people of the town were quieted afterwards; whereas before, to this deponent’s heating, they were not. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d he answereth, that he affecteth not the said bishop but as the order of charity willeth, if he be a true man to his prince.
To the 3d he answereth, and desireth that he may overcome if justice and law will so; and not otherwise.
To the 4th he answereth as afore; and otherwise he cannot depose. Thomas Williams.
JOHN GLASIAR.
John Glasiar, 134 clerk, bachelor of law, and commissary unto the bishop of Winchester within the Isle of Wight, where he hath been commissary these sixteen or seventeen years; of the age of 50 years and upwards; examined upon the 8th and 9th articles of the matter.
To the 8th article he deposeth and saith, that by the space of these sixteen or seventeen years he hath been the bishop of Winchester’s commissary within the Isle of Wight, by all which said space, this deponent saith, that he hath diligently and duly caused all manner of ordinances and innovations set forth by the acts, statutes, proclamations, and injunctions commanded by the king, to be observed and kept; all which said acts, proclamations, and injunctions, this deponent always received at master Steward’s hands, and from him (being the bishop’s chancellor) with earnest letters for the setting-forth of them diligently and earnestly; and that with an acceleration: insomuch that he willed him, by his letters (to the intent they should be duly set forth), to see the setting-forth of the innovations himself, and in his own person: and this deponent so did, in all churches within the Isle of Wight, and there they were duly observed, and quietly received. And the premises he deposeth to, be true upon his oath. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 9th article this deponent saith, that in the visitation of the clergy, holden by the authority of the king’s majesty that now is, his majesty’s visitors appointed in the diocese of Winton (of whom sir James Hales and Dr. Briggs came into the Isle of Wight), were there quietly and duly received, as becometh, in their said visitation there, to this deponent’s certain knowledge; for this deponent, being the commissary there, did wait and attend upon them. And saith, that all such injunctions and orders as were then set forth and admitted in the Isle of Wight (as he saith, of his certain knowledge), and the premises, are notorious and manifest throughout the Isle of Wight, of his knowledge. And for speedy expedition, in that the said visitors should not be letted, this deponent did answer and pay unto them the whole procurations due within the said isle, and received the same afterward of the clergy, whereof he is not yet all paid. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st , he answereth negatively, saying, that he is commissary to the bishop within the aforesaid isle without any fee or annuity.
To the 2d : he wisheth that truth should appear, and other affection he hath none.
To the 3d : he would he should obtain as he hath deserved, and no otherwise. To the 4th : he cannot depose otherwise than before. John Glasiar.
RICHARD BRUERNE Richard Bruerne, of Christ’s Church in Oxford, bachelor of divinity; of the age of 32 years or thereabouts; examined upon the 34th and 35th articles, saith accordingly as he hath deposed in a certain paper, written for his full depositions, which he exhibited at the time of his examination, with a copy of certain articles delivered him, which were the articles (as it is said) delivered by master Cecil unto the bishop of Winchester before he should preach. And otherwise he cannot depose upon these articles.
To the 37th article he deposeth, as concerning the controversy of the sacrament — when it began he knoweth not; but he doth not know, nor remember any that did openly read, preach, or dispute of it at Oxford, before Peter Martyr began, which was last February twelve months, and not before, as he doth now remember. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d he saith, that he loveth him because of his learning and wisdom; and otherwise he beareth no affection otherwise than justice.
To the 3d : he desireth that truth shall overcome, and no otherwise To the last he deposeth as afore. And otherwise he cannot depose. Richard Bruerne.
JOHN HARDY.
John Hardy of Farnham, gentleman, of the age of 56 or thereabouts; a witness sworn and examined upon the 14th article, deposeth upon his oath as followeth: That on St. Matthew’s eve last past was two years, the bishop of Winchester taking his journey to Winchester from London, lay at Farnham; and, on the morrow, being St. Matthew’s day, by reason that it was showed unto him, that certain of Farnham did murmur and grudge at certain thing commanded by the visitors, as for taking down of images, and other things; the said bishop did make a sermon in the church of Farnham aforesaid, in which said sermon, the bishop took occasion to speak of obedience, and, in the same, he likened men unto the weakness of children, which are afraid of the thing they need not fear, and what they should not fear, they fear: and declared further that men were not afraid to break the commandment of Almighty God, and of the king, but he would they should principally and first obey God’s commandment, and next the king’s. And whereas divers ceremonies are abolished in the church, which were invented by men, it is lawful for the king’s majesty to dissolve them again; and willed all men to conform their wills to the will of the prince, and of such as are appointed by him. And the premises or the like in effect, with much more matter than this deponent is able to declare now, touching obedience, he did preach of. At which said sermon this deponent and many people were present; and saith, that by reason of the same sermon, the people which before were offended, were quieted in their minds, as this deponent judgeth in his conscience. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively, saving that the said bishop suffereth him to enjoy his fee for the receiving of the rents of Farnham, which fee was granted him by the late bishop Foxe.
To the 2d he saith and answereth, that he doth not know what matter is laid against him: howbeit he wisheth that, if he be no offender, he might prosper in this case. And otherwise negatively.
To the 3d he answereth as before; and otherwise he denieth it.
To the last he answereth as afore; and otherwise he cannot depose. John Hardy.
MORGAN PHILLIPS.
Morgan Phillips, bachelor of divinity, of Oriel College, Oxford; of the age of 34 years and above; sworn and examined upon articles 34. 35. and 37., deposeth as followeth:
To articles 34. 35. and 37 . he saith and deposeth, that master Basset, one of the bishop of Winchester’s servants, delivered unto this deponent, yesterday, certain articles, being ten in number, which, he said, were the copy of the articles delivered to the bishop of Winchester by master Cecil, to preach of, with the copy of these articles (34. 35. and 37.) of the matter whereupon he is produced and examined, unto which articles he deposeth according as it is contained in a certain paper, written with his own proper hand, and exhibited for his examination upon the same. And otherwise than is contained in the same schedule exhibited by him, he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d he answereth, and beareth no other affection to him than equity willeth; for he is a man that he never talked withal.
To the 3d : he wisheth that he should no otherwise overcome than justice would.
To the 4th he answereth as before. And otherwise he cannot depose. Morgan Phillips.
ROBERT QUINBY.
Robert Quinby of Farnham, cloth-maker, where he was born; of the age of 27 or thereabouts; sworn and examined upon the 14th article of the matter, saith and deposeth as followeth:
That on St. Matthew’s day last past was two years, as he doth now remember, this deponent heard the bishop of Winchester preach and make a sermon, in the church at Farnham, in which said sermon, after that he had set forth divers things as the gospel did lead, he took occasion to speak of obedience; as first, obedience of the child to the parents, and the servant to the master. And, consequently, touched earnestly the obedience of the inferiors to the superiors; and thereupon exhorted the people, that they should not murmur or grudge at any ceremonies as were, or should be, taken away by the king’s majesty; but think that best, that is set forth by the king and his authority: and that men should not ask why or wherefore it is done. And these, or the like in effect, the said bishop did declare in the sermon; with much other words concerning obedience, which this deponent is not able to express so largely as it was set forth by him. And this deponent saith, that the said bishop was loth to offend, as this deponent judged by him; for the said bishop tarried a great space, when he came to his prayer in the same sermon, for a book to declare the order of prayers then set forth; which book the vicar went for, and brought it to him: and, according to the same, he did set forth the prayer to this deponent’s sight and hearing. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he denieth the contents thereof in all parts.
To the 2d : he hath no other affection to the bishop than charity leadeth.
To the 3d : he wisheth that the bishop should have that he hath deserved, in case he hath offended; and, if not, that he might overcome.
To the 4th as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. Robert Quinby.
ROBERT BRABORNE.
Robert Braborne of Farnham, clothier, where he was born; of the age of 40 or thereabouts; examined upon the 14th article, saith as followeth:
That on St. Matthew’s day last past was two years (as he doth now remember), this deponent was present in the church of Farnham, and heard the bishop of Winchester preach; in which his sermon he spake much of obedience, declaring the duty of a servant to his master, and so forth, from the lowest to the highest; and, specially, the duty of the subjects to the superiors: exhorting all subjects to be obedient to their king and rulers appointed, and to receive quietly such things as are set forth by them, without any reasoning of it, or grudging or murmuring thereat; saying, that their power cometh from God, and they that refuse them, refuse the power of God. And the premises, or the like in effect, this deponent, among other things, heard preached of the said bishop.
And saith, that by reason of the said sermon, the people of the town were much quieted; whereas, before, divers of them were offended with such things as were commanded; as the pulling down of images, and such other, to this deponent’s knowledge. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively, saying he is a copyholder of the said bishop, renting fifty-three shillings yearly.
To the 2d : he hath no more affection to him, than to any other, saving in way of truth.
To the 3d : he would he should obtain and have, as he hath deserved.
To the 4th as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. Robert Braborne.
EDMUND BRICKET.
Edmund Bricket, doctor of divinity, and parson of Hadham, in the county of Hertford, of the age of 56 years; sworn and examined upon articles 34. 35. and 37., saith as followeth:
To the articles 34. and 35. he saith, that he cannot depose upon the contents of the papers mentioned in the articles. Howbeit he saith, that on St. Peter’s day was two years, this deponent was at part of the bishop of Winchester’s sermon, made before the king at Westminster, in which said sermon he heard the said bishop speak of ceremonies by these words, or the like in effect; saying, ‘I am called the master of ceremonies; and, as concerning ceremonies, I am now, and ever was, of the same judgment; that they be outward creatures, appointed for us, whereby we may be moved and stirred the more to serve God; and so long as we use them to serve us, and we not serve them, so long they were good and not abused.’ And if we serve them, and they serve not us, then they were not good, but abused; which abuse might be taken away two manner of ways; one, by the instructing and teaching the people to what use and purpose they were first ordained and instituted; and the other way, if the people would not so be reformed, to take them away clean, ‘Yet,’ quoth he, ‘some things there be that are abused and ought not clean to be taken away: as the sacrament of baptism, and other sacraments, although they were abused, yet they cannot nor may be taken away; and also preaching of the word of God, although it were abused, it might not be taken away, but the abuses reformed.’
And further, he heard the said bishop speak concerning magistrates in this sort, or the like in effect. ‘Touching the magistrates,’ quoth he, ‘I do agree with them in the king’s proceedings. I like well,’ quoth he, ‘the communion under both kinds. I like well, also, the king’s proclamations concerning the sacrament, wherein he willed all men to speak reverently of the sacrament, according as the word of God leadeth us. I mislike,’ quoth he, ‘in the subjects, that they call the mass abomination. Also I mislike that they call the sacrament only bread and wine. These,’ quoth he, ‘may be called post-preachers, for they bear the verity in writing, and (saving the king’s majesty’s honor and reverence) they bear lies in their lips or mouth. I mislike, also, the bold and open marriage of priests, for I never read, in any ancient doctor since Christ’s time, that priests were married. But that married men have been priests, I am bold to speak the same afore your grace,’ quoth he; ‘for my books are abroad, which I have set forth concerning the same. And mine adversaries, that write against me in that behalf, they understand not their own authors: for, if they had read two lines further in the same places that made for their purpose, they should have perceived, that the same make against them.’ And the premises, or the like in effect, this deponent heard the said bishop preach and declare. And otherwise he cannot depose, for, he saith, that the said bishop was entered unto his sermon before this deponent’s coming thither.
To the 37th article he saith, that at the time of the said bishop’s sermon, there was no controversy or contention, among learned men, of the presence of Christ’s body in the sacrament; for the king had set forth proclamation, that no man should speak of the same unreverently, otherwise than the Scripture should bear. And, he saith, that no learned man did speak against the presence of the same, the same time, to this deponent’s knowledge or remembrance. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d : he hath no affection to him, but because of his virtue and learning; and no otherwise.
To the 3d : he would he should obtain according to truth.
To the 4th he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. Edmund Bricket.
ALEXANDER DERING.
Alexander Dering of Winchester, notary and registrar, under master Cook, within the diocese of Winchester; of the age of 36; sworn and examined upon the articles 1. 8. 9. and 15. deposeth as followeth:
To the 1st : he deposeth that by the space of these fifteen years, he hath dwelt within the town of Winchester and the Soke, and hath been under the registrar of the bishop of Winchester all the same space; and saith, that by all the same space, of his certain knowledge, all innovations as have been set forth by acts, statutes, proclamations, and injunctions, have been duly received, and set forth with such diligence as becometh, throughout all the whole diocese; for this deponent, being (as is aforesaid) deputy under the registrar, hath, by the commandment of master doctor Steward, the bishop’s chancellor, written out commandments with all speed, for the setting-forth and due observing of them within the whole diocese; insomuch that the said chancellor hath made such speed in the setting-forth of them, that he would not suffer this deponent to tarry dinner, but to have all things done, and to write such letters for the setting-forth of the same innovations, when such innovations were come. And as concerning the said bishop’s chancellor, he saith further, of his perfect sight and knowledge, that he hath been all the time aforesaid very circumspect and diligent in setting forth of all such injunctions as have been set forth by the king’s acts, proclamations, and injunctions. And the premises are notorious and manifest (as he saith) within the diocese of Winchester; and he hath seen the said chancellor sundry times give money to the apparitors, for diligence to be had in the premises, over and above their fees.
To the 8th article he deposeth as before: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 9th he deposeth, that as well before the time, as at the time, of the said king’s majesty’s visitation, the said bishop was in the Fleet, as it was commonly reported for truth at Winchester. And yet, notwithstanding, the said king’s majesty’s visitors were, throughout all the diocese, reverently and duly received and entertained, to this deponent’s knowledge; for this deponent (as he saith) did attend upon them in their visitation in the said diocese; and, for his part, did his duty as becometh, and made certificate of every deanery. And, for this deponent’s diligence and pain, the said visitors, at their departing, gave this deponent thanks, and a reward. And at Winchester, he saith, that the said bishop’s proctor did, with due reverence, receive the said visitors to this deponent’s sight; for he was present. And the premises he deposeth to be true, notorious, and manifest, within the whole diocese. And deposeth [that] at the visitors’ departing out of the diocese, he did send a letter to master chancellor, videlicet Dr. Steward, for reformation of certain comperts 45 135 in the visitation, wherein they had taken no order; and willed this deponent to give him hearty thanks for their gentle entertainment at his hands.
To the 15th article he saith, that he was present at a sermon made by the bishop of Winchester, in the church of Winchester, the Sunday after Easter day last past was two years (as he doth remember); in which said sermon he spake much of obedience.
And, amongst other things, he heard him exhort the people, willingly to receive and obey all such acts, statutes, and proclamations, as are set forth by the superiors, and to come to hear the Homilies. ‘Although some will say, that they can read them at home as well as the priest, or better, yet, for all that, they ought to come to church to hear them, to show their obedience.’
And further said that ‘in case ye were under an infidel (as you are under a christian prince), and commanded to [do] a thing against God’s law, ye were not bound to it. And yet ought not to resist, but willingly to suffer his power to punish.’ And the premises, with much more than is contained in this deponent’s depositions, as this deponent saith, the said bishop did declare concerning obedience, which he doth not now perfectly remember. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively, otherwise than before.
To the 2d : he hath affection, but as justice requireth.
To the 3d : he wisheth he might obtain according to justice; and no otherwise.
To the 4th as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. By me, Alexander Dering JOHN POTINGER.
John Potinger of Winchester, gentleman, where he hath continued these ten years; of the age of 36; sworn and examined upon articles 1. 8. 9. and 15., saith and deposeth as hereafter followeth:
To the 1st article, he saith and deposeth, that on a certain day in the month of April or May, in the second year of the reign of the king’s majesty that now is, and (as he doth remember) on Sunday called Low Sunday, this deponent was present in the cathedral church of Winchester; and there heard the bishop of Winchester preach; in which said sermon, this deponent saith, of his certain hearing and knowledge, that the said bishop did entreat of the supremacy of the king’s majesty, and the abolishment of the power of the bishop of Rome, very earnestly, to this deponent’s judgment: and in the same sermon did declare very pithily, that the life of man did consist in two things chiefly; that is, in doing and suffering. And, for an example, said, that in case the king’s majesty, our supreme head, and a godly and a christian prince, should command anything to be done and observed by his subjects, that were expressly against the word of God, we should not do it; and yet we ought not to resist, but willingly to suffer punishment for not doing of the same. And other things commanded by the king, and not against God’s law, we ought and must keep, observe, and obey them obediently.
And thereupon took occasion to speak of the Homilies: saying, that although men had the Books of the Homilies at home in their houses, and could read them as well as the priest, or better; yet, notwithstanding, they ought to come to the church, and hear them read there; because the king commandeth them so to do, whom they ought to obey by God’s law. And in the same sermon, or in some other made in the aforesaid cathedral church, by the said bishop, the said bishop brought in the story of Abraham, who, commanded by God to make sacrifice of his only son, did not reason with God, of his promise made unto him before; but willingly went about to do the commandment, without grudging, or any interrogation made by him. And certain other examples he (the said bishop) brought, and entreated concerning obedience, which I cannot now call to memory.
And saith further, that the said bishop did, at the aforesaid time and other times, speak of the abolishment of the bishop of Rome, and of the king’s supremacy earnestly: insomuch that this deponent had thought, that he had some injunction to speak of the same, that he touched them so earnestly. And he saith, that the said bishop hath set forth a book in Latin, many years since, entituled ‘De Vera Obedientia,’ wherein the said bishop set forth the king’s supremacy, as he remembereth; and treateth against the usurped power of the bishop of Rome, and of obedience of the subjects to their prince, as supreme head, very earnestly, to this deponent’s remembrance. For this deponent hath seen and read the book, and in the same did read of the premises. And, examined whether he understandeth the Latin tongue, he saith, yea; and that once he was fellow of New College in Oxford, and hath the same book at this present in his study.
And this deponent saith, that the said bishop of Winchester hath had a very diligent and circumspect chancellor within his diocese, in executing such acts, statutes, proclamations, and injunctions, as have been commanded and set forth by the king, concerning religion in the church, to this deponent’s knowledge. For he saith, that when any such injunctions, statutes, and proclamations, have been sent from the king’s majesty’s visitors, my lord of Canterbury, or by the said bishop, the said chancellor hath diligently gone about the setting forth of them. For this deponent, in the behalf of one Bartholomew Dove, yeoman apparitor, hath received, at the chancellor’s hands, such injunctions and commandments; and with speed hath sent them forth by the apparitors to the deans rural, with money for expenses of the apparitors, for the due execution of the same; which said chancellor hath straitly commanded this deponent, to use expedition and diligence therein. And the premises, he saith, are notorious, manifest, and famous in the diocese of Winchester, to this deponent’s certain knowledge.
To the 8th article he answereth as before; and saith further, that he hath been present when certain priests have come to the said bishop’s chancellor, concerning innovation: and hath heard the said chancellor straitly charge them duly to receive the same, and to observe them without any omission. And so this deponent hath been commanded, by the said chancellor, to write to the deans rural, that they should not omit any thing set forth by the same proclamations and injunctions and commandments, of his perfect knowledge. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 9th article he saith and deposeth, that the bishop of Winchester’s chancellor, against such time as the king’s majesty’s visitors had appointed to come to the diocese of Winchester, did command this deponent, exercising the room of a yeoman apparitor, to attend upon the same visitors; insomuch as, he saith, that to the uttermost of his power he did his due diligence, as becometh. And was at Hampton, when the said visitors came thither; and forasmuch as he, with others, was named in the bishop’s proxy, he had prepared to make an oration for to receive them with: howbeit master Cooke, the chief registrar to the bishop, and one of his proctors were present, and did duly receive them to this deponent’s sight, and knowledge. And from the visitors’ sitting at Hampton, until they had gone throughout the whole diocese, and were come to Croydon (saving, as he saith, in the Isle of Wight, where this deponent was not), this deponent did attend upon them. And saith that in all places, and at all times in their said visitation within the said diocese, they were reverently received, and obediently; and all injunctions set forth by them, in their said visitation, were duly set forth, and observed, to this deponent’s knowledge, throughout the whole diocese. And saith, that at such time as the visitors departed out of the diocese, they desired this deponent to have them commended to the said bishop’s chancellor, with thanks for his gentle entertainment of them; and yielded thanks to this deponent for his pain and diligence, as he saith. And the premises, he saith, are famous and notorious. And he saith, that the said visitors, at their being at Croydon, gave this deponent forty shillings for his diligence and pains: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 15th he deposeth as before To the 1st article: and otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively: saving that he occupieth procuring in the consistory of Winchester: and exerciseth the room of yeoman apparitor in the diocese, under Bartholomew Dove.
To the 2d : he affecteth no otherwise, than justice and equity requireth.
To the 3d : he wisheth him to prevail, if justice be on his side; and not otherwise.
To the 4th he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose or answer. John Potinger.
WILLIAM BROWNE.
William Browne, servant to the bishop of Winchester, with whom he hath continued fourteen years, or thereabouts; of the age of 48, or thereabouts sworn and examined upon articles 1. 8. 9. and 15.
To the 1st he deposeth, that in the space of these fourteen years, this deponent hath heard the said bishop of Winchester make many sermons; and in divers of them he heard the said bishop entreat of the supremacy, and the abolishment of the bishop of Rome’s authority: and specially at one sermon, made by the bishop about fourteen years past at Winchester, in his house of Wolvesey, before king Henry the Eighth; in which said sermon he did entreat of the king’s supremacy, and against the authority of the bishop of Rome earnestly; and brought in this text, ‘Nemo potest duobus dominis servire:’ declaring that we could not take the bishop of Rome for our head, and the king’s majesty both; but we must take the king for our supreme head only: and that the authority usurped by the bishop of Rome, was right fully abolished out of this realm (or such like words in effect), in this deponent’s hearing. And further saith, that by all the space aforesaid, all statutes, acts, proclamations, and injunctions, as have been set forth by the king’s majesty, have been duly received, and with execution executed, within the diocese of Winchester. And the premises he knoweth, for that he traveled in the diocese for the receiving and collecting of the tenths due to the king. And saith, that the said bishop of Winchester, being here at his house of the Clink, and having received letters and commandments two days (and not before, as he remembereth) before Candlemas-day, that there should be no candles borne within his said diocese, he made such expedition in the executing of the said commandment, that on the said Candlemas-day, there were no candles borne in the town of Winchester, or four miles about; as this deponent heard reported at his coming to Winchester shortly after the said Candlemas-day. On what year the same was done, he now remembereth not. And this deponent saith, that he was present at the said bishop’s house, when the same commandment came, insomuch that the bishop immediately did cause this deponent, with speed, to write to the archdeacon for the execution of the same: and so this deponent did, and delivered it with his own hands to Dr. Baugh, archdeacon of Surrey. And also saith, that the said bishop did will and command this deponent, to send the original commandment to the chancellor, willing that he should see the same done accordingly; and so this deponent did: which chancellor, this deponent saith, hath been diligent and circumspect in executing those things that have been commanded and set forth by the king, to this deponent’s certain knowledge. And the said bishop, for his part, hath at all times done the same; for this deponent hath been, by the space aforesaid, his servant, and yet is, and knoweth the premises to be true; and saith, that the same are notorious, famous, and manifest, within the diocese of Winchester. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 8th he saith, that at the time of the king’s majesty’s visitation, holden in the diocese of Winchester, the said bishop of Winchester was in the Fleet; and yet, he saith, that the said bishop’s chancellor did send this deponent to the king’s majesty’s visitors, then being at Chichester, with letters, signifying unto them that their monition for the visitation was duly done, accordingly as they had appointed by their last monition: which said visitors wrote again to the chancellor with thanks, and desiring him that the certificate for the Isle of Wight might be sent to them at the day appointed for visitation there. And thereupon this said deponent was sent against the same day, by the said chancellor, with the same certificate; for which the visitors yielded thanks, and gave this deponent, for his pains, a reward. And this deponent saith, that from the said day of the visitation at the Isle of Wight, until the visitors had visited the diocese and came to Croydon, he was present with them. And saith, that of his certain knowledge, the said visitors were, as well of the chancellor, as all other the said bishop’s officers, and by his proctor of the diocese, duly received and reverently entertained, as becometh; and that all injunctions set forth by them, were, by the said chancellor and other officers, set forth and caused to be observed accordingly. And the premises this deponent saith, are notorious and manifest, within the diocese of Winchester, to this deponent’s certain knowledge; for he saith, that by reason that this deponent was collector, he did attend in the said visitation, for to receive certain arrears that were due to the king’s majesty for tenths. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 15th he saith, that after the said bishop’s coming out of the Fleet, the said bishop preached in the cathedral church of Winchester divers sermons, in the which he entreated much of obedience, saying, among other things or the like, unto this effect: that the life of a christian man is in suffering, which is properly, when one followeth the will of another; saying that Christ said, that he came to do the will of his Father, and so we must do God’s will, in obeying of superiors. And declared, that if the king should command his subject to go to the war, he ought and must go; and not ask why and wherefore, but to do as he was commanded. And brought in for obedience, the story of Abraham, who was commanded to sacrifice his only son Isaac; and went to do the same willingly, not asking how his seed should be increased, as God had promised. And this, with much other concerning obedience, this deponent hath heard the said bishop speak in his sermons, which, otherwise than before, he cannot now call to remembrance; and saith, that at the said sermons, or some of them, were master Seton, doctor Steward, Peter Langridge, with a great number of people. Upon the Interrogatories.- To the 1st he answereth, that he is the said bishop’s servant, having four pounds yearly wages, and his livery, as his gentleman hath; and his expenses, when he goeth about the gathering of the tenths; and otherwise negatively.
To the 2d : he beareth affection, as a true servant ought to his master.
To the 3d : he desireth that he might overcome in his right, in case he have not offended the king.
To the 4th he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. William Browne.
THOMAS CROWTE.
Thomas Crowte, servant to the bishop of Winchester, with whom he hath dwelt nine years come Shrovetide next; of the age of 41, or thereabout; examined upon articles 16. and 68. deposeth as followeth:
To the 16th he deposeth, that about the feast of Whitsuntide last past was two years, the said bishop, being diseased of a fistula, so that he could not ride without much pain, came from Winchester, where he was then abiding, and came to Kingston in a horse-litter; and from thence, in a boat, to his house at the Clink, to this deponent’s certain knowledge; and so went to the council. For this deponent was then of his chamber, and did daily attend upon him; and of his sight and knowledge saw and knew the premises by him deposed to be true, which things were and are, among the said bishop’s servants within the said bishop’s house, notorious and manifest.
To the 68th of the articles he deposeth, that on a certain time in the last summer (what day or time otherwise he cannot depose), this deponent — hearing a letter read by Dr. Seton, the said bishop’s chaplain, at the said bishop’s house at Farnham, where the said bishop’s household then remained, that the bishop should shortly be at liberty, and come out of the Tower — took horse about ten o’clock of the night from Farnham, and came riding with the bishop’s steward of house, and other of his household, to London, to prepare for the receiving of the said bishop; insomuch that they were coming to London by seven of the clock in the morning, for they rode all night. And deposeth, that about Wandsworth, in their said journey, they met with master Wells, and Renagar of Southampton, riding home; which master Wells demanded the cause of their journey, and they declared, that they went to prepare and make ready all things against the said bishop’s coming out of the Tower: the said Wells saying, ‘Indeed I think he shall be delivered within two days.’ And saith, that at their coming to London, this deponent, and the others that came, heard it openly noised in Southwark, that the said bishop should come forth within a day or two: whereupon this deponent, being my lord’s chamberlain, did prepare and make ready the said bishop’s chamber; and the other officers of the house did their parts, as pertained to their office; and every hour looked for the said bishop’s coming out of the Tower. And the premises he saith are true and notorious and manifest within Southwark, and the said bishop’s house. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth, that he is the said bishop’s servant, having fifty-three shillings and fourpence yearly wages, and livery; and hath given him, by the said bishop, the reversion of a lease of a mill, wherein yet are about eighteen years to come. And otherwise he denieth the interrogatory.
To the 2d : he hath affection to his master, knowing him for a true man to God and his prince, as a true servant ought to bear to his master; and no otherwise.
To the 3d : he desireth that he might obtain in his matter, if his cause be rightful; and none otherwise.
To the 4th he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. T. Crowte.
ROBERT MASSIE.
Robert Massie, servant to the bishop of Winton, with whom he hath been servant seventeen years, of 40 years of age; sworn and examined upon articles 13. and 16. of the aforesaid matter.
To the 13th article he deposeth, that the duke of Somerset wrote letters to the bishop of Winchester for the surrendering of the college of Trinity Hall in Cambridge, whereof the said bishop was master or provost, as this deponent heard reported; which the said bishop would not surrender, as this deponent, in likewise, heard said. And this deponent saith, that he being one of the lower house of parliament, was present in the parliament house at such time as there was a bill put into the said lower house for the putting down of the said house, or else for the annexing of the same (as he remembereth) to Clare Hall in Cambridge; which bill, being read according to the order of the house, was reverted; this deponent being then present, and one of the burgesses of the said house, as he saith. And otherwise he cannot tell.
To the 16th article he saith, that the said bishop, being deceased, received letters from the king’s council to come to court; and for that his disease was such, to this deponent’s certain sight, that he could not ride conveniently, he sent letters by this deponent to the duke of Somerset; which letters this deponent delivered to master Cecil, and offered to take an oath upon a book, of the said bishop’s disease. And, within a day or two after, this deponent had letters from the said duke to the said bishop of Winton, which said bishop, shortly after, upon those letters or others, came from Winchester to Kingston, in a horse-litter, to this deponent’s sight and knowledge; for he did attend upon him in his journey. And the premises, he saith, are true upon his oath. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he saith as before, and he hath six pounds six shillings and eightpence wages, and four pounds fee, and livery. And otherwise he negatively answereth.
To the 2d : he hath affection to him as a man hath to his master.
To the 3d : he wisheth of God upon his knees, that in truth he may overcome and not otherwise.
To the last he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. Robert Massie.
HUGH WESTON.
Hugh Weston, doctor of divinity, of the age of 34 and more; sworn and examined upon articles 34. 35. and 37. deposeth as followeth:
To the 34th and 35th articles: he cannot depose upon the letters specified in that article [the 34th], nor whether he received any such letters. Howbeit, he saith, that he was present at the said bishop’s sermon, made on the said St. Peter’s day, before the king’s majesty at Westminster, and heard the said bishop speak and treat of such things, or the like in effect, as hereafter follow.
First, concerning the bishop of Rome, upon this text that Peter said, ‘Tu es filius Dei vivi;’ that although Peter spake and made answer, yet he had no superiority above the other apostles: bringing in an example of a foreman of a quest; that, although the foreman speak, yet he is not the best man of the quest. And likewise the king’s schoolmaster, although he taught the king, he was not better than the king. And said, that the bishop of Rome did usurp, to build upon this place, ‘Tu es Petrus;’ for Christ had taken that place to build on before. Item, Concerning monasteries he had these words, or, the same in effect, that he did allow and like the suppressing of monasteries, religious houses, chantries, and such other, for their abuses; and made this objection thereto himself: ‘What wouldest thou say, bishop, if thou were in thy chamber alone. It might seem that diminishing of such a number of masses and prayers should diminish the honor, glory, and service of God.’ And thus he answered himself: ‘that the true service, and true honoring of God, stood not in multitude of things, but in well-doing of things;’ with much other matter. And touching the article of the bishop of Rome, he did refer him to his own writings abroad. Item, He said, moreover, in the said sermon, this or like in effect: that touching all things made by God, and made by man, this was the difference — that things commanded by God, for the abuse might not be taken away; but things made by man and abused, the abuse may be taken away, and the thing also, for the abuse. He spake more, and said of ceremonies, images, and holy-days, under this form; giving this for a general rule, that as long as they served us, they might be kept and observed: but when we serve them, they might be taken away. Item, He heard the same bishop speak of the sacrament of the altar to be received in both kinds, and did allow it, affirming whole Christ to be under both forms.
He allowed and liked all the king’s proclamations; and said, he did agree with the superiors, and misliked those men, that would do things before an order and proclamation; as namely the preachers, comparing them to posts, which had truth in their letters, and lies in their mouths; and also priests, that married before the law: and that he liked and allowed all the king’s doings. And the premises, or the like in effect, this deponent gathered in some of the said bishop’s sermons. And other things he (the said bishop) did preach and speak of, whereof he cannot now call to remembrance, unless he be interrogated of them by special articles. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 37th article: touching any letters sent from the duke of Somerset to the bishop of Winchester, he cannot depose. Howbeit, he saith, that there was no contention of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, and concerning the mass, to this deponent’s knowledge, among learned men within this realm, before the time the said bishop preached, until Peter Martyr began to preach it at Oxford; which was about Lent was twelvemonth, as he doth now remember. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d and 3d he answereth, that he wisheth, of charity, that the said bishop might try himself an obedient subject, and to his cause justice: and for affection, he beareth him no affection, but loveth him for his learning, virtue, and wit. And otherwise negatively.
To the 4th he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. Hugh Weston.
JOHN WHITE.
Master John White, warden of the college of Winchester, of the age of 40; sworn and examined upon the articles 1. 2. 3. 15. and 29. of the matter proposed by the bishop of Winchester, deposeth as followeth:
To the 1st article of the matter, from this clause, ‘And among other things, because the said bishop,’ etc., unto the end of the said article — and all the contents of this article, touching as well the bishop as his chancellor are true, to this deponent’s certain knowledge, saving the defense of the said bishop’s book at Louvain; which book the said bishop (as this deponent hath heard say of certain learned men being then with the bishop) did defend against the rector and certain divines of the university of Louvain; which book that he so defended (as it was said) was the book made by the bishop ‘De Vera Obedientia;’ and that book this deponent hath seen and read, which entreateth of the king’s supremacy, and the abolishment of the bishop of Rome’s authority. And saith, that all the premises, saving the defense of the said book, are notorious, manifest, and famous, within the diocese of Winchester, to this deponent’s certain hearing and knowledge. And, for further declaration, this deponent saith, that about twelve years ago, or thereabouts, as he doth remember, this deponent (then being schoolmaster of the college of Winton) did, by the commandment of the bishop of Winchester, make certain verses extolling the king’s supremacy, and against the usurped power of the bishop of Rome; which said verses this deponent caused his scholars to learn, and to practice them in making of verses to the like argument; the said bishop encouraging this deponent so to do. And further this deponent saith, that Dr. Steward, the said bishop’s chancellor, hath been diligent in setting forth of commandments and injunctions commanded by the king, to this deponent’s certain knowledge, as he before hath deposed; insomuch that the said Dr. Steward, having received on Candlemas eve last past was two or three years (whether he cannot certainly depose,) that no candles should be borne on Candlemas-day, made such expedition, that in the church of Cheyton, five miles distant from Winchester, whereof this deponent was and is parson, were no candles hallowed or borne, to his certain knowledge, on Candlemas-day. And, as this deponent hath heard credibly reported, the said commandment was so expeditely set forth, and so earnestly, by the said chancellor, that the commandment came to Hampton even as the priest was going to the hallowing of the candles, or was at the hallowing of them; that the priest ceased, and so the candles were left unhallowed, and left in the church. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 2d and 3d articles he saith, that the contents of those articles are true, for this deponent hath known this said bishop these twenty years, and he never heard, nor yet knew; but that the said bishop hath been always a just and true man of his promise, and so accepted and taken and reputed, as he is declared to be in this article, among honest men; and never in trouble until the time he was committed to the Fleet (as far forth as this deponent hath heard or known), and since that to the Tower.
To the 15th article he saith, that in one of the months in the year articulate, this deponent, attending upon the said bishop, was present at a sermon, made by the said bishop in the church at Winchester, wherein he did entreat of obedience to the higher powers, in the like words as in this article is comprised, and in more lively and effectual sort than is contained in this article; oftentimes inculcating the words of suffering; which was (as he remembereth), on Palm Sunday, entreating of the epistle of that day ‘Hoc sentite,’ etc.; at which sermon were a great number, whom, he doth not remember.
To the 29th article he saith, that about three or four days (as he doth now remember) next before the time that the said bishop was appointed to preach (which was on St. Peter’s day), this deponent was present with the bishop of Winchester in his study, at the Clink; where the said bishop did declare unto this deponent, that he was motioned to preach before the king’s majesty, and to declare his conscience upon certain articles, which (as he said) he would do; the specialty of which articles this deponent doth not now remember, save that to speak of the sacrament of the altar was one of the articles which he doth remember upon this occasion; the said bishop saying, that he had taken St. Peter’s day to preach: this deponent declaring unto him, he could never have taken a better day, for the epistle of that day would minister a good occasion to treat upon: and therewith rehearsed a piece of the epistle, the bishop saying that he would not take the epistle, but the gospel; for that it served better, to induce the matter of the sacrament of the altar, and the rest of the articles upon. In which communication, it appeared to this deponent, that the said bishop had received certain articles to treat upon, and that the sacrament was one; and that he intended fully and wholly to satisfy the commandment given him. And otherwise he cannot depose, for he was not at the sermon.
To the 37th article: that the presence of the body of Christ in the sacrament, and in the mass, was, at the time of the said bishop’s preaching, and, in all ages since the faith first came into this realm, amongst learned men hath ever been, a doctrine most true, certain, and undoubted, until one Wickliffe, within this realm, first called it in question; who, nevertheless, afterward reconciled himself in that article, as in an epistle written by him to John bishop of Lincoln appeareth; which epistle this deponent hath seen. And that ever since his time, that doctrine of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, hath been received, acknowledged, and agreed upon, by the whole clergy and temporalty learned of this realm, and by acts of parliament and synods established, and by the prelates and other learned men set forth in books and open sermons, until within two years since, or thereabout, one Peter Martyr, in Oxford, in his lectures (as this deponent hath heard say), called the thing again in question; whereupon ensued contention, and afterward disputation.
And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth and saith, that he hath been the said bishop’s chaplain these nine years, and is at this present his chaplain, and hath had promotion by him; videlicet, two benefices. And otherwise negatively.
To the 2d and 3d he answereth, that for that he hath known him, truly and honorably to have served in this realm, and to be a man of great learning, virtue, and wisdom; and that he hath so humbly behaved himself at the time of his examination, (as this respondent hath heard reported), he wisheth that he might obtain justice with favor. And otherwise negatively.
To the last he deposeth as before. And otherwise he cannot depose. John White.
JOHN YOUNG.
John Young, clerk, bachelor of divinity, one of the fellows of Trinity College, Cambridge; of the age of 35, or thereabouts; examined upon articles 34. 35. and 37. of the matter, deposeth as followeth:
To article 34. he saith, that he cannot depose of the contents of the papers delivered by master Cecil to the said bishop. Howbeit, he saith, that he was at the sermon made by the said bishop on St.
Peter’s day, in the which he heard the said bishop speak and declare these, or the like in effect: videlicet, he did allow and like the proclamation, which doth forbid to reason or preach of the sacrament in any other terms than the Scripture doth lead. Item, he heard the said bishop speak concerning the bishop of Rome, taking occasion on this place, ‘Tu es Petrus,’ etc.: and that the bishop of Rome could not, upon this place, take his authority; for that Christ had builded upon the same before. And bringing in upon that, this text of St. Paul to the Corinthians: ‘Nemo potest ponere aliud fundamentum,praeter id quod positum est.’ Then the bishop showed the cause why the bishop of Rome was had in estimation of princes, declaring that the bishops of Rome, at the beginning, were learned men and virtuous, and some of them martyrs; by reason whereof the world did esteem them for their said virtue and learning, and princes were glad to use their advice. Howbeit, like as a king doth use the counsel of the physician in his sickness, in wars the counsel and policy of a good captain; in building, of a good carpenter; in sailing, the advice of a good shipmaster, and in council, the advice and counsel of a wise man in the governance of the commonwealth, yet they are not esteemed and taken above the king — even so the bishop of Rome was not a superior over princes, although they used his counsel. And this and much other the said bishop spake of the bishop of Rome, learnedly and pithily, to this deponent’s judgment, which he cannot now call to his remembrance. And farther the said bishop, speaking of ceremonies generally, had these words, or the like in effect: that so long as the ceremonies were taken as servants to us, and not we servants to them, so long they were well used; and when we become their servants, then they were abused, and may be taken away. And said, that sacraments cannot be taken away, but the abuse reformed, as of baptism and other sacraments. And saith, that he spake of religious men, and that the king that dead is, did well in taking away their coats and houses, which they did abuse. But for their vows of chastity, and poverty, and obedience, (he said) the king did well in that he did not meddle withal. And many things he (the same bishop) spake of particularly, which he cannot depose; for he was so troubled with the throng, that he doth not remember otherwise than before is deposed.
To the 35th he deposeth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. To the 37th article he saith, that there was no contention or controversy of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, at the time the said bishop did preach within the university of Cambridge, among learned men, as far as this deponent heard or knew; but that it was taken then universally for a true catholic doctrine. And so it was taught and preached, after the said sermon, in Cambridge, of his certain knowledge. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1 st he answereth negatively.
To the 2d he answereth, he hath no affection, but as he ought to every christian bishop.
To the 3d : he prayeth God, that truth might take place; and no otherwise.
To the 4th he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. John Young.
GEORGE BULLOCKE.
George Bullocke, master of arts, and one of St. John’s College, Cambridge, of the age of 30; sworn and examined upon articles 34. 35. and 37., deposeth as followeth:
To the 34th and 35th articles he deposeth, that he was present at the sermon made by the bishop of Winton on St. Peter’s day (mentioned in the article) before the king’s majesty, in which said sermon, amongst other things, he heard the said bishop speak and declare these words or the like in effect: First, he spake concerning the bishop of Rome, and against his authority; videlicet, he wondered that the bishop of Rome should take this place ‘Tu es Petrus,’ etc., to build his foundation upon, seeing that Christ had taken it up for the church. Secondly, that the Rock was Christ, and Peter’s confession: not Peter himself; for that building would have failed, when Peter did fail. When Christ said ‘Vade post me, Satan;’ which is as much as to say, ‘Come after me, Satan.’ Thirdly, that Peter’s confession was the confession of all the apostles, and likewise Peter’s blessing, wherein he was blessed by Christ, the blessing of those apostles. Fourthly, that Peter was the chief of the apostles, as the foreman and chief of the quest. Fifthly, that it was generally spoken to all, ‘Pasce oves meas;’ which is to say, ‘Feed my sheep.’ Sixthly, that the Greek church did never receive the bishop of Rome as their head universally. Seventhly, that the said bishop made a certain induction, whereby he declared the bishop of Rome to have come by such dignity for his singular excellency, virtue, and learning: yet not prejudicial to the royal dignity, no otherwise than the king should, in his disease, use the judgment of his physician; in war, the advice of a chief captain; and, in building of his house, the cunning of a carpenter. Finally, he referred himself to his books made, which he had written against his usurped authority. Item, as concerning monasteries he spake as followeth in effect: he said, we had monks, friars, and other such, with all their ceremonies of vesture, meat and drink, and solitary living; which, because they did regard the outward creatures more than the inward religion, were justly taken away. And, also, the suppressing of religious houses to be no prejudice to the mass, which standeth not in number, but in ‘true knowledge and devotion.’ Item, he spake of images and said that they might remain, if they were well used; or otherwise be taken away: even as a child [that] had a golden book given him: if he gazed, and set more by the gold and outward part, than that within, that it should be taken away, and a worse given him. Item, he spake of holy-days generally, by these words in effect: that the observing of days and hours setteth an order in the church, and putteth a man in remembrance of his duty and office; as the clock when it striketh putteth a man in remembrance of his office and duty to be done in time. — Item, he spake of chantries, and wished them to be converted to a better use. Item, he spake of mass, as of mass of ‘Scala Coeli,’ ‘mass satisfactory,’ and ‘mass in number,’ disallowing them, with all other; that it is not approved nor grounded by God’s word. And that the act concerning chantries was not prejudicial to the chantry priests, but that they might minister still. Item, he spake of palms after this sort in effect: that they might remain, if they were well used, or else to be clearly taken away. Item, concerning the receiving of the sacraments in both kinds; he declared his opinion in that behalf by his obedience, in that he himself ministered, and wished in all men, in other things, the like obedience. And, also, he did allege the constitution provincial of Peckham, concerning the receiving in both kinds; and, also, he referred himself to his writings in that behalf. Item, he commended a proclamation set forth, that men should speak reverently of the sacrament, and use no railing in villanous terms of the same. Item, as concerning ceremonies, he said, he was called the master of ceremonies; and said, that he never took therein otherwise than as St. Austin and Jerome, did take therein; that is to say, to be external creatures to move the minds to the Creator inwardly. Also, that the church could not be without all ceremonies, but that the observing of certain ceremonies, was the ordering of the church; and whosoever did obey ceremonies commanded by the magistrates, did please God in respect of obedience. Also he said, there were two manner of ways to reform ceremonies: the one to teach the true use thereof, if they could be well used; the other, that they should be clean abolished, if they could not be well used.
Nevertheless certain there be, which, for the abuse, could not be taken away, as the abuse of baptism and preaching, whereas they be baptized above the dead, as St. Paul saith. Item, he liked all the king’s proceedings, and his injunctions and proclamations; and that he found no fault in the head, but in the inferior members; as touching which, he particularly misliked three things: one was, that he misliked certain preachers, which would preach other things than they had in their commission; likening them to posts which (he said) had truth in their bag, and lies in their mouths. Item, he misliked the marriages of priests avowing chastity, for he had read of married men made priests, but he never read priests to be married. Thirdly, he misliked certain subjects, that would take upon them to rule like kings, to the diminishing of the king’s dignity, and confusion of their own estate. And as concerning the same, he brought in a certain Greek verse of Homer, 136 the effect of which in Latin is this: ‘Plures nam regnare malum: Rex unicus esto.’
All which the premises by this deponent declared, or like words in effect, this deponent heard the said bishop speak and declare in his sermon, and those like notes; and otherwise he cannot depose; for he said, that the throng was such that he noted no other things than he predeposed.
To the 37th he deposeth, that, to his knowledge, there was no controversy, nor yet contention openly spoken or preached against the presence of Christ’s body in the sacrament, of learned men, at the time the said bishop preached within the university of Cambridge, to this deponent’s knowledge or hearing. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st , he answereth negatively.
To the 2d : he hath no other affection to him, than to any other christian man, but in the way of truth and honesty.
To the 3d he answereth, that he would have him obtain as he hath deserved and done; and to have justice with mercy.
To the last he deposeth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. By me, George Bullocke.
JOHN NORTON.
John Norton esquire, of Stydestid, in the county of Southampton; of the age of 53 years; sworn and examined upon the 1st, 2d, and 3d articles.
To the 1st he deposeth, that he hath heard the said bishop of Winton many times and often, in his sermons, set forth the supremacy of the king that dead is, and his posterity, in speaking against the bishop of Rome’s authority, and preaching much of obedience. And saith, that all such statutes, injunctions, and proclamations, as have been set forth by the king’s authority, touching matters of religion, have been duly received and executed by the said bishop, or his chancellor, Dr. Steward; which said chancellor hath been, so long as he hath known him, a very diligent and circumspect man, doing and setting forth of such statutes, proclamations, and injunctions, as have been set forth; and he hath not heard the contrary. And the premises are true and notorious, he saith, within the diocese of Winton. And saith moreover, that this deponent and master Woltes, being appointed by commission to receive certain musters, in the second year of the king’s majesty’s reign that now is (at which said musters John Philpot and Thomas Cooke of Winton, gentlemen, should appear, and did not: whereupon this deponent, and the said master Woltes went to the said bishop of Winton then being at Wolvesey, near Winchester, desiring his advice and aid, touching the king’s service on that behalf. Whereupon the said bishop did send for the said Philpot and Cooke, at whom, he said, he much marvelled that they were disobedient; and exhorted them to be obedient, as becometh subjects to be: the said Philpot replying, and saying hastily to the said bishop, that he had preached too much obedience in that he preached; asking, ‘if a christian man were under the Turk, he ought to obey, and follow his will and laws.’ The said bishop denying, that he preached so, Philpot said, that one Lambert would testify the same. Which Lambert, being sent for, said, that he heard not the said bishop say after that sort that Philpot did report, but said how that the bishop said, in case a christian man were underneath a Turk, he must either obey such laws as he set forth, or suffer his power to punish: the said bishop saying ‘Yea, marry, even so said I.’ At which time were present master Woltes, this deponent, master White (warden), and others, as master Warnham, esquire, and others. And this deponent heard say, that the said bishop had made a book of the king’s supremacy, and of the usurped authority of the bishop of Rome, which book the said bishop did defend in the university of Louvain, as he hath reported; and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 2d he saith, that the same article is true; as far as this deponent ever heard or knew.
To the 3d he saith likewise, that the contents of this article are true, to his knowledge; and he never knew or heard he was in trouble or business for his behavior, until his committing to the Fleet and Tower, as he saith; but always was taken for a man true and just of promise, and so hath commonly been reputed and taken within the diocese, as he saith. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively, saving that he hath twenty shillings yearly in the name of a reward, without any patent.
To the 2d and 3d : he beareth no affection, but that he would that justice should take place, and that he should have justice according to his deserts.
To the last he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. By me, John Norton.
FRANCIS ALLEN.
Francis Allen, secretary to the bishop of Winchester, with whom he hath continued in service these eight years; of the age of 32 and upward; sworn and examined upon certain articles of the matter laid in by the bishop of Winchester, deposeth to articles 7. 8. 11. 12. 36. 37. 45. and 48. as followeth:
To the 7th article he saith, that the contents of the same article are true; for this deponent., by commandment of the said bishop, did write the same letter.
To the 8th this deponent saith, that notwithstanding the same letters, the which this deponent, by commandment of the said bishop, did write to the duke of Somerset, the archbishop of Canterbury, and, in the absence of the said duke, to the whole privy council, for the staying of innovations (the minutes of which letters by the bishop’s own hand were exhibited, as this deponent saith, this present day, on the behalf of the said bishop, by master Somerset his proctor, in the presence of this deponent) wherein the said bishop could do no good, yet he showed himself conformable when the king’s injunction came down for putting down of images, and such like; and caused the same to be duly done and executed within his diocese, without omission of any part of them, to this deponent’s knowledge.
To the 11th and 12th he saith, that the articles are true, to this deponent’s certain knowledge; and as touching the thanks given by the said duke to the said bishop, this deponent speaketh of report of the said bishop; and otherwise he cannot depose. And this deponent did write the answer to the articles of justification made by the said bishop, and did carry the same answers to master Smith, which said answers, the said bishop did subscribe. And hereupon the said bishop departed to Winchester discharged of all travail and business, as this deponent took it.
To the 36th article he saith, that after the said bishop’s coming out of Hampshire to London, and before his committing to the Tower, he was two times at the court only, and no more; at which both times this deponent did attend upon him. The first time that he went to the court was immediately after his coming out of Hampshire in a horse-litter; at which said time this deponent, and divers other of his servants, did wait upon him. And this deponent did see the said bishop enter into the council-chamber at Westminster, in which said chamber the said bishop tarried a certain space, and came out again, and tarried in the outer chamber a space, and then was called in again to the council-chamber. And after his being there, he departed to his house; and by the way, this deponent heard the said bishop say, that it was objected unto him, that he shoud carry palms, and creep to the cross, in the church of Winchester; which this deponent and others knew to be untrue.
The other time that the said bishop went to the court, after that, was about a sevennight, or more (as he remembereth), before his sermon; at which said time this deponent attended upon him thither. And declareth, that he landed at the Privy Stairs, and was conveyed to the duke of Somerset’s chamber, to this deponent’s sight; and this deponent and his fellows waited for the said bishop’s coming, at the said duke’s chamber-door, until dinner time, and saw him not come forth. And, after dinner, this deponent, inquiring for his said master, it was showed him, that he was in the lord great master’s chamber then being (now lord treasurer), where this deponent found him walking up and down alone, musing; and as soon as this deponent perceived him there, he waited for his coming forth in the outer chamber. And he afterwards heard reported, that the said bishop was conveyed by master Smith to the duke of Somerset’s chamber again, from whence he came and took his barge at the Privy Stairs, and so was conveyed home. And, in the way home, asked when St. Peter’s day was; and when it was showed him, he said, ‘a good day.’ And afterward this deponent heard the said bishop say divers times, that at his last being at the court, he saw no other of the council but only the duke of Somerset, the lord great master, and sir Thomas Smith, then secretary. And other time or times more than the times before specified, the same bishop, between the said bishop’s coming from Hampshire, as before, unto his committing to the Tower (saving the time he preached before the king), came not to the court, to this deponent’s knowledge; for, if he had, he saith, that he should have attended upon him, and should have known of it, for that he was always attendant upon the said bishop, as he saith.
To the 38th article, he saith, that on the same day that the said bishop did preach after his coming to his house, he did dine quietly, and took himself to be out of all travail. For this deponent heard the said bishop declare, after his coming home, that he trusted he had so satisfied the thing that was commanded him, that no man should have cause to be offended. And he saith, that on the morrow after, he dined quietly, and had strangers to accompany him at his dinner, and was merry; looking for no trouble. And saith, that after dinner, on the same day, this deponent, seeing sir Ralph Sadler and master Wingfield with a company of the guard arrived at his place, declared the same to the said bishop; to whom, he said, ‘They are welcome;’ saying, ‘Give me my book:’ and therewith put the Bible in his bosom, and went to them. And he saith, that the said bishop, seeing his servants (when he came through the hall) lament and bewail, he said unto them cheerfully, ‘Lament not for me, for I am a true man to my prince; and there is no cause, why ye should so lament. I shall do well enough.’
To the 40th he saith, that the contents of this article are true, for this deponent did both make and write divers supplications himself, as well to the duke of Somerset, as to the lord chancellor; and also a bill made, to put up to the parliament house, for the relief of his master and his household, the copies of which this deponent will be alway ready to exhibit. And saith, that notwithstanding the continual suit that was made by this deponent and his fellows, that their master might come forth of prison, and be heard according to justice, their suit took no effect, as he saith.
To the 68th : he deposeth the contents of the same article to be true, and that the bruit was through the city, as is contained in the same, to this deponent’s hearing. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st as before, having wages four pounds a year, four pounds fourteen shillings and fourpence annuity, and the registrar-ship of Winchester in reversion.
To the 2d : he beareth affection, as a servant beareth to his master, in the way of right and justice.
To the 3d : he desireth that justice shall take place as a true subject to his prince; and no otherwise. Francis Allen.
PHILIP PARIS.
Philip Paris esquire, of Linton, in the county of Cambridge; of the age of 59, or thereabout; sworn and examined upon articles 1. 2. and 3. of the aforesaid matter.
To the 1st he deposeth, that from the time that the said bishop of Winchester was made bishop until these ten years past, he was servant to the said bishop; and saith, that by all the same space this deponent hath heard the said bishop preach divers and many sermons, in the which he hath heard the said bishop entreat of the abolishment of the bishop of Rome’s authority, and of the king’s supremacy; and that, earnestly, to this deponent’s hearing. And also divers times since, he heard divers sermons made by the bishop of Winchester, in which he hath entreated also of the same matters, whereof some he hath made at St. Mary Overy’s, and some at Winchester. And saith, that all such articles and statutes as have been set forth by the king’s authority, for the time that this deponent was the said bishop’s servant, have been set forth on behalf of the said bishop by his chancellor, and other officers; and he never heard the contrary. And saith, that Dr. Steward, who hath been his chancellor from the time he was bishop, or soon upon, hath been, for the time aforesaid, very diligent and circumspect in his office. And the premises, he saith, are notorious, public, and famous. And deposeth further, that the said bishop of Winton made a book for the king’s supremacy, and the abolishment of the authority of the bishop of Rome; which book the said bishop exhorted this deponent to look upon; and so he did, and did read it: the contents of which book did fully satisfy this deponent’s mind in that behalf, as he saith. And further saith, that he (this deponent) was with the said bishop at Paris, at a time that he was the king’s ambassador, with whom Jermyn was also attendant upon the said bishop; which Jermyn, for that the bruit was in the town, that cardinal Pole should come to the town, to speak with the king, went to see the same cardinal. Which thing the bishop of Winchester hearing, was displeased, and was like to put the said Jermyn out of his service: howbeit the said cardinal came not; and therefore the bishop was the sooner pacified. But, if he had seen him, this deponent thinketh verily, that he would have put him out of his service. And the premises, he saith, are true upon his oath.
And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 2d he saith, that the said bishop hath been in the king’s affairs both beyond, and on this side of the sea; and hath had many and sundry commandments by him to be executed, to this deponent’s knowledge, which he hath so duly executed and done, as no fault was objected unto him or proved, as this deponent knew or heard; nevertheless he hath been sought to the uttermost, as this deponent saith. And he saith that the said bishop hath been, to this deponent’s conscience, always a true, painful, and diligent subject and servant to his prince in things committed to him; and so this deponent thinketh that he hath been accepted and taken among honest men, not being his adversaries. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 3d he deposeth, that the said bishop hath been always, and is commonly taken and reputed for, a man just of promise; and, he saith of his knowledge, that if he promiseth a little, he will perform that with more. And saith, that he never heard or knew, by all the space that this deponent was his servant (of his certain knowledge), that ever he was called in any suit, before any judge, spiritual or temporal; nor would have men in suit. And he never heard the contrary, from that he was in trouble, until his committing unto the Fleet and Tower. And moreover he saith, that in the time that this deponent was his servant, he would not suffer this deponent to take action against any of the bishop’s tenants, or any other that had done wrong or injury [to him] or to this deponent; being farmer to the said bishop. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth, that this deponent’s son had certain leases of the bishop of Winchester, wherein this deponent is jointly joined with him.
To the 2d he saith, in all truth he loveth the said bishop; and not otherwise.
To the 3d : he desireth that if he be in the right, he may obtain; and not otherwise.
To the last he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot depose. Philip Paris.
CHRISTOPHER MALTON.
Christopher Malton, master of arts, and one of Baliol College in Oxford; of the age of 33 years; sworn and examined upon articles 34. 35. and 37. of the first matter; saith as followeth:
To the 34th and 35th ; he cannot depose of the contents of the papers, but saith, that he was at the sermon made by the bishop of Winton, on St. Peter’s day, before the king; in which said sermon this deponent heard the said bishop speak and declare such things as hereafter follow, or the like words in effect: videlicet, first, concerning the authority of the bishop of Rome, when he came to these words ‘Super hanc petram,’ etc., he said, that if they took that place or sentence to make for the bishop of Rome’s supremacy, they did err, as doth plainly appear by all ancient writers upon the same text, and, for the most part, of all the new writers. And, proceeding further in that matter, afterwards said, that the bishop of Rome could challenge no authority over foreign princes out of his own diocese, by God’s word, and only upon their permission; as princes, in times past, when they saw the living of the bishops of Rome godly, they were contented to he ruled by them in matters of religion, not as being superior to their princes, but as men, as they thought, necessary for that purpose: like as the king, having a captain in war, a physician, or schoolmaster, although he be ruled by them in matters pertaining to their office, he is not subject to them; but, at his pleasure, may change and alter them, as he seeth cause convenient. Item, further he heard the said bishop speak of the receiving of the sacrament in both kinds, saying that it was a laudable thing; alleging that this was not the first time of alteration in that matter, as may appear by a constitution provincial of Peckham, made about two hundred years ago. Item, he spake of the king’s proclamation made against the unreverent speaking of the sacrament, and said he liked it well, and wished that the king’s majesty, and his council, would see it more effectuously observed. And thereupon he did reprove certain disobedient persons, which, notwithstanding the said proclamation, unreverently did use the same; comparing them to posts, which carried truth in their bosoms, and lies in their mouths. Item, the said bishop spake of ceremonies and ordinances, and made this distinction: that there were some ordained by God, as baptism, the sacrament of the altar, and the preaching of God’s word; which things could not be taken away, but the abuses therein reformed, the thing remaining still. Other ordinances there were, ordained by men, which either might be clearly taken away, as abbeys, colleges, and chantries, and such other things, as it pleaseth the higher powers, or else to be reformed and brought to their right use. And there he reproved such as did think the praying better for the time, place, or the number sake; affirming that he that so doth, doth mere superstition. Item, of images he spake and said, that he was never of that opinion concerning images, that he thought it either necessary to have them, or leave them. Item, the said bishop said, that he did like all things that were set forth by the king and his council; and did mislike things done by the inferior sort, whose part is to obey, and not to make laws or statutes: all which premises this deponent did hear the bishop speak and declare in his said sermon. Over and besides that, he heard him speak of the marriages of priests, which was, he said, a matter that he had diligently waded ancient authors, both Greek and Latin, for; and he read of married to be priests, but not of priests married.
And otherwise he cannot depose to the contents of the said articles.
To the 37th article he saith, that the opinion against the presence of the body of Christ to be in the sacrament, was not, in our time, openly taught by reading or preaching in Oxford, until February last past was a twelvemonth, as far as he hath known or heard.
And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth negatively, for he never knew the bishop before the day he preached, and never saw him since, till Monday last.
To the 2d he answereth, that he beareth no affection.
To the 3d he answereth, that he wisheth, if he be in right, he may overcome in this cause; and not otherwise.
To the last he answereth as before; and otherwise he cannot tell. By me, Christopher Malton.
JAMES BASSET.
James Basset, gentleman, servant to the bishop of Winchester, with whom he hath continued twelve years; of the age of 24 years, or thereabouts; sworn and examined upon articles 10. 11. 12. 14. 16. 33. 34. 35. 36. 38. 45. and 68. of the aforesaid matter.
To the 10th he saith, that the articles are true; for he saith, that about a fortnight or thereabouts, next before the bishop of Winchester’s coming out of the Fleet, this deponent was attendant upon the said bishop in the Fleet. In the which time or space, a parliament was holden; in which said parliament there was a general pardon granted, in the which the prisoners of the Fleet were not excepted out of the pardon. And, on the morrow after the twelfth day, in the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign, the said bishop, being sent for, went to Hampton-court, where the king then lay, upon whom this deponent did attend: and there the said bishop was discharged by the king’s majesty’s council, by virtue of the pardon, as the said bishop showed this deponent, and others attendant upon him.
To the 11th and 12th articles he saith, that the contents of these articles be true; for this deponent did attend continually upon the said bishop, from the time of his delivery out of the Fleet (as he hath before deposed), unto such time as he went to Hampshire; upon whom he attended thither. And saith, that the Thursday se’nnight, or thereabout, after his delivery out of the Fleet, the said bishop, being at the duke of Somerset’s house, was commanded to keep his own house as a prisoner. For this deponent attended upon the said bishop when he came from the said duke’s house; and, as soon as the said bishop was come home to his house, he gave commandment that no stranger should come or repair unto him, to this deponent’s hearing: and there declared, that he was so commanded, unto this deponent and other of his servants. In the which time of keeping of his house, the bishop of London that now is, sir Thomas Smith, and master Cecil, at several times did resort and repair unto the said bishop of Winton, for the subscribing of certain articles, concerning the doctrine of justification, to this deponent’s knowledge; which said articles this deponent, being of the said bishop’s chamber, saw and read. And saith, that after their often resorting unto the said bishop, finally the said bishop gave his resolute answer unto the said articles, unto master Cecil, as he now remembereth: with which his said resolution, the duke of Somerset and the council were contented, and gave thanks to the said bishop, as this deponent heard say. And so, being discharged, he went down immediately after into Hampshire: which things, of the commandment in keeping of his house, and his delivery, and the matter wherefore, were and are notorious, manifest, public, and famous.
To the 14th he saith, that on St. Matthew’s day in February, in the second year of the king’s reign, the said bishop lying at Farnham, hearing the people there to be inquieted, and to grudge at certain alterations made in the king’s visitation — for the quieting of the people, and their better satisfaction in that behalf, on the said day made a sermon, entreating of this theme: ‘Gratias tibi ago Patri,’ etc., and when he came to this point, ‘revelasti ea parvulis,’ he made a distinction between ‘parvuli malitia,’ and ‘parvuli sensibus,’ and said that we ought to be ‘parvuli malitia,’ ‘ young in malice, and evil deeds;’ and he prosecuted the same part at length.
But we ought not to be ‘parvuli sensibus;’ but we must study, and exercise ourselves in knowledge: but yet, for all that, we must be humble and meek, and not proud and arrogant. And brought in this text, ‘nisi efficiamini sicut parvuli,’ etc. And therefore, he said, like as young children learn at their fathers’ and schoolmasters’ hands, without any repugnance or contradiction; and believe that best, that they teach them: so we should submit our judgment unto the rulers, and believe that to be best that they command, without any contradiction or murmur, saying, This were best, or, That were best, or, It was better before: but believe that best, which other rulers, and higher powers command, and follow that. And so he made a long process thereupon, concerning alterations lately made, declaring how the alter ation of ceremonies, and such like, were and be in the power of the rulers, to alter and reform at their pleasure; and that we ought to think that best that they do. And the premises, with much other matter concerning obedience, this deponent heard the said bishop declare in his said sermon. And also saith, that he heard the said bishop preach at Winchester divers sermons, and in them, at divers times, did exhort the people to obedience, and to conform their wills, in the exercise and ceremonies of religion, to the superior order.
To the 16th he saith, that the contents of the article are true; for this deponent was of this chamber, and knew his sending for, and his disease; and did attend upon him at his coming up in a horselitter.
To the 33d he saith, that from the Thursday after dinner (which was St. Peter’s eve) until the Friday, after he preached (which was on St. Peter’s day), the said bishop took no refreshing, to this deponent’s certain knowledge. For this deponent was one of the said bishop’s servants, and in his chamber did attend upon him all the said space, and should have known of it if he had taken any refreshing. And saith further, that upon the said Thursday, about two or three of the clock, at which time, or thereabout, the said bishop received a letter from the duke of Somerset, this deponent saw the said bishop much unquieted, perplexed and troubled: and as this deponent thought concerning the said letter. And the most part of all that night the said bishop walked in a chamber, musing and devising of his sermon, speaking and preaching aloud thereof: insomuch that this deponent never saw him in the like trouble before. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 34th and 35th articles he saith, that he saw those papers which were delivered by master Cecil; and he was at the said bishop’s sermon the day articulate, in which said sermon he heard the said bishop entreat vehemently, and learnedly (in his opinion) against the bishop of Rome’s authority, and took the Scriptures clean away, that they made nothing for him: both ‘Super hanc petram, aedificabo eeclesiam meam (for Christ took that lace to build his church upon), and likewise ‘pasce oves meas;’ (for that was as well spoken to the rest of the apostles as to him). And likewise for that Peter was called ‘princeps apostolorum,’ he was no other, but as the foreman of the quest was called the head man, and yet hath no more authority than one of the rest: and, peradventure, some other of the inquest was better than he. And as touching the estimation of the bishops of Rome, it came, first, through the excellency of knowledge and virtue, which was thought and accounted to be in them at the beginning: and yet, for all that, he had no further authority upon princes, than a counsellor, a captain of war, or a physician, or any other, whom it pleased the prince to use. And this part be deduced and proved by sundry ensamples and similitudes. Item, the said bishops spake of masses of ‘Scala coeli,’ masses satisfactory, masses in number; and said, that for the abuse of them, they were well taken away. And as for chantry obits, he liked the foundation: that was, to praying for the dead. Yet, if the rulers thought it engendered a dissolute living amongst the people, persuading themselves falsely, that although they lived never so loosely all the days of their lives, yet afterward they might buy heaven with money, he said, that was an absurdity, if any so thought. And therefore, if the rulers thought meet to transfer the use of chantries, to avoid inconvenience therein, he said he must refer him to the policy of the realm, and that it might very well be so done. Item, this deponent heard the said bishop speak of the just taking away of monasteries, monkery, nunnery, and friary; and that for the abuse of their religion — forgetting the principal cause of their institution, and thinking their chief religion to consist in observing of days, times, hours, place, number, and apparel; and thinking him to be a good monk that observed these, they were justly suppressed, and taken away. Item, he entreated of ceremonies, noting them, how he hath been counted the master of ceremonies, and yet never had other opinion of them than he hath at this present, which he learned of St.
Austin, and others: that is, that as long as they served us for the exercise of religion, they might be well retained, and kept: and, being abused, they might be reformed in the use, or else in taking them clean away, at the rulers’ pleasure. And named many of them as images, pilgrimages, palms, with divers others As for the sacraments, and such things as God commandeth, being abused, there is but one way to reform them; that is, to teach and preach the right use of them: as the water of baptism, and such like. Item, he spake of the communion under both kinds, allowing the same to be received. Item, he commanded likewise a proclamation, that no man should speak of the sacrament but with such words as Scripture doth trade and bear, and no other. Item, he said, that he liked the king’s proceedings, and found no fault in them. And thereupon, he told what he misliked, misliking certain things in the inferior sort: as the marriages of priests; and certain preachers, which he likened to posts, who carried truth in their letters, and lies in their mouths. For in their letters carrying truth, being commanded to preach according to the king’s laws, statutes, proclamations, and injunctions, which were truth, they did preach clean contrary, and made the pulpit a place of disobedience. And further, he misliketh certain of the inferiors, which were forerunners, taking upon them the office of the king, setting forth their own will. And then said, that he would have but one king, and one order of the commonwealth; bringing in a Greek verse for that purpose: and pointed to the king, saying, he was only to be honored and obeyed; with other effectual words, tending to that purpose. Finally, he concluded that all the faults he found, were in the inferior parties, and found none in the superiors; and said, he opened himself thoroughly and plainly; praying them that they would not slander themselves in him, but take him as he was.
And this deponent saith, that in his conscience the said bishop preached the doctrine of all these articles contained in the papers, and spake the effect of them all. All which premises, by this deponent deposed, are true: not binding himself to the prescribed words of the said bishop in his said sermon, nor yet to his order; but only briefly deposeth the effect.
To the 36th article he deposeth and saith, that after the said bishop’s coming to London, when he came so in a horse-litter being sent for the morrow after immediately after dinner, he went to the court; for this deponent did attend upon him. And coming to the great chamber on the queen’s side, (commonly called the queen’s great chamber), where the lord archbishop of Canterbury, the lord treasurer, then great master, with others there were newly risen from dinner, the said bishop entered into the said chamber; and doing his duty to them, the lords above named took him by the hand, and welcomed him into the court very gently. And after they had communed together a space, they went to the council-chamber, which was the queen’s great closet: and took the said bishop with them; and then, after they had remained awhile together, the archbishop and the said lord treasurer, with the rest of the council that were there, came out of the said chamber, to the duke of Somerset’s chamber, then protector, leaving the bishop above in the council-chamber.
And after, the said bishop being advertised from the lord treasurer, by one of his men, that it were best for him, to come out, and tarry for the duke in the great chamber, he so did. And when the duke, with a great number of the council with him, passed through the said chamber into the council aforesaid, the duke, as he passed, took the bishop by the hand very gently; and after, there being, in the council-chamber, did send for the said bishop to them: whence, after he had been there by the space of one hour, or thereabouts, he came out. And then, within a while, being sent for in again — divers of his servants, by reason of a rumor that was spread abroad, fearing very much that he should have been committed to some prison — at length the bishop came out, and so came home to his house; and after, told certain of his servants, that he had thoroughly discharged himself of all matters that were laid against him, and had contented the council, and that he was clearly out of that trouble; save only, that he might not go down again into the country. And from that time, unto the time he preached, he never went out of his house to the court, but only at one other time, when he went likewise to the court, which was the Monday sevennight before he preached: and that time landed at the Privy Stairs, and passed through the low gallery, up into my lord of Somerset’s chamber: for this deponent brought him to the very stair head, and saw him go in. And this deponent, and the rest of his servants, gave their attendance beneath for him. And forasmuch as there had been divers rumors spread of the said bishop, that he should go to the Tower, or some other prison, it feared his said servants very much. And to increase the suspicion withal, lay at the Privy Stairs a close barge, they denying it was for him. And lest that he should have been conveyed secretly into some place or other, they were the more curious to sparkle and divide themselves abroad in the court, to hearken and see what should become of the said bishop. And this deponent, being much of the time in the great chamber, before the council-chamber, where the council sat, so learned and knew, that he came before them at that time; and, a little before dinner, learned of my lord treasurer’s men that he was in my lord treasurer’s chamber, where Francis Allen (servant) went to attend upon him. And, at length, word came to the said bishop’s servants, that they should depart home to the said bishop’s house, and return again after dinner. But divers of them, for the fear aforesaid, would not go home, but tarry there to see what should become of their said master: whereof this deponent was one, that attended and tarried.
And after dinner, this deponent being in the queen’s great chamber aforesaid, at length he saw the emperor’s ambassador, who was brought into the duke of Somerset’s chamber that way, whereof this deponent was very glad; verily supposing, that the bishop had been sent for, for no displeasure; but only to join with the ambassador about such matters as the said bishop had been put in trust [with], in the king’s days that dead is: and this deponent remained still in the said chamber, till the emperor’s ambassador departed again, and likewise divers of the council to their chambers: so that there was no more sitting in the council-chamber aforesaid.
Whereupon this deponent, thinking his abode there should be frustrate, he went down from the said chamber to the low gallery, by the water-side aforesaid, where a great number of his company were attending for their master, looking for his coming down there, where he went up. And at length, at about four or five of the clock, or thereabout, there came out of the duke of Somerset’s chamber, the lord treasurer that now is, the said bishop, and master Smith, then secretary: and the lord treasurer, before all the company there, departed from the bishop, and bade him ‘good night’ very familiarly and gently; master Smith bringing the said bishop to the Privy Stairs, where his barge lay, and there departed from the bishop very gently also. So the said bishop going homeward in his barge being there, it was spoken merrily by one of the bishop’s servants unto the said bishop, that when they brought him to the court, they were very sorry, fearing that they should not have him home again: but, when they had him homeward, then were they glad. Showing further, how much they were afraid that day, lest they should have lost him, because he was conveyed into chambers, and none of his men knew where he was become. And then this deponent said openly, before all the company, that he was also afraid, until it was after dinner: but, when he saw the emperor’s ambassador come into the court, he was then out of fear; thinking then that the said bishop was sent for to speak with him.
And because he would know whether the said bishop had spoken with him or no, he said unto the bishop, that many in the court thought, also, that he was sent for only for that purpose: and then and there thought it so much more likely, because the bishop went into the duke’s chamber, that privy way; and the emperor’s ambassador went into the duke’s chamber the open way, by the queen’s lodging. Whereunto the bishop replied, and said, He saw him not, nor any of the council either, but the duke, the lord treasurer and master Smith: which sayings of the said bishop, all his servants there then heard. And as he was almost at home, he asked when should be St. Peter’s day. It was said, The Friday sevennight after. And then the bishop said, That was a good day: whereupon this deponent, and other of his servants gathered, that he should preach. And that night this deponent learned, that it was so determined; and knoweth very well, that if there had been, before that time, any full resolution and determination, that the said bishop should have preached, this deponent should have known of it: for he was ever about the said bishop, and one of the chiefest about him, and one that knew the most part of things that were done.
To the 38th he saith, the contents of the same are true; for this deponent heard the said bishop so declare to divers of his servants: and was never more merry, than he was at dinner that day, on which he was committed to the Tower. And if he had been in any fear, he would have ordered his things; which, this deponent knew, he did not.
To the 45th he saith, that the contents of the article are true; for the most part of the bishop’s servants (whereof this deponent was one) made continual suit unto the duke of Somerset, then protector, and the rest of the council, for their master, that he might be heard, and have justice: and for the most part had fair words and promises, with commendation, for their part, that they had done their duty, and showed themselves like honest servants. And because they would be continual suitors, they divided themselves, and sued, some one day, and some another day, because they would be continual suitors; and one to one, and some to the other of the council. And because they saw that, notwithstanding fair words and promises, there followed no fruit or effect, they concluded among themselves, to exhibit a bill into the high court of parliament, for relief of their said master; the which bill this deponent delivered to my lord chancellor, declaring unto him — whereas he, and the rest of his company, had become suiters to the duke of Somerset. He answered them in effect, that he was but one man, and that albeit he was my lord’s friend, he could not do things, for the matter was not his but the king’s: and that he willed them to sue to the rest, who gave in manner the same answer: so that they saw no likelihood of any effect to follow: — therefore they thought it best to exhibit their bill to the high court of parliament, thinking that the only place where they should have relief, in praying him most humbly, being the public minister of justice there, that he would take their said bill, and publish and read the same amongst the lords; which the said lord chancellor was very loth to do, and would have persuaded this deponent, not to exhibit the same, saying that they should rather hurt their master, than otherwise.
Finally (being pressed by this deponent, that forasmuch as he was the public minister of justice there, and that it was a free court, where every man ought to have access), he took the bill, saying that he would show it to the council first; and as they would be contented, so he would make further answer. And after communication with the said council, the lord chancellor told this deponent that, forasmuch as the bishop was the king’s prisoner, and the matter pertained to the king, they would in no wise suffer the bill to be put by.
And being so disappointed of any relief by that means for their master, after the parliament ended, this deponent, and the rest of his company, began their suit to the duke of Somerset, and the rest of the council afresh: and at one special time (he well remembering) he being with the duke of Somerset in the gallery, and Jacques Wingfield speaking to the said duke for their master, when they came to the end of the gallery, the duke advising them both well.
And the duke going, turned in the midst between them, and said in effect, as followeth; videlicet: ‘To be plain with you, I think your master might now come abroad: but there have been certain laws passed this parliament, which I think,’ quoth he, ‘my lord will not agree unto, and be content to obey them. And then,’ quoth he, ‘if he came abroad, and brake them, there were then no remedy, but he must have the extremity of the laws ministered unto him; and shall have.’ — Whereunto this deponent replied, and said: ‘It may please your grace, hitherto we trust that my lord hath offended no law; and that, hereafter, he will not: but trust that he will show himself an obedient and conformable subject. And if he do it, we shall be most sorry for it, as men whose undoings depend thereon.
And therefore, we most humbly pray your grace, that he may not be kept so in prison still, for fear of that he will do hereafter. But when he cometh abroad, if he do not obey, and keep the laws, let him then be punished accordingly; and we must content ourselves therewithal, and require no mercy for him.’ — And to that the duke said, that he would take a time for him, and that very shortly.
And upon that, Wingfield, making suit for further liberty for the said bishop, for the preservation of his health in the mean season, and could not obtain at that time, departed. And yet, for all this, notwithstanding divers and sundry suits made by this deponent, and others, unto the said duke, and to the lord chancellor, and divers other of the council, at sundry and divers times afterward: and yet also, notwithstanding divers promises, and times also appointed, when the bishop should be spoken withal, yet, nevertheless, there came no man unto the said bishop from the council, until the time in the article mentioned; at which time my lord chancellor, my lord treasurer, and master secretary Peter, went unto the Tower to him. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 68th he saith, the article is true, touching the common voice and fame: and knoweth that the said bishop did send for his officer, master Grimwood, to make provision against his coming out; and also for his chamber keeper, who dressed and prepared his chamber. And, upon this rumor, divers of his men came up, looking every day when he should come forth. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth as before; and that he hath four pounds wages, and livery; fourteen pounds annuities, videlicet, four pounds out of the manor of Taunton, and ten pounds out of the lordship of Eastmere; and otherwise negatively.
To the 2d : he hath affection as becometh a servant to bear to his master, and not other; but ordinate, temperated with such moderations as it ought to be.
To the 8d : he prayeth God that he may have justice, and that right might take place; and that he may be ordered according to his deserts.
To the 4th he answereth as before: and otherwise he cannot depose. James Basset.
For that (otherwise than I had thought) the process of the examination of master Redman hath come into our hands, I will here intersert as much thereof as is for the matter.
PAPERS EXHIBITED BY THOMAS REDMAN.
The contents of the papers, and codicil, which Dr. Redman did exhibit before master Leedes and master Michael Dunning, judges delegate, and appointed for the production and examination of the said Redman, on Saturday the last of January, 1550, in the presence of Robert Chapman, notary.
First, the said bishop taking the text of the gospel of the day, ‘Venit Jesus in partes Caesareae Philippi,’ etc., after that he had declared the diversity of opinions that were of Christ, amongst them which were without, and forth from of Christ’s school — some taking him to be Elias, some Jeremias, etc., and others having him in more vile estimation, calling him glutton, drinker of wine; amongst all these (he said), being out of Christ’s school, there was no unity concerning the acknowledging of Christ: but, amongst them which were Christ’s own scholars, there was unity; and they were of one mind. Peter answered for all, ‘Tu es Christus.’ For this confession Christ blessed him, and all others that confess the same. — Then he spake of the interpretation of these names, Simon and Jonas; showing how we should be simple, and in what manner of simplicity; and how our pride did let us from the knowledge of God; and how we should be obedient, and submit ourselves to God’s ordinances. — Peter confessed Christ. In this word ‘Christ’ is the confession of the whole religion of christian men: Christ was our Messias, our bishop and sacrifice: he, being equal with the Father, took our nature upon him; made our reconciliation, when he was offered upon the cross, once for all, a perfect sacrifice for the redemption of the world. He is our Mediator, Bishop, and Priest.
And to the end that we might attain the benefits of his sacrifice upon the cross, he ordained a memory thereof, when he did institute the sacrament. He ordained his body to be a continual sacrifice, whereby we might glory in his passion. It may not be said, that we have any more redemption than one, although we must have always access to Christ, to give him thanks for that redemption.
And here he spake of the mass; that we come to it, not for any new redemption, but to give thanks, and that we may be strengthened in receiving Christ himself to our comfort. And he said, that as Peter confessed his faith concerning Christ, so he would confess his opinion of the state of the church of England, and declare what he did like and mislike. He said that he did much commend the proclamation which was made, that none should talk or entreat of the sacrament unreverently. He said also, that some, peradventure, because he did allow the mass, would ask him what he said to chantries: and whether the king’s majesty had done well in taking them away: whereunto he said, he would answer, that the goodness of the mass did not stand in the number, but in true knowledge and devotion, and right use of the same.
And here he brought in, that they which were departed out of this world, might well be prayed for in the mass. And as for mass of ‘Scala coeli,’ mass satisfactory, masses in number; masses with other confidence in them that is approved by Scripture, be justly abolished. Though both the monasteries be suppressed, and the chantres transposed to another use, yet it is no prejudice to the mass. And the act of parliament concerning chantries was not prejudicial to the ministers; for whom (he said) because he heard they were not provided well for, he was constrained in conscience to be a petitioner before the king’s majesty, and his council, in that place. Furthermore, as touching his opinion in the sacrament under both kinds, he said he had been always in one mind touching that matter. He said it was no new change, as might be perceived by a certain constitution provincial of Peckham: and the Cistertians did communicate under both kinds.
Then, in the process of his sermon, he came to these words, ‘Et super hanc Petram, edificabo ecclesiam meam;’ saying, that the rock was Christ, or Peter’s confession, and not Peter himself. And said, that he marvelled how the bishop of Rome would enterprise to build his primacy upon that place, seeing that Christ had taken it up before, to build his church, whereof he himself was the foundation. If it had been builded upon Peter, it had fallen when Christ called him Satan. Some called Peter the chief of the apostles, because he confessed Christ first. But yet it followed not, that he should be chief of the apostles, no more than the foreman of the inquest is always chief; for it may be, that as good as the foreman, is of the inquest. Christ spake not only to Peter, but generally to all the apostles. Both in that place, and when he gave commandment to Peter to feed his sheep, the commandment was also to all the rest. It came to pass, by this means, that the bishops of Rome had been taken for chief, by reason that, in the beginning of the church, their excellency in knowledge and virtuous living was notable; whereby they won the hearts of men, to be contented to accept them as guides concerning Christ’s religion. Like as the king’s majesty, and other supreme magistrates, do use the advice of some of their council; and yet is not the councillor, or council above the king: and when the king’s majesty intendeth to build an house, or to make war, he will take advice of the most cunning carpenter, and of the most expert warrior: and if a man be sick, he will send for the most cunning physician — so, in matters of religion, the king’s majesty may ask counsel of them that excel in knowledge and virtue. The bishop of Rome hath no superiority in this realm by God’s law; yet, if he were of excellency of virtue and knowledge above others, the king’s majesty might ask counsel of him, and take his advice; and yet no prejudice to the king’s regal dignity: for the superiority is only in the king, and not in him of whom counsel is asked. But as for his judgment concerning the bishop of Rome, he said, his books which he hath written in that matter, should bear record thereof; and that as for the place of Scripture, it made nothing for his authority.
After that, he began to entreat of ceremonies, saying, he had been called the master of the ceremonies: but, he said, he never had any other opinion of ceremonies than he had at that present time. He said, that ceremonies were ordained to stir the minds of the people to virtue and godliness. But, when we abuse them, and swerve from the right institution of them, and serve creatures, and not the Creator, then may they, for the abuse, justly be taken away.
Monks, friars, and nuns had many ceremonies, to put them in remembrance of themselves, to do their duties. But afterwards, when they fell to idleness and slothfulness, they forgat that their ceremonies were monishments to put them in mind of their profession, and did serve them out of custom. Then, seeing they abused their monishments, the king’s majesty did well in taking them away. A child, having a gay book given to him, to the intent he should learn upon it, if he fall only to admiration of the outward gayness of the book, then the next remedy is, to take it away from him, and give him a meaner book to learn upon. For there are two manner of reformations touching ceremonies and rites of the church: one is, to teach the people the right use of them, and then let them continue and remain: or else, if that cannot be (that diligence and teaching may restore them to their first institution), then to abolish them, and put them clean away. Yet there be some ceremonies, which, although they be abused, may not be taken away: as baptism, although it was abused over the dead in Paul’s time, yet it might not be taken away. The water of baptism, though it be abused, may not be taken away. The sacraments, and preaching, although they be abused, yet they may not be taken away.
Then he spake of images, saying, that whensoever he had entreated of them, he had taught they might be continued, so they were rightly used. But, seeing they were abused, Christ’s religion was nothing hindered nor touched, in that they were taken away: things indifferent should not be passed upon. After these things he spake of numbers in prayers: as a number of lessons or psalms such a day; observing days, number, and times. And he said that the observing of days, hours, number, time, and place, is to set the church in order: and so to be observed, there is none abuse. But if a man think he cannot pray, but at that hour, or that place, or that time, then he is an observer of times: then he erreth in his observation of hours and times. These things be but as the clock, to put us in remembrance.
And furthermore he said, touching ceremonies, that when they be commanded by the magistrates, they which use them do please God for their obedience. Then he spake much like words unto these: ‘Some would ask me, what I would say touching the proceedings, if I were alone. I will say even now as much as if I were alone.’ And then he said, that he liked well the communion, set forth by the king’s majesty; and also the proclamation concerning the sacrament; and that he did mislike nothing of the king’s majesty’s proceedings: but that he did mislike them that railed on the sacrament, and against the mass, and such as did take upon them to do contrary to the king’s laws and proclamations, and otherwise than his grace had appointed, by his order which he had taken. He said he did mislike, that misorderers would not obey their heads: as certain preachers that he compared to posts, who did carry truth in their letters, and lies in their mouths. He said also, he did mislike that they which had professed and vowed chastity, should openly marry. He said he was more bold to speak in this matter, because he had studied, and travailed therein. He said, he had not read in any authority, a priest married, but a married priest.
Now ye shall hear the examination of the said Dr. Redman, by the aforesaid delegates, had particularly of and upon the articles of the aforesaid long matter.
JOHN REDMAN’S EXAMINATION.
John Redman, doctor of divinity, witness brought in on the part of the bishop of Winchester, and examined the 31st of January, in the fourth year of the reign of king Edward VI., by the aforesaid commissaries and subdelegates above specified, in the presence of Robert Chapman, public notary, in this behalf named and appointed, of, in, and upon, certain articles, by the said bishop exhibited and laid in before the said delegates and commissioners above named, in a certain cause of office, against the said bishop promoted, had, moved, and depending. And first, he, [being] examined by the said commissioners’ sub-delegates of and upon the contents in the first article to the said commission annexed (being numbered, among the articles by the said bishop of Winchester exhibited, the 34th article), as well of and upon the point concerning the delivery of two papers by master Cecil to the said bishop of Winchester, as also upon the residue of the contents in the said article — this deponent saith, by virtue of his oath, that as touching the delivery of any such two papers to my lord of Winchester, mentioned in that article, he can nothing say nor depose of his own certain knowledge: howbeit he saith, he is partly induced to believe, that such two papers were delivered to the said bishop of Winchester by master Cecil, because it is expressly deduced in the said article, which is ministered for the part of the said bishop of Winchester: but what was written or contained in the said two papers (if any such were), this deponent saith, he knoweth not, nor can tell.
To the second of the said articles annexed to the commission, as above, being in number 35., this deponent saith, that upon St.
Peter’s day last was two years (which was the 29th day of June, as he remembereth), he (this deponent) was present in the king’s garden, within his majesty’s palace at New hall in Westminster, at afternoon of the same day; where and when he saw Stephen, bishop of Winchester, stand in the pulpit, before the king’s majesty, and a great audience then and there assembled; and heard the said bishop preach a sermon after the manner and form (as he hath before declared) in his book, or papers that he hath exhibited before us, the said subdelegates, as is above written: in which sermon, this deponent saith, that he heard the said bishop, among other things, say these words following, as far as he (this deponent) could bring them away: videlicet, ‘I like well the communion, set forth by the king’s majesty, and also the proclamation concerning the sacrament: and I do mislike nothing of the king’s majesty’s proceedings. But I do mislike them that rail on the sacrament, and against the mass; and against such as do take upon them to do things contrary to the king’s majesty’s laws, injunctions, and proclamations, and otherwise than his grace hath appointed by the order that his grace hath taken, etc.; as in the latter end of his depositions, made in the writing, and exhibited to the aforesaid commissioners and sub-delegates above-said, more at length it is contained.
To the third of the said articles, being in number 37., this deponent saith, that as concerning my lord of Somerset’s letters at any time sent to the said bishop of Winchester, he can nothing say nor depose: neither of the letter, nor any thing or matter in such letter contained. And in case any such letter had been sent, whether the said letter had been or was, of any force to command or restrain the said bishop, or not, this deponent saith he cannot tell. And also he (this deponent) saith, that he cannot tell, nor any thing depose, of any letter in print, mentioned in that article which was sent forth to all preachers, And further, as concerning the sacrament, and mass, specified in that article, this deponent saith, that he doth not remember, that the said bishop spake any otherwise concerning that point, than he hath already declared in his depositions above written, which he did exhibit in writing before the said subdelegates, as above specified.
And as concerning the presence of Christ’s body in the sacrament, mentioned in this article, this deponent saith, that so far as he doth now remember, the said bishop of Winchester spake none otherwise, in that point, than is (in his former deposition exhibited) in writing declared. And also he saith, that at that time as far as he remembereth there was no contention or controversy, in that matter, amongst the prelates or learned men of this realm. And further, or otherwise than he (this deponent) hath already before deposed, and also by his writing declared, he cannot say nor depose, as he saith.
THE DEPOSITIONS OF CERTAIN WITNESSES, PRODUCED AND EXAMINED UPON THE POSITIONS ADDITIONAL, LAID IN BY THE BISHOP IN HIS FIRST MATTER, SPECIFIED BEFORE IN THE NINTH SESSION.
NICHOLAS BISHOP OF WORCESTER.
Nicholas bishop of Worcester. of the age of 49 or thereabout; sworn and examined upon the 4th and 6th articles of the positions, deposeth as followeth: To the said 4th article, he deposeth the contents of this article to be true: saving that where he himself is named among the ancient and best learned bishops, he referreth that to the judgment of others.
To the 6th article, to that part ‘Carolostadius,’ etc., he saith, that the article is true, saving, as he thinketh, that there were divers other sacramentaries, which, besides these that be named in the article particularly, did impugn the said truth. And to the next part of the article, this deponent saith, that the impugning thereof is manifest error. And to the last, so beginning, ‘and in England,’ etc., this deponent saith, that he hath been in prison a long season; and what hath been defended or maintained since his coming to prison, he is not able to declare, but he judgeth, that whosoever defendeth that error, he is not sufficiently in that matter learned. And otherwise he cannot depose.
GEORGE BISHOP OF CHICHESTER.
George bishop of Chichester, of the age of 49 or thereabout; sworn and examined upon the 4th and 6th articles of the positions additional.
To the 4th he saith, that the contents of the article are true: saving (he saith) that himself is none of the most ancient bishops of the realm, nor taketh himself to be one of the best learned bishops.
To the 6th article, unto this place ‘and Carolostadius,’ he saith, that in foreign realms and countries, he knoweth not that any famous clerk, or named learned man in our time, hath impugned the truth of Christ’s most precious body and blood in the sacrament of the altar, but such as be named in the said article: saving that he knoweth that Bullingerus and Musculus have written against the truth of Christ’s body and blood in the sacrament: and though he taketh these for learned men, yet he doth not assent to their doctrine in this matter of the sacrament. And to this part of the article ‘the impugning whereof is manifest error,’ he saith, it is true.
And to the last part, he saith, that at the time the bishop of Winton preached on St. Peter’s day, he knoweth not any learned man, within this realm, did impugn the verity of Christ’s body and blood in the sacrament. And since that time, my lord of Canterbury hath made a book against the verity of Christ’s body and blood in the sacrament: and that the bishop now of London, did openly impugn the verity of Christ’s body and blood in the sacrament, in the parliament at Westminster: from both whose learning and judgments in this matter, this deponent doth dissent, although he taketh them for learned men. And otherwise he cannot depose.
OWEN OGLETHORPE.
Owen Oglethorpe, doctor of divinity, and president of Magdalen College, Oxford; of the age of 48, or thereabout; sworn and examined upon the 5th of the positions additional.
To the 5th article of the positions additional, he saith, that in the third year of the king’s majesty’s reign, there were open disputations in Oxford, to this deponent’s hearing, in the which the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the sacrament was openly defended by divers learned of the university: as master doctor Tresham and doctor Chadsey. — And others would have disputed, and defended the same, as this deponent supposeth: as master Morgan, if time would have served.
CUTHBERT BISHOP OF DURHAM.
Cuthbert bishop of Durham, a witness produced upon the 4th and 6th positions additional.
To the 4th article, he saith that the same article is true: saving, he saith, that himself is not one of the best learned bishops of the realm: and the residue of the said bishops, named in the said article, be well learned. And otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 6th article, unto that part of the article ‘and Carolostadius,’ etc., he saith, the article is true: saving, he saith, that there were certain other in Germany, besides those that he named in the said article, that did hold the said opinion, as he heard say.
To the second part of the article: videlicet, ‘the impugning whereof’ is manifest error,’ he saith, that part is true, and to the last part of the article, beginning ‘and in England,’ etc., he saith, that he hath known no man that is learned, that openly defended or maintained the said error, saving that now, lately, he hath seen a book for the defense of the said error, which is entitled to be made by the lord of Canterbury: but whether it be his or no, he cannot tell. And otherwise he cannot depose.
THOMAS, BISHOP OF NORWICH.
Thomas bishop of Norwich, of the age of 47, or thereabouts; sworn and examined upon the 4th and 6th of the additional positions.
To the 4th article, he saith it is true, saving for the learning of himself, which he referreth to the judgment of others.
To the 6th article, to that part ‘the impugning thereof,’ etc., he saith that the same is true, as far as he hath learned, or could learn, or know: saving that Wickliffe, and Huss, and Berengarius, have likewise impugned the truth of Christ’s most precious body and blood to be in the sacrament. To the same part ‘the impugning whereof is manifest error,’ etc., he saith and believeth, that to be true: And to the rest of the article he saith, that when this deponent departed out of England, in ambassade to the emperor, last, he knew no learned man in England, that did openly favor and defend that error. — But now of late, since his return, he hath seen books, that have been made here in England by those that have the name of learned men, in favor of that error. And the things deposed by this deponent, he thinketh notorious, manifest, and famous. And otherwise he cannot depose.
THOMAS WATSON.
Thomas Watson, a witness before produced on the part of the bishop of Winchester, upon the matter; and now again produced on the 1st of the additionals.
To the 1st position additional, he saith, that in the month of November (as he doth now remember), in the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign that now is, this deponent was present at a sermon 46 made at Paul’s Cross, by the bishop of London that now is, being then bishop of Rochester; in the which said sermon, the said bishop did very earnestly entreat and speak of the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the sacrament; calling them worse than dogs and hogs, that would ask the question, ‘How he was there present:’ and also noted the dignity of the sacrament, how in the beginning of the church there were three sorts of people excluded away from the communion: that is to say, catechumeni, energumeni, and penitentes. And the premises he deposeth to be true, for he stood behind the said bishop, within the cross, and heard the said bishop declare the premises. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories, etc. — To the 1st interrogatory he deposeth as before, and saith, that he doth not remember whether he spake of any such words mentioned in the interrogatory.
Howbeit he saith, speaking of the presence, he must needs speak the effect of this word, ‘real and substantially;’ for that there is no presence, but it is real: and, if it be not real, it is a plain absence, and no presence.
To the 2d he saith, that he heard the said bishop say, that they should hear more of that matter; and, in the mean season, willed them to leave searching how he is there. And more he doth not remember.
To the 3d , he thinketh that he spake of Cyprian ‘de Coena Domini;’ and otherwise he doth not remember.
WILLIAM MEDOWE.
Master William Medowe, sworn and examined upon the 1st of the additionals. To the said 1st article he saith, that he was present at a sermon made by the bishop of London that now is, at Paul’s Cross, on a Sunday between Hallow-mas and Christmas, in the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign, in which said sermon he spake of the sacrament, saying, that it was the body of Christ, calling them dogs, that would ask, how he was there. And the premises, he saith, are true; for he heard him so speak and preach there in his said sermon. Upon the Interrogatories, etc. — To the 1st he deposeth as before: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 2d he saith, that he heard the said bishop say, in his sermon, that we should hear more shortly; the meaning of which words this deponent took to be, concerning the setting-forth of the presence: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 3d he saith, that to this deponent’s remembrance, the said bishop did speak of a place in St. Cyprian, concerning the sacrament; and otherwise he cannot depose.
MAURICE GRIFFITH, ARCHDEACON OF ROCHESTER.
Maurice Griffith, archdeacon, of the age of 45, or thereabout, sworn and examined upon the 1st of the additionals.
To the 1st he saith, that the said bishop of London, in the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign that now is, did preach at Paul’s Cross, and there declared the true presence of the body of Christ in the sacrament, to this deponent’s understanding: calling them ‘dogs,’ which ask the question how and after what fashion he was there: at the which time were present a great multitude, whom by name he could not call to remembrance. And otherwise he cannot depose.
MASTER GILBERT BOURNE.
Master Gilbert Bourne, one of the canons residentiary of Paul’s, of the age of 41, or thereabout; sworn and examined upon the 1st article of the positions additional.
To the said 1st position he saith, that he was present at a sermon made by the bishop of London that now is, and then bishop of Rochester in the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign, as he remembereth (on what day or in what month he doth not remember), at Paul’s Cross; in which sermon he entreated very earnestly, and vehemently of the sacrament: and, to the understanding of the auditory with divers of whom this deponent spake, he did earnestly set forth the presence of the body of Christ in the same: at which sermon he was present, and heard him preach. And saith, that he heard the said bishop called them ‘hogs and dogs,’ that did unreverently behave themselves touching the same: and also that in the primitive church three sorts of people were expelled out of the church, whiles the sacrament was in receiving: videlicet, catechumeni, energumeni, and penitentes. And otherwise he cannot depose upon the contents of the article. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth, and doth not remember that he spake any such words.
To the 2d he cannot depose upon the contents of the same.
To the 4th , he doth not remember of any such thing. By me, Gilbert Bourne.
WILLIAM GLYN.
William Glyn, doctor of divinity, chaplain to the bishop of Norwich; of the age of 41 years; sworn and examined upon the 5th position additional, deposeth as followeth:
He saith to the said article, that about the latter end of May or June, in the year articulate, there were open and solemn disputations in the university of Cambridge, wherein the true presence of the very body and blood of Christ to be in the sacrament, was defended and maintained by sundry learned men of the said university, whose names, amongst others, were master Lagdale, master Young, master Vavasor, master Sedwick, master Parker, and master Pollard: which be in the said university counted and named for learned men, of the certain knowledge and hearing of this deponent, and being present thereat, and one of the number that defended the same. And this he saith is manifest, and notorious in the said university, and elsewhere: and otherwise he cannot depose. By me, William Glyn.
Here follow all such depositions of witnesses as were upon the last matter, otherwise called The Matter against the Exhibits produced and examined in the behalf of the bishop of Winchester, for which look in pages 127 to 130.
MAURICE GRIFFITH.
Maurice Griffith, archdeacon of Rochester, examined upon the 20th article of the last matter.
To the 20th article he saith, that he never knew nor heard of any tumult at the sermon-time, but that he was quietly heard, and so departed (as far as this deponent knoweth), otherwise than the throng, by reason of the multitude of the people. Maurice Griffith.
WILLIAM BROWNE.
William Browne, sworn and examined upon the articles 2. 3. 4. and 6. of the said matter.
To the 2d article he saith, that the said bishop made a proxy to the said master Cook, and to Potinger, to appear in the visitation, as he hath before deposed in his former depositions: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 3d he answereth as before, in his former depositions made to the matter justificatory: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 4th he deposeth as before, to the said matter: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 6th he deposeth, that the said visitation began in the month of October, in the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign that now is (as he doth remember): and otherwise he cannot depose. W. Browne.
OWEN OGLETHORPE.
Owen Oglethorpe, doctor of divinity, etc., sworn and examined upon the 20th article of the said matter.
To the 20th article against the exhibits he saith, that the said bishop was quietly heard, unless it were through the throng of the people, in the hearing of him; and that there was no tumult upon the same, at that time, to this deponent’s knowledge: but what was in other places he cannot tell. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories (as before). O. Oglethorpe.
THOMAS COTISFORDE.
Thomas Cotisforde, servant to master Babington, warden of the Fleet, with whom he hath continued these seven or eight years, of the age of 34, or there-about, sworn and examined upon the 7th article of the said matter.
To the said 7th article he saith, that from the time the said bishop of Winchester was committed to the Fleet, and so long time as he remained there, this deponent was porter of the Fleet, and kept the gate: and saith that by all the said space, there was no man that had resort to the bishop, nor did speak with him; unless it were by especial commandment, and license obtained. For this deponent had in commandment given by the warden of the Fleet, that he should let no person to come to speak with him, no more he did let any come unto him. And saith, that during the said bishop’s abode in the Fleet, he had appointed unto him two servants to attend upon him, and his cook: which cook had no access unto him, as he saith. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he saith and answereth negatively, to all parts of the interrogatory.
To the 2d he saith, that he beareth no more affection to him than to any other man.
To the 3d he saith, that he is indifferent.
To the last he answereth as before: and otherwise he cannot depose. Thomas Cotisforde THOMAS SKERNE.
Thomas Skerne, servant to the bishop of Winton, whose servant he hath been these eighteen or nineteen years; of the age of 40; sworn and examined upon articles 15. and 16. against the exhibits.
To the said articles he saith and deposeth, that by the space of eighteen or nineteen years, the said bishop for his part, and also his servants for their part, have been peaceable and quiet, not making any tumult or commotion against the powers, or any of the king’s servants: and that there was never such things once intended, or minded, as he judgeth in his conscience. And deposeth, that the said bishop, at any time within the aforesaid space, did never will, or command his servants, or any one of them, privily or apertly, to take weapon for the safeguard of his person, and his family: but always the said bishop and his servants have been quiet and peaceable, and using themselves as becometh subjects. And deposeth, that the bishop hath many times persuaded his servants to obedience, and to use themselves abroad peaceably and quietly; and hath said unto his servants, that if they use themselves abroad quietly and peaceably, that they might be honestly reported of, he taketh the less regard to their service done to him at home. And the premises, he saith, are notorious and manifest, at Winton, and all other places, that the said bishop and his servants have continued so. For this deponent hath been in his household, and should have known, seen, or heard, if any such evil or folly should have been attempted. And otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he saith, that he hath four pounds wages, a livery, meat, and drink: and he hath a patent of the office of the collector and clerk of the bailiwick of Winton and Oxfordshire, and profits belonging to the same.
To the 2d : he hath no other affection, than a servant ought to have to his master.
To the 3d : he wisheth the truth to be known, and justice to be had, which he had prayed for, and sued for.
To the last, he answereth as before: and otherwise he cannot depose. Thomas Skerne.
JOHN CLYFFE.
John Clyffe, servant to the bishop of Winchester, in whose service he hath continued these seventeen years and more; of the age of years; sworn and examined upon the 15th and 16th articles of the matter against the exhibits.
To the said 15th article he saith, that by the space of these seventeen years and more, he hath been the bishop’s servant, and one of his household; at all which time the said bishop, being as well at his house at Winton, as other of his places, hath been always a man of quietness, peace, and quiet behavior; and so was his household: not disposed or minded to any tumults or commotions amongst themselves, nor against the king’s subjects: nor at any time, while he was in service with him, did his said servants ever bear arms, or prepare themselves to weapon. But at such times as the commotion was in the court of Southampton and Surrey, by the commandment of the earl of Southampton, being there in the king’s name, some of them went to the said earl, to aid and help him for the repressing of the rebels. And the premises, he saith, are true; and that the said bishop, and his servants are commonly reputed and taken in the court of Southampton, and elsewhere, to be such persons, as they are mentioned in this article.
To the 16th he saith, that the contents of this article are true; for the said bishop never commanded his servants at any time (as far as he knew or heard) to wear any harness, for the safeguard of his house or person, or to withstand the powers of the realm: but hath showed himself always a man of quietness. And he saith, that he minded always quietness; for the said bishop hath called his servants unto him, and hath exhorted them to be men of quietness, and to live quietly, and to make no business with any man; saying to them, if they so did, they were no men meet for him. And the premises this deponent saith are true, of his own knowledge: and otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he saith, that he hath been the said bishop’s servant these seventeen years and more, and is at this present; having fifty-three shillings and fourpence wages, and livery, and forty shillings annuity out of the bailiwick of the Clink.
And otherwise negatively.
To the 2d : he hath affection to the truth, and no otherwise.
To the 3d : he desireth, if truth be on his side, that he may have victory. To the last, he answereth as before: and otherwise he cannot depose. John Clyffe.
HENRY BURTON.
Henry Burton, one of the bishop of Winchester’s servants, with whom he dwelt almost eight years; of the age of 25 or 26; sworn and examined upon the articles 9. 15. and 16. against the exhibits proposed.
To the 9th article he deposeth, that the contents of this article are true; for this deponent, being one of the bishop of Winton’s servants, was appointed, with others of his company, to serve the king in Scotland, about the year specified in this article; at which time the duke of Somerset was there, to this deponent’s certain sight and knowledge. And forasmuch as this deponent had his horse slain in the field, or battle, he obtained leave of the lord Fitzwalter, being his captain, to come home a fortnight after the battle; and, in coming home from Scotland, he met one Kirby, servant to the lord Fitzwalter, riding to his lord and master, which Kirby showed to this deponent, that the bishop of Win ton, his master, was in the Fleet; who, at this deponent’s going to Scotland, was at Waltham in Hampshire, of his certain knowledge. And further saith, that in his said coming home, he met with the lady Suffolk about Peter-borough: and the said lady asked this deponent whose servant he was, he making answer, the bishop of Winton’s servant: she demanding where his master was, he replying, at Winton: the said lady saying to this deponent, that he should not find him there; but said, that he was forthcoming. And afterward, by the way as he came toward London, he heard it commonly talked, that the said bishop was in the Fleet. And at his coming home to the said bishop’s house at the Clink, [he] perceived it to be true, how he was in the Fleet. And he saith, that he left the duke of Somerset behind in Scotland, at his coming from thence; and was not come to London, when this deponent came. And the premises, he saith, are true, as much as concerneth the duke’s being in Scotland, and the said bishop of Winton’s being in the Fleet, was, and is, public, notorious, and manifest: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 15th and 16th he saith, that by the space that this deponent hath been in the said bishop’s service, he never heard or knew that either the said bishop, or his servants, did move or stir any tumult or rumors, or give any occasions, whereas any such thing should be moved: but that the said bishop, and his servants, have peaceably and quietly used and behaved themselves toward the superiors. And saith that the said bishop never willed, or commanded any of his servants to wear harness, or bye-weapon, for any manner of defense, either of his person, or his household, in Winton or any other place: nor yet did he ever know, or could perceive, in the said bishop, any token or likelihood of any such folly to be attempted by the said bishop. And the premises, he saith, are notorious and public in Winton, and other places, where the said bishop had doings. For this deponent hath been in the bishop’s household, by the space aforesaid; and if any such thing should be done, he must needs have known of it, as he saith. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth as before, and hath four pounds wages by year, and livery; and ten pounds fee for the bailiwick of Exton, by patent: and otherwise negatively.
To the 2d and 3d he answereth: notwithstanding that he is the bishop’s servant, he would not be with him, if he had offended the king; and if he have not offended the king, he wisheth that he may overcome by justice.
To the last, he answereth as before: and otherwise he cannot depose. By me, Henry Burton.
THOMAS BABINGTON.
Thomas Babington esq. warden of the Fleet; of the age of 51 or thereabout; sworn and examined upon the 7th and 11th articles of the matter proposed against the exhibits.
To the 7th he saith, that the 25th day of September, in the year of our Lord God 1547, the said bishop of Winton was, by commandment, committed to the Fleet: whom this deponent received the same day at the hands of sir Anthony Wingfield: where he (the same bishop) continued to the 7th day of January, next following; on which day this deponent, by virtue of the duke of Somerset’s letter, brought him to Hampton-court, where this deponent received his discharge of the said duke of Somerset, and others the lords of the council, for the delivery of the said bishop.
And saith, that during the said bishop’s abode in the Fleet, he was licensed to have two servants to wait upon him, and to have his cook there, as it was declared to this deponent by the said master Wingfield; and so he had: and that there was no stranger, that had access to the bishop, nor yet any of his servants, but as they were specially licensed by the king’s council. And as concerning the visitation, he knoweth not whether it was kept in the time of the said bishop’s being in the Fleet, or no: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 11th article, concerning the said bishop’s being in the Fleet, he deposeth as before; in the which time the said bishop was twice before the lord of Somerset, then protector, at his house at the Strand: and one other time, the bishop of Lincoln came for the said bishop of Winton, and had him with him to the dean of Paul’s house, in Paul’s Church-yard, before my lord of Canterbury; upon whom this deponent, at every of the said times, did attend. But whether he was called before the said duke, and my lord of Canterbury, for any examination, or whether any thing were objected unto him, he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he answereth, that the said bishop, about six weeks ago, sent Jacques Wingfield, his servant, to this deponent, willing him to declare unto him, that he would give young Ludlow, which was his ward, in marriage to a daughter of this deponent’s called Mary, whom he called his wife: and willed this deponent to make writings of his said gift, and he would seal to them; whereupon this deponent caused writings thereof to be made, which the said bishop hath sent this deponent sealed. And the same gift came freely, of the motion and mind of the said bishop, without any suit, or speaking on this deponent’s behalf; and otherwise negatively: and saith, that the said Jacques Wingfield did not speak with this deponent, but did the errand to his wife.
To the 2d : if he be the king’s true subject, he doth bear his affection, as he doth to every true subject.
To the 3d : he desireth that the truth might take place with him, and every other subject; and not otherwise.
To the last, he answereth as before: and otherwise he cannot depose. Thomas Babington.
JOHN WARNER.
John Warner, servant to the bishop of Winchester, with whom he dwelt ten years, of the age of 38, sworn and examined upon the 15th and 16th articles of the matter against the exhibits, deposeth as follows:
To the 15th and 16th articles, he saith, that by the space of ten years (as he hath before deposed), he hath been the bishop of Winton’s servant, and continually in his household: by all which space, he saith upon his oath, that the said bishop, and his servants, have been peaceable and quiet, not making any tumult or commotion, nor minding any such, at Winton or any other place within this realm. And saith, that neither this deponent, nor yet any other of the said bishop’s servants, hath been commanded by the bishop to wear any harness, or take weapon, either for the safeguard of the person of the said bishop, or his household: nor yet any of his said servants, upon their own head, have attempted the like in the said space. But saith, that the said bishop and his servants have been always in quiet and obedience, as it becometh true subjects to their prince, and so taken and reputed in all places, where the said bishop hath had to do, and hath been resident and abiding: and saith that said bishop or yet his servants never prepared for to stir tumult against the powers: and this deponent saith, that he could never perceive any token, or likelihood of any such temerarious act, to be done by the said bishop; and, if any such thing should have been done (as it was not thought upon), this deponent, being yeoman of the horse, should have known thereof. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st , he saith that he is the said bishop’s servant, having fifty-three shillings and fourpence wages a year; meat, drink, and livery: and otherwise negatively.
To the 2d and 3d he desireth that he may have justice: and if he have offended the king’s majesty and his laws, he would he should have according as he hath done: and otherwise negatively.
To the last, he answereth as before: and otherwise he cannot depose. John Warner.
OSMOND COWARD.
Osmond Coward, servant to the bishop of Winton, with whom he hath continued these six years; of the age of 29 or thereabout; sworn and examined upon articles 9. 15. and 16. of the matter against the exhibits.
To the 9th article he saith, that the contents of this article are true; for this deponent saith, that he, being in Scotland, serving of the king, so appointed by the said bishop, and coming home after the battle done, and lying in Alnwick, within the bishopric of Durham, heard reported there, that the said bishop was in the Fleet. And saith, that the same night that this deponent lay in Alnwick, the duke of Somerset lay in the same town of Alnwick, and was come out of Scotland from the said battle, to this deponent’s certain sight and knowledge: and that this deponent since took his journey from Alnwick, homeward to London, leaving the duke’s grace at Alnwick; and, at this deponent’s coming home, knew certainly that the said bishop was in the Fleet: whereas before this deponent’s going to Scotland, the said bishop was at his house in Walton in Hampshire, to this deponent’s certain knowledge, and the premises were done about Michaelmas last was three years, as he saith: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 15th and 16th he saith, that the contents of these articles are trite, manifest, notorious, and famous, in Winton, and all other places where the said bishop hath been abiding, to this deponent’s certain knowledge. For he hath been the said bishop’s servant these six years, as he hath before declared: and saith that in all the said space, he hath been continually in his household; and saith, upon his oath, that the said bishop, and his servants, always have been quiet and peaceable, not making any tumult against any of the powers, or the king’s subjects, or amongst themselves have stirred or made any tumult. And he saith, that the said bishop never commanded any of his servants to wear harness, or bear weapon, for any such purpose, or for the safeguard of his own person, or his household; but the said bishop hath lived always quietly, as a man without fear of any trouble towards him. And saith, that he could never perceive, by any token or likelihood, that ever the said bishop minded, or intended any tumult or commotion; for if he had, he saith, that being one of his servants, and continually in the household, he must needs have known of it: and otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories. — To the 1st he saith, that he is the said bishop’s servant, and the man of the buttery, having fifty-three shillings and fourpence wages, and livery, and such advantages as fall: and otherwise negatively.
To the 2d and 3d: he hath none affection, but what the servant oweth to his master: but if he hath offended, he would he should have as he deserveth.
To the last, he answereth as before: and otherwise he cannot depose. Osmond Coward.
JOHN TEMPLE.
John Temple, gentleman, sworn and examined upon the 14th article of the matter against the exhibits, deposeth as followeth.
To the 14th article he saith, that the contents of this article are true; for this deponent was in the duke of Somerset’s house, at the same time that the said bishop was commanded to keep his house at St. Mary Overy’s: and this deponent did wait upon the said bishop home from the said duke’s house, and followed the said bishop to his study, as he was customed to do, at his repairing to the said bishop: and the said bishop, seeing this deponent there, said unto him, ‘Temple, you must go hence; for I must not speak with you.’ Which the said bishop’s committing to his house was for that he did not subscribe to certain articles concerning justification, as he (this deponent) heard say: and otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories (as before). J. Temple.
ALEXANDER DERING.
Alexander Dering, sworn and examined upon articles 2. 3. 5. 6. 15. and 16. of the matter against the exhibits.
To the 2d and 3d articles he saith and deposeth as he hath before, upon the matter justificatory; and that he knoweth, that the said bishop made a proxy to certain, to appear for him in the said visitation; the which proxy, this deponent did see, and carry from Winton to Southampton, at the time of visitation: and saith, that master Cook, one of the bishop’s proctors, did attend upon the said visitors, before their entering into the diocese: and received them reverently: which said proxy, the said master Cook did exhibit for the said bishop, as well at Lambeth as at the cathedral church, to this deponent’s sight; and did all things, on the said bishop’s behalf, as the sad bishop should have done, if the said bishop had been present.
To the 5th and 6th he saith, the articles are true, of his certain knowledge, for causes above rehearsed in his former depositions; for he saith, he made out the monition for the said visitation — for the deans particularly — and the certificates of the same: and saith that the same bishop’s chancellor, proctor, chaplains, and ministers, with other of his diocese, did reverently receive the same visitors, and did duly obey their commandments and injunctions, as becometh, to his knowledge.
To the 15th and 16th he saith, that at all times that the said bishop and his servants have been abiding and resident at Winton in the space of these fifteen years, the said bishop, and his servants, have been peaceable and quiet, and never made any tumult or commotion, or prepared themselves thereunto: and saith, that he never heard or knew, that the said bishop commanded his servants to wear harness, or take weapon for to make any tumult or commotion, or yet for the safeguard of his own person, or his servants: or to withstand and resist the powers, or any of the king’s subjects; but have always used themselves quietly and peaceably, as true, faithful, and obedient subjects, to this deponent’s knowledge. For he saith, that by the said space of fifteen years, he hath dwelt in the street where the said bishop’s house standeth; and, at the said bishop’s being there, he resorted unto the house; and by reason thereof, he doth know the premises to be true: and otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories (as before). By me, Alex. Dering.
WILLIAM MEDOWE.
William Meaowe, sworn and examined upon articles 4. 5. 6. 7. 9. 14. 15. 16. 18. and 20. of the matter against the exhibits.
To the 4th article of the same matter he saith, that the contents of this article are true. For he was present at Alton and Kingston, as the said bishop took his journey: and heard him so command as well a priest, that came to him to Alton, as the curate of Kingston, quietly to obey all such injunctions and ordinances, as the said visitors should give and set forth in their visitation. And so the said bishop hath commanded his chaplains: insomuch that this deponent, for his part, was before them at Winton, and did obediently receive them, and obey such things as were commanded: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 5th he saith, that article is true of his own knowledge.
To the 6th he saith, that the said visitation began in October, in the first year of the reign of the king: but at what day he cannot remember.
To the 7th he saith, that the said bishop was before the said visitation in the Fleet. For he saith, he was committed to the Fleet at Hampton-court (where this deponent was), and from thence went home with the household to Winchester. But how the said bishop was restrained in the Fleet, he cannot tell; until such time that this deponent, a fortnight before Christmas, being licensed, came unto him: at which time he had but two servants licensed to wait upon him, and his cook to dress his meat.
To the 9th he saith, that the article is notorious, manifest, and public.
To the 14th he saith, that the contents of the article, of his own certain sight and knowledge, are true.
To the 15th and 16th he saith, that the contents of these articles are true, of his certain knowledge; for he hath been the said bishop’s household chaplain. these twenty years. And if any such thing had been done, or attempted, he this deponent should have seen, or known thereof: but saith, that all things contained in these articles were true.
To the 18th he saith, the contents of this article are true; for he heard the sermon; and saith, he spake nothing that should disgrace, or disprove the said master Tonge, and master Ayre: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 20th he saith, that that article is true; for he was present at the sermon, and neither knoweth of, nor yet saw any tumult, that rose then and there, upon the same sermon, nor yet at any time or place since: but that the said bishop was quietly heard, and so departed, saving the throng of the people. To the Interrogatories (as before). William Medowe.
JOHN POTINGER.
John Potinger, sworn and examined upon articles 2. 3. 5. 6. 15. and 16. of the matter against the exhibits.
To the 2d and 3d articles he deposeth as before to the matter justificatory; to the which he referreth him: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 5th and 6th he deposeth as before in his depositions upon the matter justificatory: and further saith, that the said visitation began soon upon Michaelmas, in the first year of the king’s majesty’s reign: upon what day he cannot depose.
To the 15th and 16th he deposeth and saith, that by the space of these ten years, the said bishop of Winton for his part, and his said servants for their parts, all the time of their abode at Winchester, have been ever quiet and peaceable, and so esteemed, reputed, and taken, of this deponent’s hearing, and knowledge: and saith, that in all the said space, he never heard or knew that the said bishop, or yet his servants, made any tumult or commotion, or prepared themselves thereunto, by any manner of means, sign, and token, that this deponent could know or perceive; but used themselves quietly, and abstained from the doing, and attempting thereof: and saith, by the space aforesaid, he never heard or knew that the said bishop commanded his servants, or any of them, to wear harness or weapons for the safeguard of his own person, or his family; nor yet knew, or saw, that any of his servants were in harness, for that purpose, or any other; or yet to resist, or make defense against any of the powers of this realm, or the subjects of the same. And the premises, he saith, are notorious, and famous, within Winton, and all other places where the said bishop hath continued, as far as this deponent hath known or heard. And that the same are true within Winton, he knoweth of his certain knowledge; for he hath dwelled within Winton these ten years, and doth repair to the said bishop’s house at his being there: and therefore knoweth the same to be true.
And he judgeth in his conscience, that there was never any such thing once thought upon by the said bishop and his servants; and he saith, that the said bishop’s servants have been as quiet men, and peaceable, as he hath seen: and otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories: — he deposeth as before. John Potinger.
JACQUES WINGFIELD.
Jacques Wingfield, servant to the bishop of Winton, examined upon the matter against the exhibits, saith as followeth:
To the 7th article he saith, the article containeth truth; for this examinate waited upon the bishop from Hampton-court, to the Fleet, the same day he was committed thither: and tarried there till midnight next following: and then Davy, and Crowte, the said bishop’s servants came thither, whom the warden of the Fleet brought to the bishop, saying that they, with his cook were appointed by the council to be with him, and no more: whereupon this examinate went to a lodging, which he had thereby. And although he made divers means afterward to come to the said bishop his master, yet he could not be suffered, until such time as he was licensed by the council which were there but a little while before the said bishop’s departure from thence: and saith, that none of the said other bishop’s servants, or others, could be suffered, during his imprisonment, to come to him, so far forth as he understood, or could learn.
To the 13th he saith, that the article is true, as he heard both by the said bishop’s report, as all his house: and saith, that from that till Lent next following, the said bishop kept his house very secret, as a close prisoner, without having resort of strangers, of the certain knowledge of this deponent.
To the 14th he saith, the article is true; for this deponent waited on the said bishop to Winchester, and there continued with him, till he was sent for up to the council, and came in a horse-litter, as afore he hath deposed: during which mean time, the said bishop lived there quietly, and duly executed and obeyed all such commandments, and proclamations, and injunctions, as were then ordered to be set forth, without breach of any, as far as ever this deponent ever knew, heard, or perceived.
To the 15th he saith, the contents of the said article are true: for this examinate saith, he hath by long experience for these twenty years’ space, known, seen, and perceived the said bishop’s behavior to be, as in the article is contained; and likewise hath seen, and known his household, for such a number as they were (being seven-score and odd), as quiet and well ordered company, as he hath ever known in his time; and so hath heard them commonly noted, and named in the countries where they have dwelled. And saith, that he never heard, or knew, that any of his [the bishop’s] servants, or others in his house, or his tenants, prepared harness, and were armed, to any intent, or purpose, at any time, but when the bishop prepared for the defense of Portsmouth, against the Frenchmen. And that once, about a year after the said bishop was committed to the Tower, a drunken Fleming being in the house, and having received a broken head of this deponent’s servant, put on a coat of fence, and went into the town of Winchester, to seek this deponent’s servant, ‘to tight with him; and there, was found, with the coat of fence upon him, and quietly brought home again: and saith, that this he knoweth precisely. For if there had been any other preparation, at any time, this examinate should have known thereof, for that he lay next to the said bishop’s armory, and, at all times that the bishop hath sent forth his men or tenants, hath had the charge and conduct of them.
To the 16th he saith, that the article is true, for causes aforesaid, and as he verily believeth: and he never heard, or knew of the contrary.
To the 17th he saith, that the Thursday night articulate, the said master Tonge, and master Ayre, came to the said bishop’s house at Wolvesey, and there supped, and were gently entertained of him, in the sight and certain knowledge of this examinate, who, the same time, supped at the same board with them; and, after supper, heard the bishop tell them that, seeing they were of his church, he would make them no strangers: and therefore required them, without further bidding, to come to him as of his household, and they should be welcome; with other gentle words, tending to that effect.
To the 20th he saith, it is true, as far as ever he heard or knew, and believeth. For this deponent the said day, waited on the said bishop his master, to the said sermon, and there continued all the time of his sermon, which was quietly heard, without any sign or token of disquietness or tumult showed, or attempted, to this deponent’s knowledge: and after the sermon ended, he waited on the said bishop to his house, no word or token of displeasure of any person showed to him, as he saith. Upon the Interrogatories (as before). Jacques Wingfield.
JOHN COOKE.
Master John Cooke, registrar to the bishop of Winchester, examined upon articles 2. 3, 5. 6. and 14. of the aforesaid second matter, deposeth as followeth:
To the 2d article, he saith that the contents of it be true; for this deponent was one of the said bishop’s proctors in that behalf, and, by force thereof, received the king’s majesty’s visitors at Chichester, without the diocese of Winton, and conducted and waited on them into the diocese of Winton, and appeared for the said bishop in the chapter-house of the cathedral church of Winton: and there exhibiting the said bishop’s proxy, gave an oath, ‘in animam episcopi, of obedience to the king’s majesty as supreme head of the church of England, and also of Ireland: and to renounce the bishop of Rome’s usurped power and jurisdiction, according to especial clauses contained in his proxy, to that effect: and further did (as he saith) as he hath deposed in his former depositions, to certain articles of the matter justificatory.
To the 3d and 5th he deposeth, that it is true that he the said bishop required this deponent, and commanded his chancellor, and other his officers in this deponent’s hearing, to attend on the king’s majesty’s visitors, and to see them with all reverence received and obeyed, and their commandments executed accordingly: which things, he saith, were truly executed, according to the request and commandment of the said bishop: and the said visitors quietly obeyed, and received in the said diocese, of this deponent’s certain sight and knowledge, without any disobedience showed by any of the bishop’s officers, or of any other of his diocese of Winton, as far as this deponent knoweth.
To the 6th he saith, that he doth not presently remember what day or month the visitation began. But, as he remembereth, it was about October, in the year articulate.
To the 14th he saith, that after the said bishop, being delivered out of the Fleet, returned to his diocese, this deponent heard him preach two sermons, one at Farnham, and another at Winton, wherein he exhorted his audience to be obedient to the king’s majesty, as their sovereign lord, and supreme head; alleging divers texts of Scripture for the same. And after he came to Winton, he caused, and commanded to be duly executed and obeyed, all such proclamations and injunctions, as were set forth and commanded by the king’s majesty’s authority, of the hearing and knowledge of this deponent. John Cooke.
THOMAS NEVE.
Master Thomas Neve, servant to the bishop of Winton, in whose service he hath continued above these twenty years, of the age of 50 years and above; sworn and examined upon the articles 15. 16. and 20. of the matter against the exhibits, saith as followeth:
To the 15th article he saith, the contents of the said article be true, of this deponent’s certain knowledge. For (as he saith) he, having been the said bishop’s household servant above these twenty years’ space, hath, by all that time, as well at the being of the said bishop at Winchester, as in all other places where he hath kept household, marked and seen the said bishop to be a man of much quiet behavior: and in like case all his household, without any disturbance or commotion amongst themselves or others, or giving occasion of tumult, or sedition, as far forth as ever this examinate could see or perceive; and hath heard the said bishop, in his communication, divers times commend quietness and obedience, and to be much offended, when he hath heard of the contrary. And saith, that he never knew nor heard that ever the said bishop, or any of his men, were in harness, or prepared harness, or other weapon, for any purpose or intent to make any stir, or business, or resistance, to any power: saving only, that at such time as they made preparation to serve the king’s majesty in France, and likewise, at another time, in Scotland, about the same time that he was committed to the Fleet, he showed himself well willing, and forward to serve his majesty, as to his duty appertaineth. And saith, that as well the said bishop, as his servants, have always, in the parts of Winchester, and other places, where he hath dwelt, commonly been taken and named for sober and quiet persons, of this deponent’s certain knowledge and hearing, as he saith. And also saith, that he hath heard the said bishop, very many times, as well in his sermons at divers places, as in other talk, as much commend quietness and obedience, and discommend discord and disobedience, as ever he heard any man in all his life, as he saith.
To the 16th article, he deposeth, as to the next afore, adding, that shortly after the death of king Henry the Eighth, this examinate, communing with the said bishop alone in his house at Southwark, said unto him, that he was sorry to hear that the said bishop was put out of the king’s will, and out of the king’s majesty’s council.
Whereunto the said bishop made this answer in effect, that he was glad thereof, and would as gladly be content to live in quietness, under the common justice of the realm, as any subject that the king hath:and willed expressly this deponent, that he himself should conform himself (both in word and deed) to quietness, and cause and counsel all his company to do the like. And the rest of this article he saith is true, as far as ever he knew, and doth believe it, for causes before by him to the 15th article deposed.
To the 20th he saith, that he the said deponent was present at the said sermon, and saw and perceived very well, that the said bishop was very quietly heard. For else this examinate, who stood a good space off, and heard well every word that he spake, should not so easily have heard him, as he did, in case any disturbance or unquietness had been stirred amongst the audience, as he said there was none at that time and place, as far as this examinate could see, or hear. And the said bishop, after his said sermon, departed thence to his house, in quiet manner, without any tumult or disturbance showed or attempted against him: and this he knoweth, for he waited on the bishop, at the same time, from the pulpit to his house: and saith also, that he never knew or heard of any tumult, or disturbance, risen since anywhere, by occasion of the said sermon. Upon the Interrogatories — To the 1st he answereth as above, in the beginning of his examination: adding that he hath four pounds yearly wages, and a livery of the said bishop; also twenty marks of annuity, out of the manor of Estmeyne, in recompense of sundry charges, that he hath been at in the said bishop’s service. Also the keeping of Horsley Park of the said bishop by patent: and the herbage, with other things thereof, by indenture. Also he hath a copyhold in Havant, which he had in recompense of the farm of a benefice, which he caused this deponent to lose.
To the 2d interrogatory he answereth, that although the said bishop be his master, yet, he saith, upon his oath, that he beareth no other affection to him, touching this matter, but that he wisheth that he might have justice with favor, as he would wish to a stranger.
To the 3d : he desireth, that the said bishop might clear himself, and so to have victory, as justice will, and no otherwise.
To the 4th he deposeth as before. Thomas Neve.
JAMES BASSET.
James Basset, servant to the bishop of Winton, sworn and examined upon articles 4. 7. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17 18. and 20. of the said matter against the exhibits.
To the 4th he saith, that the article is true. For by the way at Alton, as the bishop was coming to the council, a priest of the diocese came to the bishop, to consult what he should do at the king’s visitation; whom the said bishop willed to obey all such things as should be commanded by the said visitors. And likewise at Kingston, he gave like charge to the curate of Kingston, to this deponent’s hearing.
To the 7th he saith, the article is true; for this deponent did continually lie in London, all the time of the said bishop’s being in the Fleet, and oftentimes went to the Fleet to see him, and could not be suffered to come in. For the warden and the porter told him, that they had in commandment, that no man should repair unto him, other than those two servants which remained continually with the said bishop all the time of his being in the Fleet. Howbeit he saith, that master Medowe, his chaplain, about ten days, and this deponent, and others, about five days before Christmas, had license to repair unto him: and saith, that at his being in the Fleet, the king’s majesty’s visitation was holden in the diocese of Winton, to this deponent’s certain knowledge.
To the 13th he saith, the article is true; referring himself to his depositions, and to articles 11. and 12. of the matter justificatory.
To the 14th he saith it is true, for he went down with the said bishop to Winton, and knoweth that he lived there quietly, and that he did duly, with all diligence, execute all such laws and proclamations and orders, as were set forth by the king: as the little book of the communion set forth before Easter, which book the said bishop caused to be sent abroad within his diocese, with such diligence and haste as he possibly could, to this deponent’s knowledge.
To the 15th and 16th he saith, the said bishop is and hath been a man of quiet and peaceable behavior, and ever hath been counted and taken for a person of quietness: and saith that there was never commandment given by the said bishop to his servants, to wear any harness for his defense, or to foresee any such safeguard for the defense of his person; for if they had, this deponent, being always one of the nighest about him, must needs have known of it.
And saith also, for his servants: they are, and ever have been, counted to be as quiet a number and sort of men, as any man keepeth: nor was there any harness worn by any of his servants for any such purpose, nor any such manner of safeguard foreseen, as he saith.
To the 17th this deponent saith, that this article is true, for this deponent was present, when the bishop did welcome them that night that they supped with the said bishop, whereas he used them familiarly, and gently. And after supper, when the bishop departed from them, he offered them his house to be welcome unto, during their abode there, to this deponent’s hearing.
To the 18th he saith, that he was present at a sermon, made by the said bishop on the Sunday after the coming of the said master Ayre and Tonge, in the cathedral church of Winton, as he was appointed to do before their coming; and, in the said sermon, the bishop did not disgrace or disprove, nor speak any thing which might touch or deface the said Tonge and Ayre, of this deponent’s certain knowledge. For he heard the sermon, from the beginning to the ending.
To the 20th he saith, that the article is true; for he was present at the said sermon, from the beginning to the ending: which was as peaceably and quietly heard as might be, in so great an audience.
And the said bishop departed quietly home, without disturbance; and he never heard or knew, at any time since that, that there rose or grew any tumult there, or in any other place. Upon the Interrogatories (as before). James Basset.
JOHN SETON.
Master John Seton, sworn and examined upon articles 4. 7. 14. 15. 16. 17. and 18. of the said matter against the exhibits, saith as follows:
To the 4th , he saith, that before the said bishop’s coming up to London from his house at Walton, which was a little before the king’s visitation, the said bishop, hearing that the said visitation should be shortly holden and kept in his diocese, willed this deponent to do his duty in receiving of them, and obediently to do all such things as by them should be commanded; or saying in like words: and otherwise he cannot depose; for this deponent remained behind, at the said bishop’s house at Walton.
To the 7th : he heard divers of the said bishop’s servants report, that they made great suit to come unto the said bishop at his being in the Fleet, and could not be suffered to come in: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 14th he saith, that the contents of the article are true; for he saith, that he was continually with the said bishop, at his coming to Winton: and knew and saw all the proclamations, statutes, and incjuntions, that were set forth then by the king’s authority, to be observed duly, and quietly kept and obeyed by the said bishop, and his ministers of the diocese: and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 15th and 16th he saith, that by all the time that this deponent hath been the said bishop’s chaplain, he hath been of the said bishop’s household, and still continueth in the same: by all which space, he saith, of his certain sight and knowledge, that the said bishop hath been a man always quiet, peaceable, and never made or caused to be made any tumult or commotion, at any place where he hath kept and been resident within his diocese, or elsewhere: and saith, that his servants have been, and are, men of quiet behavior, and so using themselves; never making any tumult or commotion: and he saith, that he never knew, heard, or saw, that the bishop at any time commanded his servants to wear harness or weapons, either for the safeguard of his own person, or his family and household, or for to resist the powers, or any other of the king’s true subjects, nor yet ever minded any such thing, as he thinketh in his conscience; for he never could perceive or see any likelihood or token of any such thing: but saith, that the said bishop and his servants have lived peaceably and quietly, as men without fear, not looking for danger of enemies. And for such persons, in all places where the said bishop hath been, he and his servants have been commonly taken and reputed, as he saith. And deposeth, that he hath heard the said bishop oftentimes will his servants to be quiet and obedient, and to suffer wrong and injuries, rather than to show themselves ready thereto by any means.
To the 17th he saith, that at the time the said master Ayre and master Tonge came to Winton, to be instituted canons there, the said bishop, on the Thursday next before the Sunday that he preached, had the said master Ayre and [master] Tonge to supper, and did gently entertain them, and made them good cheer. And after supper, the said bishop said, ‘Ye are now of my church, and you must take this house as your own, as the others of the church do: and saith, that the said bishop caused their writings for their institution and installation speedily to be made. And after supper this deponent and master Watson, for their parts, went with these two to their inns; and there made them good cheer: the like whereof this deponent hath not showed to any man in four years before; for he saith, in four years’ space before, he never drank in any layman’s house in Winton: and the premises, he saith, are true, of his own sight and knowledge; and otherwise he cannot depose.
To the 18th he saith, that he was present at the said sermon, made by the said bishop, in the day articulate: and saith, in the same the said bishop did not speak of any thing that should disgrace or reprove the said master Ayre and [master] Tonge, or any of them; or spake any thing of them, that this deponent heard or could perceive: and otherwise he cannot depose. Upon the Interrogatories: — he answereth as before. John Seton.
NOTES FOR THE READER A BRIEF TABLE OR INDEX OF SUCH NOTES AND SPECIALTIES, WHEREUNTO STEPHEN GARDINER DID AGREE AND GRANT; CONCERNING REFORMATION OF RELIGION.
It may seem to thee, loving reader, we have been too prolix and tedious in reciting the multitude of so many witnesses, which needed not here, peradventure, to have been inserted, considering our other matters more necessary, and the greatness of the volumes: but the cause moving us thereunto was so reasonable, that we could not leave them out. For seeing there be so many yet to this day, that stick so much to Gardiner’s wit, learning, and religion, taking him for such a champion, and a firm pillar of the popish church — for such as hitherto have been so deceived in him, we have taken here a little pains: so that if they will either credit his own words, works, sermons, writings, disputations, or else will be judged by his own witnesses on his own part here produced, they shall see how clearly and evidently he withstandeth the pope’s supremacy:
First, In his writings, as in his book ‘De vera Obedientia.”
Secondly , In his disputations and defensions at Louvain, and other places.
Thirdly , In his open sermons and preaching, as where he expoundeth the place ‘Tu es Petrus,’ nothing at all to make for authority of the Romish bishop, marvelling how the pope could usurp so much to take up that place to build upon, when Christ had taken it up before to build his church. Item, That the confession of Peter was the confession of all the apostles, like as the blessing given to Peter, pertained as well to all the apostles. Item, That the place, ‘Pasce oves meas,’ was not special to Peter alone, but general to all the apostles. Also that the Greek church did never receive the said bishop of Rome for their universal head. Item, That the authority of the bishop of Rome, was not received of most part of christian princes. Item, He would not grant, that the said authority was received generally. Item, That the church was builded upon Christ’s faith, and not upon Peter; and though Peter was called ‘princeps apostolorum,’ that was nothing else but like as it is in an inquest, where the foreman or headman, is not so called because he is best or chiefest of that company; but because he speaketh first Item, When the keys were given, they were given generally to all the apostles. Item, He taketh away all such scriptures which are thought to serve for the pope’s supremacy, as ‘super hac petra:’ ‘pasce oves meas:’ ‘princeps apostolorum,’ etc.: proving, that they serve nothing for his authority. Item, In his book ‘De vera Obedientia,’ he did not only write against the pope’s supremacy, but also did defend the same at Louvain.
And moreover in his sermons he did allege and preach the same, and that, vehemently — pithily — earnestly — very earnestly — very forwardly.
And not only did so vehemently, pithily, earnestly, and forwardly, preach himself against the pope’s supremacy, but also did cause master White (then schoolmaster, after bishop of Winchester), to make certain verses extolling the king’s supremacy against the usurped power of the pope, encouraging also his scholars to do the like. Item, For the space of fourteen years together, he preached against the pope’s supremacy in divers sermons, and especially in one sermon before king Henry. Item, For ceremonies and images, which were abused: to be taken away by public authority, he did well allow it, as a child to have his book taken from him, when he abuseth, or delighteth only in the golden cover. Item, For dissolving of monkery, nunnery, or friary, and for dissolution of monasteries, he granteth they were justly suppressed.
Concerning images being by king Edward’s Injunctions abolished, he exhorted the people in his sermons to be contented therewith Monks and friars he calleth flattering knaves. Friars he never liked in all his life. Monks he counted but belly-gods.
The going about of St. Nicholas, St. Katherine, and St. Clement; he affirmeth them to be children’s toys.
For taking away or transposing of chantry obits, he referreth it to the arbitrement of the politic rulers, granting that in dissolving them it might well be so done. Item, He wisheth them to be committed to a better use.
The observing of days, hours, number, time, and place, if they be orderly and publicly commanded by the rulers, it is but to set the church in an outward and public order. But if a man inwardly and privately be addicted to the same, thinking his prayer otherwise not availing, but by observing of the same, it is an error.
The Communion set out by king Edward, he liked well.
The Book of Common Service, he was content both to keep it himself and caused it to be kept of others.
For the Homilies he exhorted the people, in his preaching, to come to the church to hear them read.
In sum: to all injunctions, statutes, and proclamations, set forth by the king and superior powers, he yieldeth and granteth. Item, Cardinal Pole, coming to the French king to stir him up against England, Winchester caused him to be expelled out of France. — Witness:
Cuthbert, bishop of Durham. Item, The said bishop sworn against the pope by express clauses in his proxy.
Now, gentle reader, lay these his writings, preaching, and doings, with his doings in queen Mary’s time, and thou shalt see how variable he was, how inconstant and contrary to himself, how perjured, and far differing from the report of one, who, in an English book, 1 set out in queen Mary’s time, reported (as it appeareth in the said book to be seen), that there were three only in England, whose consciences had been never distained in religion, of whom, he said, the aforesaid bishop of Winchester was one.
NOTES AND POINTS CONCERNING REFORMATION OF RELIGION, WHERE UNTO HE WOULD NOT GRANT.
Contrary to the real and natural presence of the body in the sacrament, and to transubstantiation, he would not agree or subscribe.
Contrary to the mass, he would not dearly grant; but saying it did profit the quick and the dead. Although against the mass of “Scala Coeli,” “masses satisfactory,” and “masses in number,” he could not find them by Scripture.
To the marriage of priests, he would not agree.
To the article of justification, he would not agree; and divers other places.
Also, here is to be noted in these aforesaid depositions, especially in the depositions of Andrew Beynton, and of master Chalenor, how falsely, and traitor-like, Winchester behaved himself against king Henry the Eighth at Ratisbon, insomuch that the said king, for the secret informations which he had of the bishop, caused in all pardons afterward, all treasons committed beyond the seas, to be excepted, which was most meant for the bishop’s cause. Item, He did exempt the said bishop out of his testament, as one being wilful and contentious, and that would trouble them all. Item, That the said king Henry, before his death, was certainly believed to abhor the said bishop more than any Englishman in his realm. Item, That the said king exempted also out of his testament the bishop of Westminster, for that he was schooled in Winchester’s school. Item, The said bishop of Winchester, was found to be the secret worker, that, three years before the king’s death, divers of the privy chamber were indicted of heresies; for the which the said king was much offended.
Thus thou seest, reader, Stephen Gardiner here described, what in all his doings he is, and what is to be thought of him; as who is neither a true protestant, nor a right papist: neither firm in his error, nor yet stedfast in the truth: neither a true friend to the pope, nor yet a full enemy to Christ: false in king Henry’s time; obstinate in king Edward’s time; perjured, and a murderer, in queen Mary’s time: but mutable and inconstant in all times.
And finally, whereas in his letters to the lord protector and others, usually he vaunteth so much of his late sovereign lord king Henry the Eighth that dead is, and of the great reputation that he was in with him, behold before, in the depositions of the lord Paget; and there ye shall see, that the king, before his death, both excepting him out of his pardons, and quite striking him out of his last will and testament, so detested and abhorred him as he did no Englishman more. And whereas the lord Paget, being sent in message from the king to the bishop, by other words than the king’s mind and will was, of his own dexterity gave to him good and gracious words: then, indeed, the king neither knew, nor yet by him sent the same Whereupon the bishop, persuading himself otherwise of the king’s favor towards him than it was in deed, was far deceived.
And this, now, being sufficient concerning the witnesses and their depositions, let us return to the rest of the twentieth act and session of the process, where we left off.
The publication of the witnesses, which next before I have put, being had, as you have heard and granted, the judges, at the like petition of the promoters, did assign to hear final judgment and decree, in this matter, on Friday the 18th day of this month of February, between the hours of eight and ten aforenoon, in this place: The said bishop of Winchester under like protestation as afore dissenting also to the said assignation.
THE TWENTY-FIRST SESSION The twenty-first act or session was held on Friday the l3th day of February, between the aforesaid hours, and in the place assigned, before all the judges and commissioners, in the presence of Thomas Argall and William Say, actuaries.
Here, and at this time, final judgment being assigned to be heard, the bishop of Winchester, under his former protestations, did exhibit for proof of his matters and additionals, five books in print: videlicet, one entitled thus: ‘Stephani Winton, de Vera Obedientia Oratio:’ item, another of Peter Martyr, called, ‘Tractatio de Sacramentis Eucharistiae:’ item, another called, ‘Catechismus’ set forth by my lord archbishop of Canterbury: item, another entitled ‘De divinis, apostolicis, atque ecclesiasticis Traditionibus, ductore Martino Peresio Guadixiensium Episcopo 47 :’ item, ‘Injunctions given by the king’s, majesty that now is, to all his subjects, as well of the clergy, as the laity:’ also, ‘A Proclamation against those that do innovate, alter, or leave doone 48 , any rite or ceremony in the church, of their private authority:’ all which he did exhibit (as far as they made for him, and none otherwise) in presence of the promoters, accepting the contents of the same exhibits, as far as they made for the office; and as much as they made against the office, protesting of the nullity and invalidity of the exhibits aforesaid (saving only the king’s majesty’s injunctions and proclamation) and alleging the same to be such, whereunto no faith ought to be given.
And as concerning the aforesaid five books, with the injunctions and proclamation, before by the bishop exhibited, because they are in print (here omitting them) we thought best to refer you to the perusing of the same. The said bishop also, under his said protestations, did exhibit certain exceptions in writings against the witnesses, which he desired to be admitted: the promoters protesting of the nullity, inefficacy, overmuchgenerality, and invalidity of the same exceptions; and alleging that they were such, whereunto no faith ought to be given nor the same to be admitted. The exceptions, although they were not admitted, yet for divers considerations I thought good to recite them.
EXCEPTIONS GIVEN, AND LAID IN BY THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER; AGAINST SUCH WITNESSES AS WERE PRODUCED AGAINST HIM.
The bishop of Winchester — under all and singular protestations, heretofore by him made in this matter, and the same always to him saved and reserved, accepting and approving all and singular such parts of the depositions of the witnesses produced and examined against him and by him in this behalf, as the law bindeth him, and as they make for his part, and for this intent and none otherwise — saith, that forasmuch as certain of the witnesses, brought forth by the said bishop and against him, be of the king’s majesty’s most honorable council; that is to say, the duke of Somerset, the lord treasurer, the lord great master, the lord privy seal, the lord great chamberlain, the lord Cobham, the lord Paget, sir William Harbert: unto whom, for that respect, and also in consideration of their estate, duty requireth seemly and convenable speech to be used of them: [in] which mind of his behavior in language towards them, the said bishop protesteth, and by way of exception allegeth; and excepting saith, that the said noblemen have been, without any corporal oath by them taken, contrary to the order of the ecclesiastical laws, examined and deposed: unto whom, because the said oath-giving was not by special consent remitted, but especially and expressly by the part of the said bishop required, their deposition by the ecclesiastical laws hath no such strength of testimony, as the judge should or might, for the knowledge of truth, have regard to them. For, albeit the quality of their estate be such, and their sayings also, in words declared to proceed of their faith and honor, with which it becometh no private man to contend,2 nor to affirm, by objection, that they would otherwise say or depose upon a corporal oath, than they do now: yet, because the order of the law ecclesiastical requireth the oath corporal, lately practiced in this realm, in persons of like estate: the said bishop dare the more boldly allege this exception: and so much the rather, that the lord Paget hath, in his deposition, evidently and manifestly neglected honor, faith, and honesty, and showeth himself desirous, beyond the necessary answer, to that was demanded of him (only of ingrate malice), to hinder, as much as in him is, the said bishop, who was in the said lord’s youth, his teacher and tutor, afterward his master, and then his beneficial master, to obtain of the king’s majesty that dead is, one of the rooms of the clerkship of the signet for him: which ingrate malice of the said lord Paget, the said bishop saith, in the depositions manifestly doth appear, as the said bishop offereth himself ready to prove and show. And moreover, the said bishop against the lord Paget allegeth at such time as the said lord Paget was produced against the said bishop, the same lord Paget openly, in the presence of the judges, and others there present, said, how the said bishop did fly from justice, which made him notoriously suspected, not to be affected indifferently to the truth (as seemed him); and without cause therein to speak, as enemy to the said bishop. Objecting against the lord Paget, as afore in especial: and generally excepting the omission of the corporal oath in the rest, he saith further — that the sayings of the said noblemen, as they in some points depose only upon hearsay, in some points speaking in general, declaring no specialty, in some points declaring a specialty without such quality as the proof of the fact requireth; without giving such a reason of their saying, as the law in the deposition of a witness requireth, when there is deposition of such matter: the same their sayings do not in law conclude, nor make proof of any matter prejudicial to the said bishop, as upon the consideration, of the depositions may appear. And finally, the said bishop, by way of exception, allegeth, and excepting saith, that the lord Paget, being produced against the said bishop, was by the office examined, as appeareth, upon the interrogatories ministered by the office, without making the bishop privy what the said interrogatories were, to the intent he might understand what new matter were deduced, to use his just defense in that behalf. And, although the bishop produced those noblemen, as witnesses to prove his behavior, at their repair unto him in the Tower, and at his coming to them, when he was commanded to appear before them at the king’s majesty’s palace, whereby his sayings and answers before them might appear, with their testimony in general of the bishop’s estimation in our late sovereign lord’s days: yet the same personages be produced again for the office, to be taken and used as witnesses against the said bishop in the principal matter of that they themselves supposed to be true in their process, thereby, with their own testimony, to justify their own doings: whereupon they did proceed so as it appeareth, that the same personages be the judges in the first sentence, and brought here witnesses, whereby to approve the justness of their own former doings; which is against all law, equity, and justice. And touching the other witnesses, such as appear in the acts, to have made a corporal oath, — amongst which be also four of the king’s most honorable council, sir Anthony Wingfield, sir Ralph Sadler, sir Edward North, and master Cecil — the said bishop, with due respects to their worships, saith their sayings and depositions, where they be general, and declare no specialty against the said bishop, wherein he should especially offend, conclude no proof in law, nor ought to be prejudicial to the said bishop, as by consideration of the depositions may appear.
And where master Cecil deposeth upon the 10th article, he is therein singular, and concludeth no proof in such a matter of weight, and telleth not that matter touching the king’s majesty’s young age, as he uttered it, and calleth it a commandment that he uttered not so, leaving out the joining of the council to limit the king’s authority; as the said bishop, upon his oath in answer hath affirmed: and in the 8th article, the declaration of his knowledge of commandment given to the bishop to preach, by knowledge, from master Smith (as he saith), varieth from master Watson, a witness in that part produced. And as for master Coxe, master Ayre, master Honing, master Cheke, master Chalenor, master Record, and master Smith, the bishop, excepting, allegeth, that either they depose generally, or by hearsay, not concluding any proof, or else so utter their own affection, as they be worthy of no credit, or else show themselves so loth to seem to remember any thing that might relieve the bishop, as they ought to be reputed not indifferent. And moreover, the said bishop saith, that master Coxe had his conversation so touched in the latter end of the bishop’s sermon, for priests to marry contrary to a law, and against order, that it was no marvel though he were offended. Master Ayre declareth himself to have complained of the said bishop, whose complaint by witness already produced is reproved. Master Record, saying that the bishop is yet disobedient, and so wrongfully judging of the bishop in his private prejudice, is unworthy all faith in the matter.
Master Chalenor showeth himself to mistake the matter, not distinguishing Hampton-court from Westminster. Master Smith, in declaring of his treating with the bishop, doth plainly confound the month of February with June. Master Honing’s deposition hath no matter substantial in form of proof declared. And also the said bishop, excepting as afore and under his protestation above mentioned, allegeth, that all and singular the witnesses aforesaid, examined against the said bishop, be, in their pretensed depositions, variable, singular, discrepant, repugnant, and contrary one to another; and not proving, in any wise, such things as they go about and endeavor themselves to depose of. All which matters the said bishop allegeth as they be above respectively mentioned, touching the witnesses concerning the premises against them, as is aforesaid, objected and excepted, as well for the causes before respectively specified, as other causes contained in their pretensed depositions: to whose sayings, credit and faith, sufficient by the law, ought not to be given, as is required for proof and testimony of truth in process, as by their said pretensed depositions more plainly appeareth; unto which and unto the law (as is expedient for him and none otherwise), the said bishop referreth himself in this behalf. And under his said protestations he allegeth, that these things before by him respectively excepted against the said witnesses, were and be true and notorious, as by the acts and depositions of the same witnesses, and by other records and things had, exhibited, done, and made in this matter, doth appear; and also, by proof to be further made by the said bishop, if he may be admitted thereunto, shall appear; and therewith to what is already deposed, to which (as is aforesaid) the bishop answereth himself so far forth as they make for him and none otherwise.
Besides the premises, the said bishop also, under like protestations as afore, did exhibit, for the better information of the judges in this matter, certain papers: one, containing a collation made of the depositions in both parts, what was said, and how it was said in the bishop’s sermon; and of the charge and discharge in the same: which collation, for that I have before comprehended it in the table and index of notes, I thought it not here necessary to occupy any more room. — Item, another abridgment of collections touching the said bishop’s sermon. — Item, another touching the articles of the council sending to the said bishop to the Tower. — Another entitled “A note of the bishop’s conformity in prison, with confutation of that which hath been in general terms called in him, obstinacy and disobedience.” — Another entitled, “Answers by evident deeds, to such matter at large in words, as is surmised against the bishop of Winchester:” the promoters protesting also of the nullity of the same exhibits, and requiring judgment to be given.
Then and there the judges assigned again to hear judgment, on the following day, between the hours of nine and eleven of the clock before noon, in the same place: the bishop under his protestation, dissenting to the said assignation, and protesting of a grief, for that he hath not yet all the exhibits again, nor space sufficient to consult with his learned counsel in this behalf: and also requiring another temporal counsellor, because one of them already assigned unto him cannot tarry longer in these parts.
THE TWENTY-SECOND SESSION.
The twenty-second act or session, wherein appeared Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, personally, was sped in the hall of the manor at Lambeth, on Saturday the 14th day of February, before all the judges delegate, in the presence of Thomas Argall, and William Say, actuaries.
On this day and place, according to the assignment in that behalf, between the hours prefixed, the promoters delivering to the archbishop the sentence in writing, required the same to be given in presence of the bishop of Winchester, who, under his former protestations, before the said actuaries and the multitude there assembled, making a certain appellation from the said judges to our sovereign lord the king’s most excellent majesty, according as was contained in certain paper-leaves, which he, then and there openly read; and upon the reading thereof, required the said actunties, to make him an instrument thereof; and the witnesses there present, to bear testimony thereunto: protesting also, that from thenceforth he intended not, by any of his doings or sayings, to recede from the benefit of his said appellation. The copy of which appellation so by the bishop read, here followeth.
THE APPEAL OF THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER BEFORE THE SENTENCE DEFINITIVE.
In the name of God, Amen. Before you judges delegates, or commissaries pretensed, under named, and before you notaries public, and authentic persons: and also before you witnesses here present, I Stephen, by the permission of God bishop of Winchester, to the intent to appeal, and likewise principally of nullity to querell under the best and most effectual way, manner, and form of law which I best and most effectually ought to do, and to all purposes and effects of the law that may follow thereof, say, allege, and in this writing propone in law — That, although I have obtained, and do obtain, hold, keep, and occupy the said bishopric of Winchester lawfully; and the same (so by me lawfully had and obtained), with all the rights, and appurtenances of the same, have possessed, by many years, peaceably and quietly; and so, (saving always such things and griefs, as be under written) do possess now, at this present time; and, for the very and true bishop, and lawful possessor aforesaid have been, and am commonly taken, named, had, holden, and reputed, openly and notoriously: and albeit I was and am ( as I ought to be 49 ) in peaceable possession of the law, to take, have and receive the fruits, rents, provents, obventions, and other rights and profects, whatsoever they be, in any wise to the bishopric aforesaid appertaining, and of the same bishopric, by any manner of means, coming or happening: and though also I was, and am, a man of perfect and full integrity and of good name and fame, and also of life, manners, and conversation, laudable; not suspected, not excommunicated, nor interdicted; neither with any crime, at least notorious or famous, nor with any disobedience or contentions against any my superiors, noted, respersed, or convicted; but to obey the law, and to stand to the commandments, precepts, and monitions of the most noble prince, and our sovereign lord Edward the Sixth (by the grace of God, king of England, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, and in earth of the church of England and Ireland, supreme head), as far forth as they be consonant, conformable, and agreeable with the laws, statutes, parliaments, and injunctions of the said king’s majesty, and ordained by his authority, published, made, and admitted — being not repugnant to the same: and as I may obey the same, saving the integrity of my conscience, am always ready likewise, as hitherto I have always been, as far as I am bound, duly to obey the same, and, with God’s help so do intend to do hereafter, and all other my superiors: — Yet, nevertheless, the most reverend father in God Thomas, by the sufferance of God archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, and metropolitan; Nicholas bishop of London; Thomas bishop of Ely, one of the king’s majesty’s privy council; Henry bishop of Lincoln; sir William Peter, knight, one of the king’s majesty’s principal secretaries, and one of the king’s highness’ privy council; sir James Hales, one of the justices of the Common Pleas; John Oliver, and Griffith Leyson, doctors of the civil law; John Gosnall, Richard Goodrick, esquires, commissaries or judges delegate, as they pretend themselves, by virtue of commission to them committed by the king’s majesty’s proceeding against me (the bishop aforesaid), of their pretensed office, necessarily promoted, as is pretended: laying and objecting against me certain articles, as well for the generality of them as otherwise, of no value, efficacy, or effect: and thereupon, and upon other interrogatories ministered privately by them, without the knowledge of the said bishop, taking away his just defense in that behalf: examining also divers and sundry witnesses upon them, contrary to the due order and deposition of the law, and without any corporal oath due and accustomed in that behalf, to them given, or by them taken, notwithstanding the said witnesses were, and be, laymen, and the cause original (as it is pretended) very urgent, tending to the deprivation of a bishop: which judges, or pretensed commissaries, earnestly and vehemently defend the same, against the said bishop, and, showing themselves manifestly judges not indifferent, but very much affectionate against me; and to be therein to me, and to the truth of my just cause, vehemently, notoriously, and worthily suspected: and that my lord of Canterbury aforesaid, was one of the judges that caused and commanded me (the said bishop) to the prison in the Tower of London, where I am now prisoner; and upon that commandment have remained as prisoner, almost these three years continually: also master James Hales, master Goodrick, and master Gosnall, commissioners pretensed aforesaid, were of counsel, and gave their counsel and advice concerning the same sending of me to the Tower, and imprisonment aforesaid: moreover my lord of Canterbury, my lord of London, and my lord of Lincoln, commissioners pretensed aforesaid, do, contrary to the laws ecclesiastical of this realm, teach and set forth the manifest and condemned error against the very true presence of Christ’s body and blood in the sacrament of the altar; and because I (the said bishop) am, and have been always, of the true catholic faith, contrary to them (who in that, as well by my writings as otherwise, have and do set forth, according to the truth and verity of Christ’s word, and the catholic faith and doctrine, that in the same sacrament of the altar, is the very presence of Christ’s body and blood); therefore the same archbishop and bishops have and do show themselves unduly affected against me, and be notoriously in the truth adversaries unto me: and sir William Peter was one of the judges, that decreed the fruits of my bishopric (not according to the order of law, or upon cause sufficient) unjustly, contrary to the laws, to be sequestered; and did sequester them, ‘de facto, sed non de jure;’ and now is judge in his own cause, concerning his own fact; and so entreateth, and affecteth the maintenance of the same against me (the said bishop), as his own proper cause, both in the place of judgment, and other places: and also all the said judges have so notoriously handled, used, and openly manifested themselves in the distrust, and in their proceeding in this matter against me (the said bishop) that they seem, and appear openly, to indifferent men them hearing and perceiving, rather to be parties, than indifferent judges; and show, and declare manifestly, in words and deeds, their undue affection towards me, in my matter aforesaid; and more earnestly, fervently, and rigorously saying, imagining, and intending, with all their endeavors and industry, what they can possibly say, and do against me, than any other of them that be of counsel against me, do, or can imagine, or invent to say, or do; and at no time do show themselves like indifferent judges, to say, speak, declare, or do in word or deed, any thing or matter besides granting of process, that might touch or return to my just innocency, and just and lawful defense, notoriously known to them as judges in this behalf, opening and manifesting thereby, and by other the premises, their undue affection, purpose, and intent they have to deprive me from my bishopric, and to make their determination by sentence against me: and that notwithstanding the copies of such necessary writings, and exhibits, as were exhibited in this cause by the part of me the said bishop, which be very necessary and expedient for the proof of my part in this behalf, be not yet delivered me, whereupon I might consult with my counsel: and that the fact and state of the cause is not yet fully opened or declared, the said judges having, for their affections, and other the causes aforesaid, no respect thereunto, nor to minister justice in this behalf, having as yet little or no knowledge at all of the cause; and show themselves ready, and, with all their affections, industry, and endeavor, prepare themselves to give sentence of deprivation against me; and, in effect, uttered the same openly in judgment. And to the intent the verity of the fact, and due proof thereof, whereby the innocency of me (the said bishop) might evidently appear, should pass over unknown, and to have the same concealed, cloaked, and hid, the said pretensed commissaries sitting, and unjustly and unlawfully proceeding, in this matter yesterday, being the 13th of this present month of February, then being the first time, that, in the matter, was assigned to hear sentence, and the first opening or declaring of any part of the fact, after the publication and other probations made; having no respect to any of the premises, nor yet that it was almost three of the clock that I returned home to the Tower, to repose and refresh myself; whereunto, without any consideration had in any the premises, [they] assigned the next morrow; videlicet, this day, at nine of the clock aforenoon, to hear definitive sentence in this matter; not first admitting the exceptions laid before them by the said bishop, but refusing so to do, and thereby rejecting the same, no day being of respect betwixt the said days; whereby it is notorious, that the said time assigned was and is so short, that the counsel of me the said bishop, dwelling about St. Paul’s, and I remaining prisoner in the Tower, where the gates be shut at five of the clock in the evening, and till after six in the morning, that there was no time sufficient for me, and my counsel, to peruse and examine such witnesses, proofs, and writings, as were, as well of my part, as against me, in this behalf produced and exhibited, and deliberately to consult thereupon together; especially this cause being a very urgent, weighty, and arduous cause, concerning the deprivation (as it is intended) of a bishop of many years’ continuance therein, from his bishopric: and that I, being of long time kept in close prison, was so pestered the said 13th day, being yesterday, with the populous audience, that I repair this day with the great travail of my body, and make my personal appearance again to the said place of judgment. And that the said injuries and griefs aforesaid, and other the premises, under manner and form above specified, done, and made, were and be true, public, notorious, manifest, and famous. Whereupon I (the said bishop), feeling and perceiving to be grieved of and upon the premises, and of such other things, as of the acts, facts, doings, and proceedings of the said commissioners may be duly collected, do, from them, and from every of them, appeal in this writing, to the king’s majesty aforesaid; and ask apostules, first, secondarily, and thirdly, instantly, more instantly, and most instantly, to be given and delivered to me, with the effect; and of the nullity of the premises do libel principally, and querell, and protest, that there be not ten days since griefs of appeal have been done unto me, and that these griefs be daily continued: and I protest to add, correct, reform, diminish this my appellation, and to subtract from it, and to reduce and conceive the same in a better and more competent form, according to the counsel of such as be expert and have knowledge of the law; and to intimate the same to all and singular persons, that have or may have any interest in this behalf, for time and place convenient, as the manner and style of the law requireth.
After this, upon debate and discussion of the principal matter had, made, and used on both sides, my lord’s grace of Canterbury, with consent of all the rest of the said judges his colleagues there personally and judicially sitting, gave and read openly a final sentence conceived in writing against the said bishop of Winchester, whereby, amongst other, he judged and determined the said bishop of Winchester to be deprived and removed from the bishopric of Winchester, and from all the right, authority, emoluments, commodities, and other appurtenances to the said bishopric in any wise belonging, whatsoever they be: and him did deprive, and remove from the same, pronouncing and declaring the said bishopric of Winchester, to all effects and purposes to be void, according as in the same sentence is more fully contained; the copy whereof here ensueth. SENTENCE DEFINITIVE AGAINST STEPHEN GARDINER, BISHOP OF WINCHESTER.
In the name of God Amen. By authority of a commission by the high and mighty prince our most gracious sovereign lord Edward the Sixth, by the grace of God king of England, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith; and of the church of England, and also of Ireland, in earth the supreme head, the tenor whereof hereafter ensueth: Edward the Sixth, etc. — We, Thomas, by the sufferance of God archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, and metropolitan, with the right reverend fathers in God Nicholas bishop of London, Thomas bishop of Ely, and Henry bishop of Lincoln, sir William Peter knight, one of our said sovereign lord’s two principal secretaries, sir James Hales knight, one of our said sovereign lord’s justices of his common pleas, Griffith Leyson and John Oliver, doctors in the civil law, Richard Goodrick and John Gosnall esquires, delegates and judges assigned and appointed, rightfully and lawfully proceeding according to the form and tenor of the said commission, for the hearing, examination, debating, and final determination of the causes and matters in the said commission mentioned and contained, and upon the contents of the same, and certain articles objected of office against you, Stephen bishop of Winchester, as more plainly and fully is mentioned and declared in the said commission and articles, all which we repute and take here to be expressed; and after sundry judicial assemblies, examinations, and debatings of the said cause and matters, with all incidents, emergents and circumstances to the same or any of them belonging; and the same also being by us oft heard, seen, and well understood, and with good and mature examination and deliberation debated, considered, and fully weighed and pondered, observing all such order and other things, as by the laws, equity, and the said commission, ought or needed herein to be observed, in the presence of you, Stephen bishop of Winchester, do proceed to the giving of our final judgment and sentence definitive in this manner following.
Forasmuch as by the acts enacted, exhibits and allegations proposed, deduced, and alleged, and by sufficient proofs, with your own confession, in the causes aforesaid had and made, we do evidently find and perceive that you, Stephen bishop of Winchester, have not only transgressed the commandments mentioned in the same, but also have of long time, notwithstanding many admonitions and commandments given unto you to the contrary, remained a person much grudging, speaking and repugning against the godly reformations of abuses in religion, set forth by the king’s highness’s authority within this his realm; and forasmuch as we do also find you a notable, open, and contemptuous disobeyer of sundry godly and just commandments given unto you by our said sovereign lord and by his authority, in divers great and weighty causes touching and concerning his princely office, and the state and common quietness of this realm; and forasmuch as you have, and yet do, contemptuously refuse to recognize your notorious negligences and misbehaviors, contempts and disobediences, remaining still, after a great number of several admonitions, always more and more indurate, incorrigible, and without all hope of amendment — contrary both to your oath sworn, obedience, promise, and also your bounden duty of allegiance; and for that great slander and offense of the people arise in many parts of the realm, through your wilful doings, sayings, and preachings, contrary to the common order of the realm; and for sundry other great causes by the acts, exhibits, your own confession, and proofs of this process, more fully appearing; considering withal that nothing effectually hath been on your behalf alleged, proposed, and proved, nor by any other means appeareth, which doth or may impair or take away the proofs made against you, upon the said matters and other the premises: — Therefore we, Thomas archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, and metropolitan, judge delegate aforesaid, having God before our eyes, with express consent and assent of Nicholas bishop of London, Thomas bishop of Ely, Henry bishop of Lincoln, sir William Peter knight, sir James Hales knight, Griffith Leyson and John Oliver, doctors of the civil law, Richard Goodrick and John Gosnall esquires, judges and colleagues with us in the matters aforesaid, and with the counsel of divers learned men in the laws, with whom we have conferred in and upon the premises, do judge and determine you, Stephen bishop of Winchester, to be deprived and removed from the bishopric of Winchester, and from all the rights, authority, emoluments, commodities, and other appurtenances to the said bishopric in any wise belonging, whatsoever they be; and by these presents we do deprive and remove you from your said bishopric, and all rites and other commodities aforesaid; and further pronounce and declare the said bishopric of Winchester, to all effects and purposes, to be void by this our sentence definitive, which we give, pronounce, and declare in these writings.
This sentence definitive being given, the said bishop of Winchester, under his former protestations, dissented from the giving and reading thereof, and from the same, as unjust, and of no efficacy or effect in law; and in that the same containeth excessive punishment, and for other causes expressed in his appellation aforesaid, he did then and there ‘apud acta,’ immediately after the pronouncing of the sentence, by word of mouth appeal to the king’s royal majesty, first, secondly, and thirdly, instantly, more instantly, most instantly; and asked apostules, or letters dimissorial, to be given and granted unto him: and also, under protestation not to recede from the former appellation, asked a copy of the said sentence; the judges declaring that they would first know the king’s pleasure and his council’s therein. Upon the reading and giving of which sentence, the promoters willed William Say and Thomas Argall to make a public instrument, and the witnesses then and there present to bear testimony thereunto; *and 4 the bishop of Winchester required us also to make him an instrument upon his said appellation, and the said witnesses to testify thereunto; being present as witnesses at the premises: namely, the earls of Westmoreland and Rutland; the lord William Haward, the lord Russel; sir Thomas Wrothe, sir Anthony Brown, knights; master John Cheke, esquire; John Fuller, Richard Lyall, Galfride Glyn, William Jefferey, Richard Standish, David Lewis, doctors of law; master serjeant Morgan, master Stamford, master Chidley, master Carell, master Dyar, temporal counsellors; and many others in a great multitude then assembled.* And thus have you the whole discourse and process of Stephen Gardiner 50 , late bishop of Winchester, unto whom the papistical clergy do so much lean (as to a mighty Atlas, and upholder of their ruinous religion); *with 5 his letters, answers, preachings, examinations, defensions, exhibits, and attestations, of all such witnesses as he could produce for the most advantage to his own cause, with such notes also, and collections gathered upon the same; whereby, if ever there were any firm judgment or sentence in that man to be gathered in matters of religion, here it may appear what it was, as well on the one side as on the other.* And thus an end of Winchester for a while, till we come to talk of his death hereafter, whom as we number amongst good lawyers, so is he to be reckoned amongst ignorant and gross divines, proud prelates, and bloody persecutors, as both by his cruel life and pharisaical doctrine may appear, especially in the article of the sacrament, and of our justification, and images, and also in crying out of the Paraphrase, not considering in whose person the things be spoken; but what the paraphrast uttereth in the person of Christ, or of the evangelist, and not in his own, that he wresteth unto the author, and maketh thereof heresy and abomination.
The like impudeney and quarrelling also, he used against Bucer, Luther, Peter Martyr, Cranmer, and almost against all other true interpreters of the gospel. So blind was his judgment, or else so wilful was his mind, in the truth of Christ’s doctrine, that it is hard to say, whether in him unskilfulness or wilfulness had greater predomination. But against this Dr.
Gardiner, we will now set and match, on the contrary side, Dr. Redman, forasmuch as he, departing this transitory life the same present year 1551, cometh now, by course of history, here to be mentioned; who, for his singular life and profound knowledge, being inferior in no respect to the said Gardiner, shall stand as great a friend in promoting the gospel’s cause, as the other seemeth an enemy, by all manner of ways to impair and deface the same: for the more assured declaration whereof we will hereto adjoin (the Lord willing) the learned communication between the said Dr. Redman lying on his death-bed, and master Wilkes, master Alexander Nowel, Dr.
Young, and other witnesses more; whereof the said master Wilkes thus recordeth, speaking in his own person, and his own words, as followeth:
A NOTE OF THE COMMUNICATION That I, Richard Wilkes, had with Master Doctor Redman, being sick at Westminster on his Deathbed, but of good memory, the 2d day of November, 1551, in the presence of Master Young, and another whom I did not know, and two of Master Doctor Redman’s Servants, the one called Ellis, and the other unknown.
I (the aforesaid Richard Wilkes) coming to Dr. Redman lying sick at Westminster, and, first saluting him after my ordinary duty, wished him health both in soul and body; not doubting, moreover, but he did practice the godly counsel in himself, which he was wont to give to others being in his case; and, thanks be to God, said I, who had given him stuff of knowledge to comfort himself withal.
To whom he, answering again, said in this wise: “God of all comfort, give me grace to have comfort in him, and to have my mind wholly fixed in him!” Master Young and I said, “Amen.”
Then I communed with him of his sickness, and of the weakness of his body, and said, that though he were brought never so low, yet he, if it were his pleasure that raised up Lazarus, could restore him to health again. “No, no,” saith he, “that is past, and I desire it not; but the will of God be fulfilled!”
After this, or a little other like communication, I asked if I might be so bold, not troubling him, to know his mind for my learning, in some matters and points of religion. He said, “Yea,” and that he was as glad to commune with me in such matters, as with any man.
And then I said to his servants, I trusted I should not trouble him. “No,” said Ellis, his servant, “my lord of London, Master Nowel and others, have communed with him, and he was glad of it.” Then said Master Redman, “No, you shall not trouble me. I pray God ever give me grace to speak the truth, and his truth, and that which shall redound to his glory, and send us unity in his church;” and we said “Amen.”
I said, he should do much good in declaring his faith, and I would be glad to know his mind as touching the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ. — He said, “As man is made of two parts, of the body and the soul, so Christ would feed the whole man: but what (saith he) be the words of the text? let us take the words of the Scripture.” And he rehearsed the text himself thus: “‘Accepit Jesus panem;’ ‘Christ took bread;’ wherein his will was to institute a sacrament. ‘Accipite, comedite:’ ‘Take, eat.’ Here he told the use of it. What did he give to them? ‘Hoc est corpus meum,’ he calleth it his body.”
Then I asked him of the presence of Christ. — He said, Christ was present with his sacrament, and in those that received it as they ought. And there was “mira unitio,” a wonderful union (for that word was named), betwixt Christ and us, as St. Paul saith: “Vos estis os ex ossibus ejus, et caro ex carne ejus;” “Ye be bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh:” the which union was ineffable.
Then I asked him, what he thought of the opinion, that Christ was there corporally, naturally, and really. — He answered, “If you mean by corporally, 6 naturally and really, that he is there present ‘vere,’ I grant.”
Then I asked, how he thought of that which was wont commonly to be spoken, that Christ was there flesh, blood, and bone; as I have heard the stewards in their Leets give charge when the Six Articles stood in effect, and charge the inquest to inquire, that if there were any that would deny that Christ was present in the sacrament of the altar, in flesh, blood, and bone, they should apprehend them. — He said, that it was too gross, and could not well be excused from the opinion of the Capernaites.
Then I asked him, “Inasmuch as Christ is there ‘vere,’ how do we receive him? in our minds and spiritual parts, or with our mouths, and into our bodies; or both? — He said, “We receive him in our minds and souls by faith.”
Then, inasmuch as he was much on this point, that there was “mira unitio,” “a marvellous union” betwixt us and Christ, in that we were “caro ex carne ejus, et os ex ossibus ejus,” “bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh;” I desired to know his opinion, whether we received the very body of Christ with our mouths, and into our bodies, or no? — Here he paused and held his peace a little space; and shortly after he spake, saying, “I will not say so; I cannot tell; it is a hard question: but surely,” saith he, “we receive Christ in our soul by faith. When you do speak of it otherways, it soundeth grossly, and savoureth of the Capernaites.”
Then I asked him, what he thought of that which the priest was wont to lift up and show the people betwixt his hands? — He said, “It is the sacrament.”
Then said I, “They are wont to worship that which is lifted up.” — “ Yea,” saith he, “but we must worship Christ in heaven; Christ is neither lifted up nor down.” “I am glad,” said I, “master doctor, to hear you say so much. I would not speak of the holy sacrament otherwise than reverently; but I fear, lest that sacrament, and the little white piece of bread so lifted up, hath robbed Christ of a great part of his honor.” — Then said he, looking up and praying, “God grant us grace that we may have the true understanding of his word, whereby we may come to the true use of his sacraments;” and said, he would never allow the carrying about of the sacrament, and other fond abuses about the same.
Then after a little while pausing, said I, “Master doctor, if I should not trouble you, I would pray you to know your mind in transubstantiation.” “Jesus! master Wilkes,” quoth he, “will you ask me that?” — “ Sir,” said I, “not if I should trouble you.” — “No, no, I will tell you,” said he. “Because I found the opinion of transubstantiation received in the church, when I heard it spoken against, I searched the ancient doctors diligently, and went about to establish it by them, because it was received. And when I had read many of them, I found little for it, and could not be satisfied. Then I went to the school-doctors, and namely to Gabriel, and weighed his reasons. The which when I had done, and perceived they were no pithier, ‘Languescebat opinio mea de transubstantiatione,’ My opinion of transubstantiation waxed feeble: and then,” saith he, “I returned again to Tertullian and Irenaeus, and when I had observed their sayings, mine opinion that there should be transubstantiation ‘prorsus erat abolita,’ was quite dashed.”
Then, said I, “You know that the school doctors did hold, that ‘panis non remanebat post consecrationem,’ ‘that bread remained not after the consecration,’ as they called it.” — “ The school doctors,” saith he, “did not know what ‘consecratio’ meaneth:” and here he paused awhile. “I pray you,” said I, “say you what ‘conseeratio’ means.” — Saith he, “It is ‘tota actio,’ in ministering the sacrament as Christ did institute it. All the whole thing done in the ministry, as Christ ordained it, that is ‘consecratio;’ and what,” said he, “need we to doubt, that bread remaineth? Scripture calleth it bread, and certain good authors that be of the later time, be of that opinion.”
After that I had communed with master Redman, and taken my leave of him, master Young came forth into the next chamber with me, to whom I said that I was glad to see master doctor Redman so well minded. Then said master Young to me, “I am sure he will not deny it; I assure you,” saith he. “Master doctor hath so moved me, that whereas I was of that opinion before, in certain things, that I would have burned and lost my life for them; now,” saith master Young, “I doubt of them. But I see,” saith he, “a man shall know more and more by process of time, and reading and hearing of others, and master doctor Redman’s saying shall cause me to look more diligently for them.”
Also Ellis, master doctor Redman’s servant, showed me, that he did know, that his master had declared to his majesty king Henry VIII., that faith only justifieth; but that doctrine, as he thought, was not to be taught the people, lest they should be negligent to do good works.
The said master Young hath reported (the which also I heard), that master doctor Redman should say, that ‘consensus ecclesiae,’ the consent of the church, was but a weak staff to lean to; but did exhort him to read the Scriptures, for there was that which should comfort him, when he should be in such case as he was then.
ANOTHER COMMUNICATION BETWEEN DR. REDMAN Lying in his Deathbed, and Master Nowel, then Schoolmaster in Westininster, and certain others, with Notes of his Censure and Judgment touching certain Points of Christ’s Religion.
Imprimis , the said Dr. Redman sent for master Nowel, of his own mind, and said, he was willing to commune with him of such matters as he had moved the said Dr. Redman of a day or two before; and he, being desired of the said master Nowel to declare his mind concerning certain points of our religion, first said, Ask me what ye will, and I will answer you, before God, truly as I think, without any affection to the world or any worldly person. Witnesses: Alexander Nowel, Richard Burton, Ellis Lomas, John Wright. 2. Item, The said Dr. Redman said, that the see of Rome in these latter days is “sentina malorum,” that is, “a sink of all evil.” Witnesses: John Young, Alex. Nowel, Rich. Burton, John Wright, Edward Cratford, Richard Elithorne, Ellis Lomas. 3. Item, That purgatory, as the schoolmen taught it, and used it, was ungodly, and that there was no such kind of purgatory as they fancicd. Witnesses: John Young, Alex. Nowel, Rich. Burton, Ellis Lomas, Edw. Cratford, Rich. Elithorne, John Wright. 4. Item, That the offering up of the sacrament in masses and trentals for the sins of the dead is ungodly. Witnesses: John Young, Alex. Nowel, Rich. Burton, Edward Cratford, Ellis Lomas. 5. Item, That the wicked are not partakers of the body of Christ, but receive the outward sacrament only. Witnesses: John Young, Alex. Nowel, Richard Burton, Ellis Lomas, Edw. Cratford, Rich. Elithorne, John Wright. 6. Item, That the sacrament ought not to be carried about in procession; for it is taught what is the use of it in these words, “Accipite, manducate, et bibite,” and “Hoc facite in mei memoriam;” “Take, eat, and drink,” and “Do this in remembrance of me.” Witnesses: John Young, Alex. Nowel. Richard Burton, John Wright, Edward Cratford, Ellis Lomas. 7. Item, That nothing which is seen in the sacrament, or perceived with any outward sense, is to be worshipped. Witnesses: John Young, Alexander Nowel, Ellis Lomas, Rich.
Burton. 8. Item, That we receive not Christ’s body “corporaliter, id est, crasse,” corporally, that is to say, grossly, like other meats, and like as the Capernaites did understand it. Witnesses: John Young, Alex. Nowel, Richard Burton, Edw.
Cratford, Ellis Lomas, John Wright. 9. Item, That we receive Christ’s body “sic spiritualiter, ut tamen vere;” so spiritually, that nevertheless truly. Witnesses: John Young, Alexander Nowel, Richard Burton, Edward Cratford, Ellis Lomas, John Wright. 10. Item, As touching transubstantiation, that there is not, in any of the old doctors, any good ground or sure proof hereof, or any mention of it, as far as ever he could perceive, neither that he seeth what can be answered to the objections made against it. Witnesses: John Young, Richard Burton, Ellis Lomas. 11. Item, Being asked of master Wilkes, what that was, which was lifted up between the priest’s hands, he answered, “He thought that Christ could neither be lifted up nor down.” Witnesses: John Young, Richard Burton, Ellis Lomas. 12. Item, That priests may, by the law of God, marry wives. Witnesses: Alex. Nowel, Ellis Lomas. 13. Item, That this proposition, “Sola fides justifieat,” so that “fides” signify “Veram, vivam, et acquiescentem in Christo fidem, id est, amplexum Christi:” that is to say, that only faith doth justify, so that faith do signify a true, a lively [faith], and a faith resting in Christ, and embracing Christ, is a trite, godly, sweet, and comfortable doctrine; so that it be so taught that the people take none occasion of carnal liberty thereof. Witnesses: John Young, Alex. Nowel, Rich. Burton, John Wright, Edw. Cratford, Rich. Elithorn, Ellis Lomas. 14. Item, That our works cannot deserve the kingdom of God, and life everlasting. Witnesses: John Young, Alex. Nowel, Rich. Burton, Ellis Lomas, Edw. Cratford, Richard Elithorne, John Wright. 15. Item, That the said Dr. Redman, at such times as we, the aforesaid persons who have subscribed, heard his communication concerning the aforesaid points of religion, was of quiet mind, and of perfect remembrance, as far as we were able to judge. Witnesses: John Young, Alex. Nowel, Rich. Burton, Ellis Lomas, Edw. Cratford, Richard Elithorne, John Wright.
Also master Young, of himself, doth declare further, touching the former articles, in this wise:
To the Fifth Article : — Imprimis, That Dr. Redman said more, whereas St. Augustine said, “Quod Judas idem accepit quod Petrus,” that Judas received the same that Peter did, he said, that he understood that of the sacrament; and that after the same phrase a man might say, “Quod Simon Magus idem baptisma recepit quod apostoli,” “That Simon Magus received the same baptism that the apostles did,” when he did receive only the outward sacrament to his condemnation; for he said, that he thought Christ would not vouchsafe to give his holy flesh to an ungodly man: and this, he said, was always his mind, though he knew well that other men did otherwise think.
To the Sixth: — Item, He said, he never liked the carriage about of the sacrament, and preached against it about sixteen years since in Cambridge.
To the Tenth: — Item, When he was demanded of transubstantiation, he said, that he had travailed about it, and thinking that the doubts which he perceived did rise thereon, should be made plain by the schoolmen, did read their books; and after that he had read them, the opinion of transubstantiation was every day “Magis et magis languida,” that is, weaker and weaker, and that there was no such transubstantiation as they made; adding thereto, that the whole school did not know what was meant 52 by consecration, which he said was the whole action of the holy communion.
To the Thirteenth: — Item, He said, that he did repent him, that he had so much strived against justification by faith only.
To the Fourteenth: — Item, That works had their crown and reward, but that they did not deserve eternal life, and the kingdom of God; no not the works of grace: “Nam donum Dei vita aeterna;” “For everlasting life is the gift of God.”
Although these testimonies above alleged may suffice for a declaration touching the honest life, sound doctrine, and sincere judgment of Dr.
Redman, yet (velut ex abundanti) I thought not to cut off in this place the testimonial letter or epistle of Dr. Young, written to master Cheke, specially concerning the premises: which epistle of Dr. Young, as I received it written by his own hand in the Latin tongue, the copy which he himself neither hath nor can deny to be his own, and is extant to be read in the former Book of Acts and Monuments, 8 so I have here exhibited the same faithfully translated into the English tongue, the tenor whereof followeth:
THE LETTER OF MASTER YOUNG TO MASTER CHEKE CONCERNING DR. REDMAN, TRANSLATED OUT OF LATIN INTO ENGLISH.
Although, right worshipful, I am stricken into no little damp and dolour of mind for the unripe (but that it otherwise pleased Almighty God) and lamentable death of that most blessed and learned man Dr. Redman, insomuch that, all-astonied with weeping and lamenting, I cannot tell what to do or think; yet nevertheless, perceiving it to be your worship’s will and pleasure, that so I should do, I gladly call my wits together, and purpose, by God’s grace, here, in these my letters, sincerely and truly to open and declare what I heard that worthy learned man speak and confess at the hour of his death, as touching the controversies of religion, wherewith the spouse of Christ is, in these our days, most miserably troubled and tormented.
This Dr. Redman (being continually, by the space of twenty years, or somewhat more, exercised in the reading of the holy Scripture), with such industry, labor, modesty, magnanimity, and prayers to Almighty God, tried and weighed the controversies of religion, that in all his doings, as he would not seem to approve that which was either false or superstitious; so he would never improve that, which he thought to stand with the true worship of God. And albeit in certain points and articles of his faith, he seemed to divers, which were altogether ignorant of that his singular gravity, either for softness, fear, or lack of stomach, to change his mind and belief, yet they, to whom his former life and conversation, by familiar acquaintance with him was thoroughly known (with them also which were present at his departure), may easily perceive and understand, how, in grave and weighty matters, not rashly and unadvisedly, but with constant judgment and unfeigned conscience, he descended into that manner of belief, which at that time of his going out of this world he openly professed.
I give your wisdom to understand, that when death drew near, he, casting away all hope of recovery, attended and talked of no other thing (as we which were present heard) but of heaven and heavenly matters, of the latter day, of our Savior Jesus Christ, with whom most fervently he desired to be; whose incredible love towards us miserable sinners most worthily, and not without tears, he oftentimes used to extol and speak of: and us which were there present he earnestly moved and exhorted to prepare ourselves to Christ, to love one another, and to beware of this most wretched and corrupt world. And besides that, he promised (calling God to witness thereunto, to whom he trusted shortly to come), if any would demand any question, that he would answer him what he thought in his judgment to be the truth. At that time there was present master Alexander Nowel, 9 a man earnestly bent to the true worshipping of God, and one that had alway singularly well loved the said master Redman, to whom he spake on this wise. “Your excellent learning, and purity of life, I have ever both highly favored, and had in admiration; and for no other cause (God be my judge) I do ask these things of you which I shall propound, but that I might learn and know of you what is your opinion and belief touching those troublous controversies which are in these our days; and I shall receive and approve your words, as oracles sent from heaven.”
To whom, when Dr. Redman had given leave to demand what he would, and had promised that he would faithfully and sincerely answer (all affection set aside) what he thought to be the truth, master Nowel said, “I would,” quoth he, “right gladly; but that I fear, by my talk and communication, I shall be unto you, so feeble and now almost spent, a trouble and grief.” Then said Dr. Redman, replying, “What shall I spare my carcase,” quoth he, “which hath so short a time here to remain? Go to, go to,” said he, “propound what you will.”
Then master Nowel put forth certain questions, which in order I will here declare; whereunto the said Dr. Redman severally answered, as hereafter followeth.
The first question that he asked of him was, What he thought of the bishop of Rome: unto whom Dr. Redman answered, “The see of Rome, in these our later days, hath much swerved from the true religion and worshipping of God, and is with horrible vices stained and polluted; which I, therefore,” quoth he, “pronounce to be the sink of all evil; and shortly will come to utter ruin by the scourge of God, except it do fall the sooner to repentance:” wherewith he briefly complained of the filthy abuse of our English church.
Being then asked, what his opinion was concerning purgatory, and what the schoolmen judged thereof, he answered, that the subtle reasons of the schoolmen concerning purgatory, seemed to him to be no less vain and frivolous, than disagreeing from the truth; adding thereunto, that when we be rapt to the clouds, to meet Christ coming to judgment with a great number of angels, in all glory and majesty, then every one shall be purged with fire, as it is written, “The fire shall go before him, and shall flame round about his enemies, and the fire shall burn in his sight; and round about him shall be a great tempest;” (Psalm 97:50) saying, that divers of the old writers approved this his sentence concerning purgatory.
When he was asked, whether wicked and ungodly people, in the Holy Communion, did eat the body of Christ, and drink his blood, he answered, that such kind of men did not eat Christ’s most blessed flesh, but only took the ‘sacrament to their own damnation; saying, that Christ would not give his most pure and holy flesh to be eaten of such naughty and impure persons, but would withdraw himself from them. “And that,” quoth he, “that is objected by St.
Augustine, that Judas received the selfsame thing which Peter received, that I think to be understood of the external sacrament.
And the like kind of phrase of speaking,” said he, “we may use concerning the baptism of Magus, — that Simon Magus received that which the apostles did receive. Indeed, as concerning the sacrament of the external baptism, Simon Magus received that which the apostles did; but that internal grace wherewith the apostles were indued, and that holy Spirit wherewith by baptism they were inspired, he lacked. And so,” quoth he, “the wicked and forsaken people, who rashly presume to come to the holy table of the Lord, do receive the sacrament, and the selfsame which good and godly men receive; but the body of Christ they do not receive, for Christ doth not vouchsafe to deliver it them.” And thus, he said, was his opinion and belief, although he knew others to be of a contrary judgment.
Being then after this demanded, whether he thought Christ’s presence to be in the Sacrament, or no; he answered, that Christ did give and offer to faithful and christian men his very real body and blood verily and really, under sacraments of bread and wine; insomuch that they which devoutly come to be partakers of that holy food, are, by the benefit thereof, united and made one with Christ in his flesh and body. And therefore, he said, that Christ did distribute his body spiritually; that he gave it truly: yet not so, nevertheless, that by these, and the like words, we should conceive any gross and carnal intelligence, such as the Capernaites once dreamed of; but that (quoth he) we might labor and endeavor to express, by some kind of words, the ineffable majesty of this mystery. For the manner whereby Christ is there present, and ministereth to the faithful his flesh, is altogether inexplicable; but we must believe (quoth he) and think, that by God’s mighty power, and the holy operation of his Spirit, this so notable a mystery was made; and that heaven and earth were joined together in that moment, as the blessed man St. Gregory saith, “The lowest parts are joined with the highest;” by which is understood that holy food, whereby they which be regenerate by the Holy Ghost in baptism, are nourished to immortality. And further he said, that Christ’s body was received in the said sacrament by faith; which being received, both body and soul were quickened to everlasting life.
Being then required to say his mind about transubstantiation, he gave answer, that he had much travailed in that point, and that he first much favored and inclined to that part which maintained transubstantiation; in searching the verity whereof most studiously he had been no little while occupied, and found to arise thereabout infinite and almost inexplicable absurdities, in confuting whereof, when he had but smally contented himself (he said), he took in hand the schoolmen’s works, and perused Gabriel and other writers of that sort; for that, by their help and aid, he hoped that all inconveniences which did spring and arise by maintenance of transubstantiation, might be clean convinced and wiped away. Of which his hope he was utterly frustrate (said he), for that he did find in those books many fond and fantastical things, which were both too foolish to be recorded in writing, and also to be alleged, about such a mystery: and truly (said he) ever after the reading of them, my former zeal and opinion touching the maintenance of transubstantiation, did every day more and more decrease; and therefore, in conclusion, he persuaded himself to think, that there was no such transubstantiation as the schoolmen imagined and reigned to be; saying, that indeed the ancient writers were plainly against the maintenance thereof; amongst whom he recited by name, Justin, Irenaeus, and Tertullian, notorious adversaries to the same. Furthermore he added hereunto, that the whole school understood not what this word “consecratio” was, which he defined to be the full entire action of the whole communion. Being demanded also, whether we ought to worship Christ present in his holy supper; he told us, that we are bound so to do, and that it was most agreeing to piety and godly religion.
Likewise being asked, whether he would have the visible sacrament to be worshipped, which we see with our eyes, and is lifted up between the priest’s hands, he answered, that nothing which was visible, and to be seen with the eye, is to be adored or worshipped, nor would Christ be elevated into any higher, or pulled down into any lower place, and that he can neither be lifted up higher, nor pulled down lower.
Again, being asked his opinion about the custom and manner in carrying about the sacrament in solemn pomps, processions, and otherwise; he said, that he always misliked and reproved that order; insomuch that about sixteen years ago, openly in the pulpit at Cambridge, he spake against that abuse, and disallowed that ceremony; showing that Christ had expressed, by plain and evident words, a very fruitful and right use of this sacrament, when he said, “Take ye,” (by which phrase, quoth he, he doth express that he will give a gift:) “eat ye,” (by which words he doth declare the proper use and order of that his precious gift:) “This is my body,” (whereby he doth evidently and plainly show what, by that gift, they should receive, and how royal and precious a gift he would give them:) and, therefore, he judged such pompous and superstitious ostentations utterly to be condemned, and taken as plain mockeries and counterfeit visors.
His judgment also being asked about the commemoration of the dead, and the remembrance of them in orisons, whether he thought it profitable or no; he answered, that it seemed to him to be no less profitable, than religious and godly; and that might be well proved out of the books of Maccabees: the which books, although St.
Jerome, adjudging as not authentic, thought good to be read in the temples only for the edifying of the church, and not for the assertion of opinions; yet with him [Dr. Redman], the opinions of the other writers, by whom those books are allowed as canons, prevail, which he, in that point, thinketh good to be read. Being, furthermore, required to show his mind about Trental Masses, and masses of “Scala coeli;” he showed them that they were altogether unprofitable, superstitious, and irreligious, flowing out of the filthy and impure fountain of superstition, not yielding the fruit which they promised to bring forth. The sacrifice of the supper of the Lord — the eucharist I mean — that sacrifice, he said, could not be offered for the sins of the quick and the dead.
Finally, of his own voluntary will, and no man (as far as I can call to remembrance) demanding of him, he showed his opinion concerning justification by Christ. “I lament,” said he, “and repent, beseeching God forgiveness of the same, that too seriously and earnestly I have withstood this proposition, ‘that only faith doth justify;’ but I always feared that it should be taken to the liberty of the flesh, and so should defile the innocency of life which is in Christ. But that proposition, ‘that only faith doth justify’ is true,” quoth he, “sweet, and full of spiritual comfort, if it be truly taken, and rightly understood.” And when he was demanded what he thought to be the true and very sense thereof, “I understand,” quoth he, “that to be the lively faith, which resteth in our only Savior Jesus Christ, and embraceth him; so that in our only Savior Jesus Christ, all the hope and trust of our salvation be surely fixed.
And as concerning good works,” saith he, “they have their crown and merit, and are not destitute of their rewards; yet, nevertheless, they do not merit the kingdom of heaven. For no works,” said he, “could purchase and obtain that blessed, happy, and everlasting immortality; no, nor yet those things which we do under grace, by the motion of the Holy Ghost: for that blessed and immortal glory is given and bestowed upon us, mortal men, of the heavenly Father, for his Son our Savior Christ’s sake, as St. Paul testifieth: ‘The gift of God is eternal life.’” (Romans 6) And these be the solutions which I heard him give to the questions of master Nowel proposed; from which his sentence and judgment, so heard by me, and of him uttered (as I remember), he never declined or varied.
I beseech our Lord Jesus Christ to cease these troublous storms wherewith the church is tossed, and vouchsafe, for his holy name’s sake, tenderly to behold and look upon his poor wretched flock, so miserably scattered and dispersed; beseeching him also, of his goodness, to preserve your worship.
At London the 3d of November.
THE HISTORY, NO LESS LAMENTABLE THAN NOTABLE, OF WILLIAM GARDINER AN ENGLISHMAN, SUFFERING MOST CONSTANTLY IN PORTUGAL, FOR THE TESTIMONY OF GOD’S TRUTH.
PICTURE: The Cruel Handling of William Gardiner Coming to the next year following, *now 1 we will for a time depart, and leave the coasts and country of England, whereupon our style hath now long stayed; and, with open sails, as it were, following the tempests of persecution, pass over into Portugal amongst the popish 53 merchants there, whereunto William Gardiner, an Englishman, of necessity calleth me, who was burned in Lisbon, the chief city of Portugal, in the year of our Lord 1552* A man verily, in my judgment, not only to be compared with the most principal and chief martyrs of these our days, but also such a one as the ancient churches, in the time of the first persecutions, cannot show a more famous, whether we do behold the force of his faith, his firm and steadfast constantness, the invincible strength of his spirit, or the cruel and horrible torments; the report only and hearing whereof were enough to put any man in horror or fear. Yet notwithstanding, so far off it was, that the same did discourage him, that it may be doubted whether the pain of his body, or the courage of his mind were the greater; when as indeed both appeared to be very great.
Wherefore, if any praise or dignity amongst men, as reason is, be due unto the martyrs of Christ for their valiant acts, this one man, amongst many, seemeth worthy to be numbered, and also to be celebrated in the church, with Ignatius, Laurentius, Cyriacus, Crescentianus 54 , 2 and Gordianus.
And if the Church of Christ do receive so great and manifold benefits by these martyrs, with whose blood it is watered, by whose ashes it is enlarged, by whose constancy it is confirmed, by whose testimony it is witnessed, and, finally, through whose agonies and victories the truth of the gospel doth gloriously triumph; let us not, then, think it any great matter to requite them again with our duty, by committing them to memory, as a perpetual token of our good will towards them. Albeit they themselves receive no glory at our hands, and much less challenge the same, but, referring it wholly unto the Lord Christ, from whom it came, whatsoever great or notable thing there was in them: notwithstanding, forasmuch as Christ himself is glorified in his saints, we cannot show ourselves thankful unto him, except we also show ourselves dutiful unto those, by whom his glory doth increase.
Hereupon I think it came to pass 55 , that the ancient Christians, in the time of the first persecutions, thought good to celebrate yearly commemorations of the martyrdom of those holy men, not so much to honor them, as to glorify God in his soldiers, unto whom all glory and praise doth worthily belong; and moreover that we, being instructed by their example, might be the more prompt and ready in the policies of those wars, to stand more stoutly in battle against our adversaries, and learn the more easily to contemn and despise this world. For, in considering the end and death of these men, who will greatly long or lust after this life, which is so many ways miserable, through so many afflictions dolorous, through so many casualties ruinous, wherein consisteth so little constancy, and less safety, being, never free from some hard calamity one or other? What good man would have this world in reputation, wherein he seeth so many good men so cruelly oppressed, and wherein no man can live in quietness, except he be wicked? Wherefore I do not a little marvel, that in this great slaughter of good men, with so many spectacles and examples of cruel torment, Christians do yet live, as it were, drowned in the foolish desires of this world; seeing daily before their eyes so many holy and innocent men yield up their spirits under the hands of such tormentors, to lie in filthy prisons, in bonds, darkness, and tears, and, in the end, to be consumed with fire. We see so many prophets of God, even Christ himself, the Son of God, to be so cruelly and many ways afflicted in this world, turmoiled, scourged, and crucified; and yet we laugh, drink, and give ourselves unto all looseness of life, and all lasciviousness. For honor and great possessions we contend; we build; we study and labor by all means to make ourselves rich: unto whom it doth not suffice, that we, with safety and freedom from their afflictions, racks, wheels, scourges, irons red-hot, gridirons, flesh-hooks, mallets, and other kind of torments, may serve our Christ in peace and quiet; but being herewith not content, will give over ourselves to all kind of wickedness, to be led away at the will and pleasure of Satan.
But what do we think in so doing? Either we must reckon those men to be most miserable in this life, or else ourselves to be most unhappy. But if their blessedness be most certain and sure, then let us direct the course of our life to the same felicity. These men have forsaken this life, which they might have enjoyed. But if we cannot willingly put off this life, yet let us not be slow to correct and amend the same; and though we cannot die with them in like martyrdom, yet let us mortify the worldly and profane affections of the flesh, which strive against the spirit; and, at the least, let us not run thus headlong into the licentious desires of the world, as we do.
As the life of christian men is now, I pray thee, what do these bonds, prisons, these wounds and scars, these great fires, and other horrible torments of martyrs, but upbraid unto us our slothful sluggishness, and worthily make us ashamed thereof? which martyrs, if in their lives they lived so innocently, and in their deaths continued so constant, what then is to be deemed of us, which suffer nothing for Christ, and will not take upon us the small conflict against vices and our own affections? How would we suffer the cruel looks of tyrants, the fearful kinds of torments, or the violent assaults of the tormentors, in any quarrel of godliness, if in peace and quietness we are (and that with every small breath or wind of temptation) blown away from God — so faint-hearted without any resistance, that we are carried headlong into all kinds of wickedness and mischief? One singeth songs of love; another watcheth all the night at dice: some spend their life and time day by day in hawking and hunting; some tipple so at taverns, that they come home reeling. Others, whatsoever desire of revenge doth put into their heads, that, by and by, they seek to put in practice. Some gape after riches; some swell with ambition; some think they are born for no other purpose but for pleasure and pastime. All the world is full of injury and perjury; nay, rather, it is so rare a thing patiently to suffer injuries done unto us, that except we have the sleight to do injury to others, we think ourselves scarce men. There is no love almost, nor charity among men; neither is there any man that regardeth the good name or fame of his neighbor.
But amongst all the rest, unsatiable covetousness and avarice so relieth, that no man almost is contented with any tolerable estate of life, either that will prescribe himself any measure in having that he possesseth, or in prowling for that which he lacketh; never quiet, but always toiling; never satisfied, but always unsatiable. Whereby it so cometh to pass, that the minds of men which profess themselves to be good Christians, being occupied in such worldly carks and cares, can scarcely find any vacant leisure to think upon heavenly things; and yet notwithstanding, with these minds, we will needs seem Christians. — But now, setting apart these complaints spent in vain, we will prosecute our purposed story touching good William Gardiner.
And first, as concerning his kindred, he was of an honest stock, born at Bristol, a town of merchandise on the sea-coast of England; honestly brought up, and, by nature, given unto gravity; of a mean stature of body, of a comely and pleasant countenance, but in no part so excellent as in the inward qualities of the mind, which he always, from his childhood, preserved without spot of reprehension. Also his handsome and indifferent learning, did not a little commend and beautify his other ornaments. When he grew unto those years at which young men are accustomed to settle their minds to some kind of life, it happened that he gave himself to the trade of merchandise, under the conduct and guiding of a certain merchant of Bristol, called master Paget, by whom he was at the last (being of the age of twenty-six years or thereabout) sent into Spain; and by chance the ship arriving at Lisbon (which is the chief city of Portugal), he tarried there about his merchandise, where, at the last, he, having gotten understanding of the language, and being accustomed to their manners, became a profitable servant both unto his master and others, in such things as pertained unto the trade of that vocation; whereunto he did so apply himself, that nevertheless he, in that popish country, reserving still the religion of his own country of England, ever kept himself sound and undefiled from the Portuguese superstition. There were also, besides him, divers other good men in the same city. Neither did he lack good books, or the conference of good and honest men, unto whom he would oftentimes bewail his imbecility and weakness, that he was neither sufficiently touched with the hatred of his sins, nor yet inflamed with the love of godliness.
Whilst he was there abiding, it happened that there should be a solemn marriage celebrated the first of September in the year above-said, betwixt two princes; that is to say, the son of the king of Portugal, and the Spanish king’s daughter. The marriage day being come, there was great resort of the nobility and estates. There lacked no bishops with mitres, nor cardinals with hats, to set out this royal wedding. To be short, they went forward to the wedding with great pomp, where a great concourse of people resorted, some of good will, some for service’ sake, and some (as the matter is) to gaze and look. Great preparation of all parties was there throughout the whole city, as in such cases is accustomed, and all places were filled with mirth and gladness. In this great assembly of the whole kingdom, William Gardiner, albeit he did not greatly esteem such kind of spectacles, yet being allured through the fame and report thereof, was there also; coming thither early in the morning, to the intent he might have the more opportunity, and better place, to behold and see.
The hour being come, they flocked into the church with great solemnity and pomp; the king first, and then every estate in order; the greater persons, the more ceremonies were about them. After all things were set in order, they went forward to the celebrating of their mass; for that alone serveth for all purposes. The cardinal did execute, with much singing and organ-playing: The people stood with great devotion and silence, praying, looking, kneeling, and knocking; their minds being fully bent and set, as it is the manner, upon the external sacrament. How grievously these things did prick and move this young man’s mind, it cannot be expressed — partly to behold the miserable absurdity of those things, and partly to see the folly of the common people; and not only of the common people, but, especially, to see the king himself, and his council, with so many sage and wise men as they seemed, to be seduced with like idolatry as the common people were; insomuch that it lacked very little, but that he would, even that present day, have done some notable thing in the king’s sight and presence, but that the great press and throng that was about him, letted that he could not come unto the altar. What need many words? When the ceremonies were ended, he cometh home very sad and heavy in his mind, insomuch that all his fellows marvelled greatly at him; who, albeit upon divers conjectures they conceived the cause of his sadness, notwithstanding they did not fully understand that those matters did so much trouble his godly mind; neither yet did he declare it unto any man: but, seeking solitariness and secret places, falling down prostrate before God, with manifold tears he bewailed the neglecting of his duty, deliberating with himself how he might revoke that people from their impiety and superstition.
In this deliberation and advice his mind being fully settled, and thinking that the matter ought not to be any longer deferred, he renounced the world, making up all his accounts so exactly (as well of that which was due unto him, as that which he owed unto others), that no man could justly ask so much as one farthing. Which thing done, he continued night and day in prayer, calling upon God, and in continual meditation of the Scriptures, that scarcely he would take any meat by day, or sleep by night, or at the most above one hour or two of rest in the night; as Pendigrace, his fellow companion both at bed and board, being yet alive, can testify.
The Sunday came again to be celebrated either with like pomp and solemnity, or not much less, whereat the said William was present early in the morning, very cleanly apparelled, even of purpose, that he might stand near the altar without repulse. Within a while after, cometh the king with all his nobles. Then Gardiner setteth himself as near the altar as he might, having a Testament in his hand, which he diligently read upon, and prayed, until the time was come, that he had appointed to work his feat. The mass began, which was then solemnized by a cardinal. Yet he sat still. He which said mass, proceeded: he consecrated, sacrificed, lifted up on high, showed his god unto the people. All the people gave great reverence, and as yet he stirred nothing. At last, they came unto that place of the mass, where they use to take the ceremonial host, and toss it to and fro round about the chalice, making certain circles and semicircles. Then the said William Gardiner, being not able to suffer any longer, ran speedily unto the cardinal; and (which is incredible to be spoken) even in the presence of the king and all his nobles and citizens, with the one hand he snatched away the cake from the priest, and trod it under his feet, and with the other hand overthrew the chalice. This matter at first made them all abashed, but, by and by, there arose a great tumult, and the people began to cry out. The nobles and the common people ran together, amongst whom one, drawing out his dagger, gave him a great wound in his shoulder; and, as he was about to strike him again to have slain him, the king twice commanded to have him saved. So, by that means, they abstained from murder.
After the tumult was ceased, he was brought to the king; by whom he was demanded what countryman he was, and how he durst be so bold to work such a contumely against his majesty, and the sacraments of the church?
He answered, “Most noble king, I am not ashamed of my country, who am an Englishman both by birth and religion, and am come hither only for traffic of merchandise. And when I saw, in this famous assembly, so great idolatry committed, my conscience neither ought nor could any longer suffer, but that I must needs do that, which you have seen me presently do. Which thing, most noble prince, was not done or thought of me, for any contumely or reproach of your presence, but only for this purpose, as before God I do clearly confess — to seek only the salvation of this people.”
When they heard that he was an Englishman, and called to remembrance how the religion was restored by king Edward, they were, by and by, brought in suspicion, that he had been suborned by Englishmen thus to do, to mock and deride their religion: wherefore they were the more earnest upon him to know, who was the author and procurer, that he should commit that act. Unto whom he answered, desiring them that they would conceive no such suspicion of him, forasmuch as he was not moved thereunto by any man, but only by his own conscience. For, otherwise, there was no man under the heaven, for whose sake he would put himself into so manifest danger; but that he owed this service, first, unto God, and secondarily, unto their salvation. Wherefore, if he had done any thing which were displeasant unto them, they ought to impute it unto no man, but unto themselves, who so irreverently used the holy supper of the Lord unto so great idolatry; not without great ignominy unto the church, violation of the sacrament, and the peril of their own souls, except they repented.
While he spake these, with many other things more unto this effect, very gravely and stoutly, the blood ran abundantly out of the wound, so that he was ready to faint; whereupon surgeons were sent for, whereby he might be cured, if it were possible, and be reserved for further examination, and more grievous torment. For they were fully persuaded, that this deed had divers abettors and setters-on; which was the cause that all the other Englishmen, also, in the same city, came into suspicion, and were commanded to safe custody: amongst whom Pendigrace, because he was his bedfellow, was grievously tormented and examined more than the residue, and scarcely was delivered after two years’ imprisonment. The others were much sooner set at liberty, at the intercession of a certain duke. Notwithstanding, their suspicion could not yet be thus satisfied, but they came into his chamber, to seek if there were any letters, to understand and find out the author of this enterprise. And when they could find nothing there, they came again unto him, being grievously wounded, with torments to extort of him the author of this fact, and to accuse him as guilty of most grievous heresy: of both which points, with such dexterity as he could, he cleared himself; wherein albeit he spake in the Spanish tongue well, yet he used the Latin tongue much more exactly.
But they, not being therewith satisfied, added another strange kind of torment, which (as I suppose) passeth the bull of Phalaris. 3 Because there should no kind of extreme cruelty be left unassayed, they caused a linen cloth to be sewed round like a ball, the which they with violence put down his throat unto the bottom of his stomach, tied with a small string which they held in their hands; and when it was down, they pulled it up again with violence: plucking it to and fro through the meat pipe, in such sort as that with much less grief, they might have rid him out of his life at once.
Thus at the last, when all torments and tormentors were wearied, and that it did nothing at all prevail to go this way to work, they asked him, whether he did not repent his wicked and seditious deed? As touching the deed, he answered, that it was so far off that he did repent, that if it were to do again, he thought he should do the same. But as touching the manner of the deed, he was not a little sorry that it was done in the king’s presence, to the disquietness of his mind. Howbeit, that was not to be imputed unto him, who neither enterprised nor thought upon any such matter; but was rather to be ascribed unto the king, in that he, having power, would not prohibit so great idolatry used among his people. — This he spake with great fervency.
After they had used all kind of torments, and saw that there could nothing more be gathered of him, and also that through his wounds and pains he could not long live, they brought him, three days after, to execution. And first of all, bringing him into the vestry, they cut off his right hand, which he, taking up with his left hand, kissed. Then he was brought into the market-place, where his other hand also was cut off; which he, kneeling down upon the ground, also kissed. These things thus done, after the manner and fashion of Spain, his arms being bound behind him, and his feet under the horse’s belly, he was carried to the place of execution.
There was in that place a certain engine, from which a great rope coming down by a pulley was fastened about the middle of this christian martyr, which first pulled him up. Then was there a great pile of wood set on fire underneath him, into which he was, by little and little, let down, not with the whole body, but so that his feet only felt the fire. Then was he hoisted up, and so let down again into the fire; and thus oftentimes pulled up and down. In this great torment, for all that, he continued with a constant spirit, and the more terribly he burned, the more vehemently he prayed.
At last, when his feet were consumed, the tormentors asked him whether he did not yet repent him of his deed; and exhorted him to call upon our Lady and the saints. Whereunto he answered, that as he had done nothing whereof he did repent him, so he had the less need of the help of our Lady, or any other saint; and what external torments soever they used, the truth, he said, remaineth always one, and like unto itself; the which as he had before confessed in his life, so would he not now deny it at his death: desiring them to leave off such vanities and folly; for when Christ did cease any more to be our Advocate, then he would pray to our Lady to be his Advocate. And said, “O eternal God, Father of all mercies, I beseech thee look down upon thy servant,” etc. And when they sought, by all means possible, to stop or hinder his praying to, and praising God in this sort, he cried out with a loud voice, rehearsing the forty-third Psalm, “Judica me, Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta.” “Judge me, O God, and defend my cause against the unmerciful people.”
He was not come unto the latter end of the Psalm, when, as they pulling him up and down in the fire for the more torment, the rope being burnt asunder, he fell down into the midst thereof; where, giving his body for a sacrifice, he changed his temporal pains for perpetual rest and quietness.
Thus it seemed good in the sight of God, by this messenger to provoke the Portuguese to the sincere knowledge of him; and therefore they ought the more to have acknowledged the great love and kindness of God offered unto them, and also the more to be mindful of their own duty and thankfulness towards him. And, if it be so great an offense to violate the ordinances of man’s law, and to contemn the ambassadors of kings and princes, let the Portuguese, and all others, look well unto it, what it is so cruelly to handle the heavenly messenger of the high God. Neither was this their cruelty altogether unrevenged by the mighty hand of God, when as not only the very same night, amongst divers of the king’s ships which were in the next haven ready to sail, one was burned, being set on fire by a sparkle of Gardiner’s fire driven thither with the wind,4 but also the king’s son, who then was married, died within half a year, and, in the next year after, the king himself also died; and so both within one year after the tormenting of this blessed martyr.
Thus the body of the said Gardiner being consumed, yet the rage and fury of the common people so ceased not, but they were as cruel against him, being dead, as they were when he was alive, and with their tongues tormented this martyr, when they could do no more with their hands; yea, for very madness, they would scarce tarry until he were burned, but every man, as they could catch any piece of him half burned, threw it into the sea.
This sacrifice thus ended, the clergy to pacify God’s wrath, which they feared for the violating of their altar, appointed a solemn fast of certain days, for penance to purge that fact; which fact rather should have taught them to purge themselves, and to put away their filthy idolatry; and much rather they should have fasted and repented for that their extreme cruelty, which they had showed unto the lively member of Christ.
Albeit this death of William Gardiner seemeth to have profited very many of them little or nothing; yet, for all that, there are some (as I have heard divers report), out of whose minds the remembrance of this constant martyr can never be pulled, and is so fresh yet amongst them, as if it were now lately done: and finally, albeit it be a good while since he was put to death, yet the memory of his death, as fruitfiul seed, hath taken such root in some, that even unto this present day he is a lively and diligent preacher unto them, against superstition and idolatry used in their churches. *IN6 GULIELMI GARDINERI FELICEM MEMORIAM, SACRUMQUE ET CONSTANS MARTYRIUM.
I.F. Per mare, per gladios, per tot tormenta, per ignes, Vulnera, et indignis stigmata inusta modis, Caesus, et affectus diris per viscera pilis, Obrutus et sannis omnigenisque probris, Martyrio functus, post tot, Gardnere, labores Regna Dei, manibus sis licet absque rapis, Regna per angustos aditus scandisque rapisque, Te licet haec teneat maehina, celsa Dei.
Barbara non hominum te vis, non Tartara, non te Mors, non quicquid habet terra, tenere potest.
Te licet haereticum spernant Hispanica regna, Inque tuum spiret turba nefanda caput; Vulneribus rubicunda tuis Ecclesia Christi Pullulat, inque tua robora morte capit.
Vos utinam admoneant Gardneri dogmata vestri, Cives, qui colitis Lisbona regna, boni, Eque bonis reddant vos, Lysbonii, meliores, Vestra haec quo fiat bis-bona Lisbonia.* THE TRAGICAL HISTORY OF THE WORTHY LORD EDWARD DUKE OF SOMERSET, LORD PROTECTOR, WITH THE WHOLE CAUSE OF HIS TROUBLES AND HANDLING.
After so many troublous matters in this history afore-passed, coming now to the lamentable and tragical narration of the lord Edward duke of Somerset, the king’s uncle, and protector of his person and of his realm, I could not well enter into the story of him without some premonition, first, to all noble personages, of what honor or calling soever within this realm, by way of history, briefly to admonish them, no man to plant any trust or assurance upon the brickle pillars of worldly prosperity, how high soever it seemeth, considering that there is no state so high, but it hath his ruin; no wisdom so circumspect, but it may be circumvented; no virtue so perfect, but it may be envied; neither any man’s trade so simple, but it may be beguiled. And therefore, seeing the condition of mortal things is so, that no man can always stand in this so ruinous a world, the surest way is, for every man to choose his standing so, that his fall may be the easier. But, because my purpose is (as I have said in the stories before) to abridge and make short, I will here stay; referring thee to the secret consideration of that which remaineth further by me in this matter to be uttered: and so, filling into the story of the lord protector, duke of Somerset, we will (the Lord willing) declare in order the original and whole occasion of his trouble and decay, even from the beginning.
King Edward, after that both his father and mother were dead, had three uncles left him by his mother’s side, Edward, Thomas, and Henry Seymour; of the which two first, one was made protector of the realm, and the other high admiral of the same. These two brethren, so long as they were knit and joined together in amity and concord, preserved both themselves, the king their nephew, and the whole commonwealth, from the violence and fear of all danger. But the subtle old serpent, always envying man’s felicity, through slanderous tongues sought to sow matter, first of discord between them; then of suspicion; and last of all, extreme hatred: insomuch that the protector suffered his brother, being accused (whether truly or falsely the Lord knoweth), to be condemned, and to lose his head. Whereby it came to pass (whether by the correction of God’s judgment upon him, or whether that he, after the death of his brother, and the king, being yet but young and tender of age, was the less able to shift for himself), that, not long after, he was overmatched and overthrown of his enemies; and so cast into the Tower, and at last lost his head also — to the great lamentation of many good men, as in the sequel of this history followeth to be declared. For the better introduction of which history, first to begin with the aforesaid brother of the lord protector, namely sir Thomas Seymour, high admiral of England, and the king’s uncle, here is to be understood, that he had married queen Katharine, late wife to king Henry the Eighth, of whom ye heard before. Now it happened (upon what occasion I know not), that there fell a displeasure betwixt the said queen and the duchess of Somerset, and thereupon also, in the behalf of their wives, displeasure and grudge began between the brethren; which, albeit, through persuasion of friends, it was for a time appeased between them, yet, in short space after (perchance not without the privy setting-forward of some, who were back friends to the gospel), it brake out again, both to the trouble of the realm, and especially to the confusion of them both, as after it proved. First, to the lord admiral’s charge it was laid, that he purposed to destroy the young king, and translate the crown unto himself; and for the same being attainted and condemned, he did suffer at Towerhill the twentieth of March, 1549. 1 As many there were, who reported that the duchess of Somerset had wrought his death; so many more there were, who, misdoubting the long standing of the lord protector in his state and dignity, thought and affirmed no less, but that the fall of the one brother, would be the ruin of the other; the experiment whereof, as it hath often been proved, so, in these also, eftsoons it ensued.
It was not long after the beheading of the lord admiral, that insurrections began to kindle, the same year, in divers quarters of the realm, as is above storied; by the occasion whereof the lord Russel, lord privy seal, was sent to the west parts, and the lord Dudley, earl of Warwick, was sent with an army into Norfolk, where both he himself, and a great number of gentlemen that were with him, meeting with the rebels, were in great danger: notwithstanding, in the, end the overthrow was given to the rebels; which was about the beginning of September, 1549 57 . After this victory achieved, in the the next month following, which was October, how the matter fell out between the lord protector and certain other lords, I know not, but, at the return of the earl of Warwick aforesaid, great working and consultation there was among the lords, assembling themselves in the house of master York, and at Baynard’s-castle, and in the lord mayor’s house, at London, against the lord protector, remaining then with the king at Hampton-court. Of the which business and trouble, thus the lord protector writeth, in his letters to the lord Russel in the west country, as followeth.
A LETTER OF THE LORD PROTECTOR, TO THE LORD RUSSEL, LORD PRIVY SEAL, CONCERNING TROUBLES WORKING AGAINST HIM.
After our right hearty commendations to your good lordship: here hath of late risen such a conspiracy against the king’s majesty and us, as never hath been seen, the which they cannot maintain but with such vain letters and false tales surmised, as was never meant or intended of us. They pretend and say, that we have sold Boulogne to the French, and that we do withhold wages from the soldiers; and other such tales and letters they do spread abroad (of the which if any one thing were true, we would not wish to live): the matter now being brought to a marvellous extremity, such as we would never have thought it could have come unto, specially of those men, towards the king’s majesty and us, of whom we have deserved no such thing, but rather much favor and love. But the case being as it is, this is to require and pray you to hasten you hither to the defense of the king’s majesty, with such force and power as you may, to show the part of a true gentleman, and of a very friend: the which thing we trust God shall reward, and the king’s majesty, in time to come, and we shall never be unmindful of it too. We are sure you shall have other letters from them; but, as you tender your duty to the king’s majesty, we require you to make no stay, but immediately repair, with such force as ye have, to his highness in his castle of Windsor, and cause the rest of such force as ye may make, to follow you. And so we bid you right heartily farewell.
From Hampton-court the 6th of October.
Your lordship’s assured loving friend, Edward Somerset.
SUBSTANCE OF A LETTER OF THE LORD RUSSEL IN ANSWER TO THE LORD PROTECTOR’S LETTER.
To this letter of the lord protector sent the 6th of October, the lord Russel returning answer again upon the 8th of the said month, first lamenteth the heavy dissension fallen between the nobility and him, which he taketh for such a plague, as a greater could not be sent of Almighty God upon this realm, being the next way, saith he, to make of us conquerors, slaves, and like to induce upon the whole realm a universal calamity and thraldom, unless the merciful goodness of the Lord do help, and some wise order be taken in staying these great extremities. And as touching the duke’s request in his letters, forasmuch as he heard before, of this broil of the lords, and fearing lest some conspiracy had been meant against the king’s person, he hasted forward with such company as he could make, for the surety of the king, as to him appertained. Now, perceiving by the lords’ letters sent unto him the same 6th day of October these tumults to rise upon private causes between him and them, he therefore thought it expedient, that a convenient power should be levied, to be in a readiness to withstand the worst (what perils soever might ensue), for the preservation both of the king and state of the realm from the invasion of foreign enemies, and also for the staying of bloodshed, if any such thing should be intended between the parties in the heat of this faction. And this, he, thinking best for discharge of his allegiance, humbly beseecheth his grace to have the same also in special regard and consideration, first, that the king’s majesty be put in no fear; and that if there be any such thing wherein he hath given just cause to them thus to proceed, he will so conform himself as no such private quarrels do redound to the public disturbance of the realm; certifying, moreover, the duke, that if it were true, which he understandeth by the letters of the lords, that he should send about proclamations and letters for raising up of the commons, he liked not the same.
Notwithstanding, he trusted well that his wisdom would take such a way as no effusion of blood should follow.
And thus much being contained in his former letter of the 8th of October, in his next letter again, written the 11th day of October, the said lord Russel wrote to this effect:
THE CONTENTS OF ANOTHER ANSWER OF LORD RUSSEL TO THE PROTECTOR.
He (rejoicing to hear of the most reasonable offers of the lord protector made unto the lords) writeth unto him, and promiseth to do what, in the uttermost power of him (and likewise of sir William Harbert joined together with him) doth lie, to work some honorable reconciliation between him and them; so as his said offers being accepted and satisfied, some good conclusion might ensue, according to their good hope and expectation: signifying moreover, that as touching the levying of men, they had resolved to have the same in readiness for the benefit of the realm, to occur all inconveniences, whatsoever (either by foreign invasion or otherwise) might happen; and so, having their power at hand, to draw near, whereby they might have the better opportunity to be solicitors, and a means for this reformation on both parts, etc.
And thus much for answer of the lord Russel to the lord protector’s letters.
But now to the matter again of the lords, who, together with the earl of Warwick (upon what occasion God knoweth) being assembled at London, as ye heard, against the lord protector; when the king with his council at Hampton-court heard thereof, first secretary Peter with the king’s message was sent unto them, whom the lords, notwithstanding, detained still with them, making as yet no answer to the message. Whereupon the lord protector writeth to them in this manner as followeth:
A LETTER OF THE LORD PROTECTOR TO CERTAIN LORDS OF THE COUNCIL ASSEMBLED AT LONDON.
My lords, we commend us most heartily unto you: and whereas the king’s majesty was informed that you were assembled in such sort as you do now also remain; and was advised by us, and such other of his council as were then here about his person, to send master secretary Peter unto you, with such message as whereby might have ensued the surety of his majesty’s person, with preservation of his realm and subjects, and the quiet both of us and yourselves, as master secretary can well declare to you: his majesty, and we of his council here, do not a little marvel that you stay still with you the said master secretary, and have not, as it were, vouchsafed to send answer to his majesty, either by him or yet any other. And for ourselves, we do much more marvel, and are right sorry, as both we and you have good cause to be, to see the manner of your doings bent with force of violence, to bring the king’s majesty and us to these extremities. Which as we do intend, if you will take no other way but violence, to defend (as nature and our allegiance doth bind us) to extremity of death, and to put all to God’s hand, who giveth victory as it pleaseth him: so that if any reasonable conditions and offers would take place (as hitherto none have been signified unto us from you, nor do we understand what you do require or seek, or what you do mean), and that you do seek no hurt to the king’s majesty’s person; as touching all other private matters, to avoid the effusion of christian blood, and to preserve the king’s majesty’s person, his realm and subjects, you shall find us agreeable to any reasonable condition that you will require. For we do esteem the king’s wealth and tranquillity of the realm, more than all other worldly things; yea more than our own life. Thus, praying you to send us your determinate answer herein by master secretary Peter, or, if you will not let him go, by this bearer, we beseech God to give both you and us grace to determine this matter, as may be to God’s honor, the preservation of the king, and the quiet of us all; which may be, if the fault be not in you.
And so we bid you most heartily farewell.
From the king’s majesty’s castle of Windsor, the 7th October, 1549. Your lordships’ loving friend, E. Somerset.
After these letters received, and the reasonable conditions of the lord protector offered, and yet not much regarded of the lords, they, persisting still in their intended purpose, took this advice, first to keep themselves in the city of London, as strong as they might; and therefore, calling upon the mayor and the aldermen, they willed them in any case to provide a good and substantial watch by night, and a good ward by day, for the safeguard of their city, and the ports and gates thereof; which was consented unto, and the companies of London, in their turns, warned to watch and ward accordingly.
Then the said lords and councillors demanded of the lord mayor and his brethren five hundred men to aid them to fetch the lord protector out of Windsor from the king; but thereunto the mayor answered, that he could grant no aid without the assent of common-council of the city: whereupon, the next day, a common-council was warned. But, in the mean time, the said lords of the council assembled themselves at the lord mayor’s house of London, who then was sir Henry Amcottes, 2 fishmonger, and William Locke, mercer, and sir John Aileph, sheriffs of the said city; and there the said council did agree and publish a proclamation forthwith, against the lord protector, the effect of which proclamation was as followeth:
THE EFFECT OF THE PROCLAMATION SET OUT AGAINST THE LORD PROTECTOR.
First , That the lord protector, by his malicious and evil government, was the occasion of all the sedition that of late happened within the realm. 2. The loss of the king’s pieces in France. 3. That he was ambitious, and sought his own glory, as appeareth by building of most sumptuous and costly houses in the time of the king’s wars. 4. That he esteemed nothing the grave counsel of the councillors. 5. That he sowed division between the nobles, the gentlemen, and commons. 6. That the nobles assembled themselves together at London for no other purpose, but to have caused the protector to have lived within limits, and to have put such order for the surety of the king’s majesty, as appertained, whatsoever the protector’s doings were; which, they said, were unnatural, ingrate, and traitorous. 7. That the protector slandered the council to the king, and did what in him lay, to cause variance between the king and the nobles. 8. That he was a great traitor; and, therefore, the lords desired the city and commons to aid them, to take him from the king.
And in witness and testimony of the contents of the said proclamation, the lords subscribed their names, which were these:
The lord Riche, lord chancellor.
The lord St. John, lord great master, and president of the council.
The lord marquis of Northampton.
The earl of Warwick, lord great chamberlain.
The earl of Arundel, lord chamberlain.
The earl of Shrewsbury.
The earl of Southampton (Wriothesley).
Sir Thomas Cheney knight, treasurer of the king’s house, and lord warden of the Cinque Ports.
Sir John Gage knight, constable of the Tower.
Sir William Peter knight, secretary.
Sir Edward North knight.
Sir Edward Montague, chief justice of the common pleas.
Sir Ralph Sadler.
Sir John Baker.
Sir Edward Wootton.
Dr. Wootton, dean of Canterbury.
Sir Richard Southwell.
After the aforesaid proclamation was proclaimed, the lords, or the most part of them, still continuing and lying in London, came the next day to the Guildhall, during the time that the lord mayor and his brethren sat in their court or inward chamber, and entered and communed a long while with the mayor; and at last, the mayor and his brethren came forth unto the common-council, where was read the king’s letter sent to the mayor and citizens, commanding them to aid him with a thousand well-appointed men out of their city, and to send the same with all speed to his castle at Windsor.
This letter by name was directed to sir Henry Amcottes knight, lord mayor, to sir Rowland Hill knight, mayor elect; and to the aldermen and common-council of the city of London. The day and date of the letter was the 6th of October, in the third year of his reign, being signed with the hand of the king, and the lord protector; the contents of which letter, for the satisfaction of the reader, are here to be seen in manner and form as followeth.
LETTER OF THE KING TO THE LORD MAYOR, ALDERMEN, AND CITIZENS OF LONDON, IN BEHALF OF THE LORD PROTECTOR.
EDWARD.
BY THE KING.
Trusty and well-beloved, we greet you well. We charge and command you most earnestly, to give order, with all speed, for the defense and preservation of that our city of London for us; and to levy out of hand, and to put in order, as many as conveniently you may, well weaponed and arrayed, keeping good watch at the gates; and to send us hither, for the defense of our person, one thousand of that our city, of trusty and faithful men, to attend upon us, and our most entirely beloved uncle, Edward duke of Somerset, governor of our person, and protector of our realms, dominions, and subjects, well harnessed, and with good and convenient weapon; so that they do make their repair hither unto us this night, if it be possible, or at least to-morrow before noon; and, in the mean time, to do what appertaineth unto your duty, for ours and our said uncle’s defense against all such as attempt any conspiracy or enterprise of violence against us or our said uncle, as you know best for our preservation and defense at this present.
Given under our signet, at our manor of Hampton-court, the sixth of October, the third year of our reign.
You shall further give credit to our trusty and well-beloved Owen Cleydon, the bearer hereof, in all such things as he shall further declare unto you on the behalf of us, and our said uncle the lord protector. EDWARD SOMERSET.
This letter of the king, and of the lord protector, was not so secretly devised, nor so speedily sent, but the lords keeping at London had knowledge immediately thereof (by the means, as some suppose, of the lord Paget, who was then with the king and the protector, but the truth the Lord knoweth), being there ready furnished with their own bands of serving men, and other soldiers and men of arms; who, forthwith upon the same, addressed their letters in semblable wise to the said lord mayor and aldermen in the king’s name, not only for a supportation of armed men to serve their purposes, and for a sufficient watch to fortify their city; but also, that they should not obey any such letters, proclamations, or injunctions sent to them from the duke: which letter of the lords at the same instant came likewise to the lord mayor and his brethren, the 6th day of the said month of October; the tenor and copy of which letter here ensueth.
LETTER, OF CERTAIN OF THE COUNCIL TO THE LORD MAYOR, ETC. AGAINST THE LORD PROTECTOR58 .
To our very good lord, the lord mayor, aldermen, and citizens of London.
After our right hearty commendations unto your good lordship: knowing your hearty favor and earnest zeals to the preservation of the king’s majesty, and of this realm, and other his majesty’s realms and dominions, we have thought good to advertise you, that notwithstanding all the good advice and counsel that we could give to the duke of Somerset, to stay himself within reasonable limits, and to use his government now, in the tender age of his majesty, in such sort as might tend to his highness’s surety, to the conservation of his estate, and to his honor; the said duke, nevertheless, still continuing in his pride, covetousness, and ambition, ceaseth not daily, by all the ways and means he can devise, to enrich himself without measure, and to impoverish his majesty.
He buildeth in four or five places most sumptuously, and leaveth the poor soldiers unpaid of their wages, unvictualled, and in all things so unfurnished, as the losses lately sustained, to the greatest dishonor that ever came to the king and this realm, do declare. He soweth daily division between the nobles and gentlemen, and commons. He rewardeth and entertaineth a number of those that were captains of the commons in these late insurrections; and finally, in such wise subverteth all laws, justice, and good order (as it is evident), that, putting his trust in the commons, and perceiving that the nobles and gentlemen should be an impediment to him in his devilish purposes, he laboureth first to have them destroyed, and thinketh after, easily enough to achieve his desire; which, it appeareth plainly, is, to occupy the king’s majesty’s place. For his doings, whosoever list to behold them, do manifestly declare, that he mindeth never to render account to his majesty of his proceedings. These things, with many more too long to recite, considered, we pondered with ourselves, that either we must travail for some reformation, or we must, in effect as it were, consent with him to the destruction of our sovereign lord and country. Whereupon, laying apart all respects, and resting only upon our duties,’ we joined in counsel, and thought quietly to have treated the matter with him; who, perceiving that we joined for the king, and would have such order as might be for the surety of his majesty’s person and the commonwealth, strait put himself in force, and resteth at plain point (as it appeareth), either to go through with his detestable purpose in such sort as he hath done, or to try it by the sword.
Now, forasmuch as we see presently, that unless there be a reformation, the person of the king’s majesty is in most certain danger, and this realm, our natural country, like to be destroyed, with all our posterities; like as we have again fully resolved with God’s help, either to deliver the king’s majesty and the realm from this extreme ruin and destruction, or to spend our lives for the declaration of our faithful hearts and duties; so, knowing your hearty good wills and truth to his majesty, and therefore nothing doubting of your readiness to join with us in our godly purpose, we thought good to let you know the very truth of our enterprise, and, in the king’s majesty’s behalf, to require you not only to put good and substantial order for watch and ward, but also to have an earnest continual regard to the preservation, within your city, of all harness, weapons, and munitions, so as none be suffered to be conveyed to the said duke, nor any others attending about him; and besides, that you from henceforth obey no letters, proclamations, nor other commandments to be sent from the said duke. And thus we bid your lordship most heartily farewell.
From London, the 6th of October.
Your lordship’s assured loving friends, William St. John, Arundel.
Edward North, W. Northampton.
Th. Southampton, John Gage.
John Warwick, William Peter.
Richard Southwell.
After the receiving of these two letters above mentioned, the one from the king, the other from the lords, which came both at one instant, with contrary commandment to the lord mayor and citizens of London, the case seemed hard to them, and very doubtful (as it was indeed) what way to take, and what were best for the citizens of London to do. On the one side, the name and authority of the king was much; on the other side the power and garrisons of the lords, lying then in London, was not little, which seemed then to be such as would have no repulse.
The case thus standing perplexedly, first by the mouth of the recorder it was requested, that the citizens would grant their aid rather unto the lords, for that the protector had abused both the king’s majesty and the whole realm; and that without he were taken from the king, and made to understand his folly, this realm was in great hazard; and he therefore required, that the citizens would willingly assent to aid the lords with five hundred men.
Hereunto of a great part in the common-council was no other answer made but silence. But the recorder (who at that time was master Brook) still rested upon them for answer. At last stepped up a wise and good citizen, named George Stadlow, and said: “In this case it is good for us to think of things past, to avoid the danger of things to come. I remember,” saith he, “in a story written in Fabian’s chronicle, of the war between the king and his barons, which was in the time of king Henry the Third, and the same time the barons (as our lords do now) demanded aid of the mayor and city of London, and that in a rightful cause, for the commonwealth, which was for the execution of divers good laws against the king, who would not suffer those laws to be put in execution. And the city did aid them, and it came to an open battle, and the lords prevailed against the king, and took the king and his son prisoners; and, upon certain conditions, the lords restored the king and his son again to their liberties, and among all other conditions this was one, that the king should not only grant his pardon to the lords, but also to the citizens of London; the which was granted, yea and the same was ratified by act of parliament. But what followed of it? Was it forgotten? No surely, nor forgiven neither, during the king’s life.
The liberties of the city were taken away, strangers appointed to be our heads and governors, the citizens given away body and goods, and from one persecution to another were most miserably afflicted. Such a thing is it, to enter into the wrath of a prince; as Solomon saith, ‘The wrath and indignation of a prince is death.’
Wherefore, forasmuch as this aid is required of the king’s majesty, whose voice we ought to hearken unto (for he is our high shepherd), rather than unto the lords, and yet I would not wish the lords to be clearly shaken off; my counsel is, that they with us, and we with them, may join in suit, and make our most humble petition to the king’s majesty, that it would please his highness to hear such complaint against the government of the lord protector, as may be justly alleged and proved; and I doubt not but this matter will be so pacified, that neither shall the king, nor yet the lords, have cause to seek for further aid, neither we to offend any of them both.”
After this tale the commons stayed, and the lord mayor and his brethren for that time brake up, till they had further communed with the lords. 4 To make short, I let pass what order by the city was taken; but the conclusion was, that the lords (upon what occasion I know not) sat the next day in council in the Star-Chamber, and from thence sent sir Philip Hobby with their letter of credence to the king’s majesty, beseeching and requesting his majesty to give credit to that which the said sir Philip should declare unto his majesty in their names. And the king gave him liberty to speak, and most gently heard all that he had to say; who so handled the matter, declaring his message in the name of the lords, that in the end the lord protector was commanded from the king’s presence, and shortly was committed to ward in a tower within the castle of Windsor, called Beauchamp Tower; and soon after were stayed sir Thomas Smith, master Whalley, master Fisher, and many other gentlemen that attended upon the lord protector. The same day the lords of the council resorted to the king; and the next day they brought from thence the lord protector, and the others that were there stayed, and conveyed them through the city of London unto the Tower, and there left them.
Shortly after the lords resorted unto the Tower, and there charged the lord protector with sundry articles, which follow:
ARTICLES OBJECTED AGAINST THE LORD PROTECTOR59 .
Inprimis , You took upon you the office of protector and governor, upon condition expressly and specially, that you would do nothing in the king’s affairs, publicly or privately, but by the assent of the late king’s executors. 2. Also you, contrary to the said condition, of your own authority did stay and let justice, and subverted the laws, as well by your letters, as by your commandments. 3. Also, you caused divers persons being arrested and imprisoned for treason, murder, manslaughter, and felony, to be discharged and set at large, against the king’s laws and statutes of this realm. 4. Also, you have made and ordained lieutenants for the king’s armies, and other weighty affairs, under your own writing and seal. 5. Also, you have communed with the ambassadors of other realms, discoursing alone with them the weighty causes of this realm. 6. Also, you have sometime rebuked, checked, and taunted, as well privately as openly, divers of the king’s most honorable councillors, for showing and declaring their advices and opinions against your purposes, in the king’s weighty affairs; saying sometimes to them, that you need not to open matters unto them, and would therefore be otherwise advised; and that you would, if they were not agreeable to your opinion, put them out, and take others at your pleasure. 7. Also, you had and held, against the law, in your own house, a court of requests; and thereby did enforce divers the king’s subjects to answer for their freeholds and goods, and determined the same to the subversion of the same laws. 8. Also you, being no officer, without the advice of the council, or the more part of them, did dispose of the offices of the king’s gift for money, and granted leases and wards of the king’s, and gave presentations to the king’s benefices and bishoprics, having no authority so to do. And further, you did meddle with the selling of the king’s lands. 9. Also, you commanded multiplication and alchymy 60 to be practiced, to abuse the king’s coin. 10. Also, you caused a proclamation to be made concerning enclosures, whereby the common people have made divers insurrections, and levied open war, and distrained and spoiled divers of the king’s subjects; which proclamation went forth against the will of the whole council. 11. Also, you have caused a commission, with certain articles thereunto annexed, to be made out concerning enclosures of commons, high-ways, decaying of cottages, and divers other things, giving the commissioners authority to hear and determine the same causes, to the subversion of the laws and statutes of this realm; whereby much sedition, insurrection, and rebellion, have risen and grown amongst the king’s subjects. 12. Also, you have suffered the rebels and traitors to assemble, and to lie in camp and armor against the king, his nobles and gentlemen, without any speedy subduing or repressing 61 of them. 13. Also, you did comfort and encourage divers of the said rebels, by giving of them divers sums of your own money, and by promising to divers of them, fees, rewards, and services. 14. Also, you in favor of the said rebels did, against the laws 62 , cause a proclamation to be made, that none of the said rebels or traitors should be sued or vexed by any person for any their offenses in the said rebellion; to the clear subversion of the same law. 15. Also you have said, in the time of the rebellion, that you liked well the doings and proceedings of the said rebels and traitors; and said, that the covetousness of the gentlemen gave occasion to the common people to rise; saying also, that better it were for the commons to die, than perish for lack of living. 16. Also you said, that the lords of the parliament were loth to incline themselves to reformation of enclosures and other things; therefore the people had good cause to reform the things themselves. 17. Also you, after the report and declaration of the defaults and lacks reported to you by such as did survey Boulogne and the pieces there, would never amend the same defaults. 18. Also, you would not suffer the king’s pieces beyond the seas, called Newhaven and Blacknest, to be furnished with men and victuals, although you were advertised of the defaults therein by the captains of the same pieces and others, and were thereto advertised by the king’s council; whereby the French king, being the king’s open enemy, was encouraged and comforted to invade and win the said pieces; to the king’s great loss, and dishonor of his realm. 19. Also, you declared and published untruly, as well to the king’s majesty, as to other the young lords attendant upon his grace’s person, that the lords of the council at London minded to destroy the king; and you required the king never to forget it, but to revenge it: and likewise you required the young lords to put the king in remembrance thereof, to the intent to make sedition and discord between the king and his lords. 20. Also, whereas the king’s majesty’s privy council, of their love and zeal that they did bear unto the king and his realm, did consult at London, to have communed 63 with you, to the intent to move you charitably to amend your doings and misgovernment, you, hearing of their said assembly, caused to be declared, by letters in divers places, the said lords to be high traitors to the king, to the great disturbance of the realm.
And thus much hitherto, concerning the first trouble of the lord protector, duke of Somerset, with the crimes and articles objected against him, with his imprisonment also in the Tower, and the terrible proclamation given out against him. All which purposes of man, though they seemed fully to intend no less than the spilling of his blood; yet the Lord above, the only disposer of all men’s purposes, so ordered the matter, by the means of the king laboring for his uncle, that in short while after he was let out of the Tower, and that proclamation which before had made him a traitor within three days after was called in again (a Domino factum est illud), and with commandment given, none of them to be sold. And so the duke of Somerset, graciously escaping this adversity, was again restored, though not to the former office, yet unto liberty, wherein he continued the space of two years and two days. 5 After the which time of respite being expired, the said duke of Somerset was apprehended and committed again to the Tower, and with him also sir Michael Stanhope, sir Ralph Vane, sir Miles Partridge, and others, etc. At length the time being come of his arraignment, the aforesaid good duke, being brought from the Tower, was conveyed through London with the axe of the Tower before him, and with great preparance of bills, halberts, pikes, and poleaxes, in most forcible wise; a watch also set and appointed before every man’s door through the high street of London: and so was he brought into Westminster-hall, where the lords of the council, sitting as his judges in the middle of the hall, upon a new scaffold, he was there before them arraigned and charged both with treason and felony.
In that judgment I pass over the unseemly speech, the vile taunts and despiteful rebukes, without all modesty or honesty, used by certain of the sergeants and justices, and some others sitting there. All which, notwithstanding, he patiently and quietly did suffer, neither storming inwardly in stomach, nor reviling them with words again; but like a lamb, following the true Lamb and example of all meekness, was contented to take all things at their hands, and with no less patience to bear now their ungentle and cruel railings, than he did before their glavering words and flatterings, in time of his high estate and prosperity. And as the patience of this good duke was marvellous in forbearing his enemies, so also was his discretion and temperance no less seen in answering for himself to the articles to him objected; whereunto he wisely and substantially replied, putting himself, in the end, to be tried by his peers; who then, at length, after consultation had, did frame and temper their verdict thus: That as concerning the case of treason, wherewith he was charged, they discharged him, but they accounted him guilty of felony. When the people (which were there present to a great number) heard the lords say, “not guilty” (meaning by the case of treason), supposing no less but that he had been clearly acquitted by these words, and especially seeing the axe of the Tower to be carried away, for great joy and gladness they made an outcry; well declaring their loving affection and hearty favor unto the duke, whose life they greatly desired. But this opinion of the people was deceived, and the innocent duke condemned to die for felony; which act of felony had been made a little before against the rebels and unlawful assemblies, such as should seek or procure the death of any councillor, so that every such attempt and procurement, according to the act, should be adjudged felony. By the virtue of which act the duke being accused, with certain others his complices, to intend and purpose the death of the duke of Northumberland, and of certain besides, was therefore cast and condemned of felony, and so was returned toward the Tower again; at whose passage through the city, great exclamations and outcries were made again of the people, some rejoicing that he was acquitted, some bewailing that he was condemned.
Thus the good duke, passing through a great part of the city, landing at the Crane in the Vintry, was conveyed to the Tower, where he endured till the 22d of January; upon the which day, at the coming down of the letter of execution from the king and the council, the aforesaid duke and uncle to the king, being found no traitor, only being cast by the act of felony, was delivered unto the sheriffs, and so brought to the place of execution.
Touching which execution a few words here would be [well] bestowed, in describing the wonderful order and manner thereof, as it hath faithfully been suggested to us upon the credit of a certain noble personage, who not only was there present at the deed-doing, but also, in a manner, next unto him upon the scaffold, beholding the order of all things with his eyes; and with his pen, also, reporting the same in order and manner as here followeth 64 . * In 7 the year of our Lord 1552, the 22 day of January, in the fifth year of the reign 65 of king Edward the Sixth, he being yet under age and governed with tutors, the noble duke of Somerset, uncle to king Edward, was brought out of the Tower of London, and, according to the manner, delivered to the sheriffs of the city; and being compassed in round about with a great number of armed men, both of the guard and others, he was in this manner brought unto the scaffold where as he should suffer; where as this meek man, nothing changing neither voice nor countenance, but in a manner with the same gesture which he partly used at home, kneeling down upon both his knees, and lifting up his hands, erected himself unto God.
After that he had ended a few short prayers, standing up again, and turning himself toward the east side of the scaffold, nothing at all abashed (as it seemed unto me, standing over against the midst of the scaffold, and diligently marking all things) neither with the sight of the axe, neither yet of the hangman, or of present death; but with the like alacrity and cheerfulness of mind and countenance as beforetimes he had accustomed to hear the causes and supplications of the poor (towards whom, as it were with a certain fatherly love toward his children, he always showed himself most attentive), he uttered these words to the people: “Dearly beloved maisters and friends, I am brought hither to suffer, albeit that I never offended against the king neither by word nor deed, and have been always as faithful and true unto this realm as any man hath been. But forsomuch as I am by a law condemned to die, I do acknowledge myself, as well as others, to be subject thereunto. Wherefore, to express and testify my obedience which I owe unto the laws, I am come hither to suffer death, whereunto I willingly offer myself, giving most hearty thanks unto the divine goodness, as if I had received a most ample and great reward. But thus it is thought good in the sight of the most merciful Father, now to grant me this time and space of repentance, and to acknowledge myself, who might through sudden death have stopped my breath, that I should neither acknowledge Him nor myself; in which behalf I worthily with my whole heart render thanks unto Him. “Moreover, dearly beloved friends, there is yet somewhat that I must put you in mind of, verily as touching christian religion; which so long as I was in authority I have always diligently set forth unto you. Neither do I repent me of my doings, but rather thereof take most abundant and true occasion of rejoicing, now that the state of christian religion seemeth to draw most near unto the form and order of the primitive church; of which thing I do not only rejoice, but also interpret it as a great benefit, given of God, both unto you and me: most heartily exhorting you all, that this which is most purely set forth unto you, you will, with like thankfulness, accept and embrace, and set out the same in your living. Which thing if ye do not, without doubt greater mischief and perils will follow.”
When he had spoken these words, suddenly a terrible and unspeakable horror 66 and fear possessed all men’s hearts, in similitude and likeness as it had been the noise of some great storm or tempest, which unto some seemed to be heard from above; not very unlike as if a great deal of gunpowder being inclosed in an armory, and having caught fire, had violently broke out. But unto some, again, it seemed as though it had been a great multitude of horsemen running together, or running upon them. Such a noise was then in the ears of all men, albeit they saw nothing. Whereby it happened that all the people, being amazed without any evident cause, without any violence or stroke stricken, or any man seen, there ran away, some into the ditches and puddles, and some into the houses thereabout; other some, being afraid with the horror and noise, fell down grovelling unto the ground, with their poleaxes and halberts; and most part of them cried out, “Jesus save us, Jesus save us.” Those which tarried still in their places, for fear knew not where they were. The divers and sondrye noyses of those which cried out, made the soddaine tumulte much more confused than it would have been; albeit of it selfe it was troublesome ynoughe, for as every man thought himselfe to be in daunger, so he cryed out, and as many as cryed oute, so many and sondry noises were heard:
This way and that way they come; let us runne awaye. Thus every man cryed out, as he thought himself in daunger. And I myself which was there present among the rest, being also afraid in this hurly-burly, stood still altogether confused in my mind, looking if any man would knock me on the head. The like unto this seemeth to have happened unto Christ, as the evangelists write, when as the Bishops’ guard came to take him, all in armor, running backward they fell all down.
In the mean time, whilst these things were thus a doing, the people by chance spied one sir Anthony Brown riding unto the scaffold; which was the occasion of a new noise. For when they saw him coming, even at that time they suspected that which was not true, but notwithstanding that which they all wished for — that the king by that messenger had sent his uncle pardon; and therefore with great rejoicing they cried out, “Pardon, pardon is come; God save the king.” In this manner the duke, although he was destitute of all man’s help, yet this he did see before his departure, in how great love and favor he was of all men. And truly I do not think that, in so great slaughter of dukes as hath been in England within these few years, there was so many weeping eyes at one time; and not without cause. For all men did see in the decay of this duke the public ruin of all England; except such as indeed did perceive nothing.
But now to return from whence we have strayed; the duke in the mean time standing still both in the same place and mind, with his cap which he shook with his hand, he made a sign to the people, that they should keep themselves quiet; which thing being done, and silence obtained, he spake unto them in this manner: “Dearly beloved friends, there is no such matter here in hand as you vainly hope or believe. It seemeth thus good unto the Almighty God, whose ordinance it is meet and necessary that we all be obedient unto. Wherefore I pray you all to be quiet and without tumult. For I am even now quiet; and now let us join in prayer unto the Lord for the preservation of our most noble king, unto whom hitherto amongst the most obedient subjects I have always showed myself a most faithful and true subject and client unto him. I have always been most diligent about his majesty in doing of his business, both at home and abroad, and no less diligent about the common commodity of the whole realm:” at which word all the people answered that it was most true: and some said out aloud, that it was now too much apparent unto them.
Then the duke proceeding, said, “Unto whose majesty I wish continual health, with all felicity and abundanee, and all manner of prosperous success:” whereunto the people again cried out, “Amen.” “Moreover, I do wish unto all his councillors the grace and favor of God, whereby they may rule all things uprightly with justice. Unto whom I exhort you all, in the Lord, to show yourselves obedient (the which is also very necessary for you, under the pain of condemnation), and also most profitable for the preservation and safeguard of the king’s majesty. “Moreover, forsomnch as heretofore I have had oftentimes affairs with divers men, and that it is hard to please every man, therefore, if there be any man that hath been offended or injured by me, I most humbly require and ask him forgiveness, but especially Almighty God, whom, throughout all my life, I have most grievously offended; and unto all other whatsoever they be that have offended me, I do with my whole heart forgive them. Now I once again require you, dearly beloved in the Lord, that you will keep yourselves quietly and still, lest, through your tumult, you might cause me to have some trouble: which in this case would nothing at all profit me, neither be any pleasure unto you. For albeit the spirit be willing and ready, the flesh is frail and wavering, and, through your quietness, I shall be much more the quieter. But if that you fall unto tumult, it will be great trouble unto me and no gain at all unto you. Moreover, I desire you all to bear me witness, that I die here in the faith of Jesus Christ; desiring you to help me with your prayers, that I may persevere constant in the same unto my live’s end.”
After this, he, turning himself again about like a meek lamb, kneeled down upon his knees: unto whom Dr. Coxe, which was there present to counsel and advertise him, delivered a certain scroll in his hand, wherein was contained a brief confession unto God; which being read, he stood up again upon his feet, without any trouble of mind (as it appeared), and first bade the sheriffs farewell, then the lieutenant of the Tower, the Lord Dyer, and the Lord Brook, taking them all by the hands which were upon the scaffold with him. Then he gave the hangman certain money; which done, he put off his gown, and kneeling down again in the straw, untied his shirt-strings. Then the hangman, coming unto him, turned down his collar round about his neck, and all other things which did let or hinder him. Then he, covering his face with his own handkerchief, lifting up his hands unto heaven, where as his only hope remained, he laid himself down along, showing no manner of token of trouble or fear, neither did his countenance change color, but that, before his eyes were covered the blood began to show in his cheeks.
Thus this most meek and gentle duke, lying along, and looking for the stroke, either because the straw was higher than the block, or that his doublet did cover his neck, he was commanded to rise again and put off his doublet; and after laying himself down again upon the block, called upon the name of Jesus: and now the third time he had uttered these words (O Lord preserve me), even as the name of Jesus was in uttering, even in a moment he was bereft both of head and life, and slept in the Lord Jesus, taken away now from all the perils and evils of this life; where he resteth now in the peace of God; in the preferment of whose truth and gospel he always showed himself in his youth time an excellent instrument and member, having now received there-for the reward of his labors, whereunto in this life he so much labored and travailed.
Thus, gentle readers, you have the true description and history of this worthy and noble duke: and if any man report it otherwise, let it be counted as a lie 67 .* As touching the manners, disposition, life, and conversation of the said duke and the king’s uncle, what shall we need to speak, when he cannot be sufficiently commended according to the dignity of his virtues? There was always in him great humanity, and such meekness and gentleness, as is rare to be found in so high estate. He was prone and ready to give ear unto the complaints and supplications of the poor, and no less attentive unto the affairs of the commonwealth, to which, if he had lived together with king Edward, he was like to do much good, in reforming many misorders within this realm. He was utterly ignorant of all craft and deceit, and as far void of all pride and ambition, as he was from doing of injury; being indeed utterly void of both. He was of a gentle disposition, not coveting to be revenged; more apt and ready to be deceived, than to deceive. His ancient love and zeal of the gospel and of religion, he brought with him to the state of this his dignity. The proof whereof sufficiently was seen, in his constant standing to God’s truth, and zealous defense thereof, against the bishops of Chichester, Norwich, Lincoln, London, and others more, in the consultation had at Windsor, the first year of the king’s reign.
Briefly, considering the nature and virtues of this duke, I may (as seemeth) not unaptly compare and resemble him unto duke Humphrey, the good duke of Gloucester; who, likewise, being uncle unto king Henry the Sixth, and protector of the realm (as this was, also, to king Edward the Sixth), yet he wanted not his enemies and privy enviers, especially Henry Beaufort, cardinal, bishop of Winchester, and lord chancellor of England; who, at that time disdaining and envying the rule and authority of this duke, procured much trouble against him, and great division in the whole realm, insomuch that all the shops within the city of London were shut in, 8 for fear of the favorers of these two great personages; for each party had assembled no small number of people. For pacifying whereof, the archbishop of Canterbury and the duke of Coimbra (called the prince of Portugal), rode eight times 68 in one day between the two adversaries. Such were then the troubles of this tumultuous division within the realm, between these two, as is before expressed; not much unlike to the troublesome discord betwixt parties in this protector’s days. And as, in their afflictions and troubles, these two dukes 9 seemed not much unlike, so, in matters of religion, and in discerning truth from falsehood, their zeals seemed not much discrepant.
Although the light of the gospel did not so fully then shine out, as in the time of this latter duke (the Lord be praised there-for), yet the wisdom and towardness of the other duke also, touching the same, was not utterly unworthy of his commendation. For the more manifest declaration whereof, amongst many other his godly doings, we may take for example the prudent and famous act of that noble duke, in discerning and trying out the false lying miracle and popish hypocrisy of the blind beggar at St.
Alban’s, mentioned in his story before; 10 for which cause, and for his diligent study in reforming that, and such other blind abuses of feigned religion, he was the more hated of the spiritualty, and such as Winchester afterwards was.
Finally, as this lord protector, duke of Somerset, the king’s uncle, by certain of the council was then accused, arraigned, and condemned, for the trespass (as it was given forth) of felony (although I never heard he murdered or robbed any), so the other uncle of king Henry the Sixth was made away; of whose decease thus writeth master Tyndale in his Practice of Prelates: “At the last, they found the means to contrive a drift to bring their matters to pass, and made a parliament far from the citizens of London, where was slain the said good duke, and the only wealth of the realm, and the mighty shield which so long had kept it from the sorrow, which, shortly after his death, fell upon them by heaps. But the chronicles,” saith he, “cannot tell wherefore he died, nor by what means.
Nevertheless, this they testify, that he was a virtuous man, godly and good to the commonwealth.”
But, to leave duke Humphrey, and to return to the manners and virtues of the duke of Somerset, which before we were about to describe: — As he was a gentle and courteous duke at home, so was he no less fortunate a captain in warfare abroad; under whose government and guiding not only divers rebellious commotions were happily suppressed here at home; but also abroad, in the expedition of Scotland, such a victory was given him of God, that with the loss of scarce six hundred of his own men, there were, of the enemies, as good or little less than ten thousand slain and put to flight; and even the very same day and time in which all the idolatrous images were here burnt at London. And yet, all these wars notwithstanding, whereunto he was against his will compelled, he was a man of nature singularly given to peace, as may be seen by the sweet and peaceable exhortation by him set forth in print before, and sent to the realm of Scotland. But as there is nothing in this world so perfect in all respects, which is not blotted or darkened with some spot of vice adjoined withal; so, amongst the manifold commendations of this duke, one thing there was too, which both distained his honor and estimation much, and also more impaired and hindered his own life and safety; which was, that he, in condescending to the death of his brother, followed too rashly the persuasion of certain whosoever they were: for that matter lacked not, perchance, some singular fetch and policy of some more craftily than godly disposed persons; as many good men have supposed.
But howsoever 69 of that matter is to be deemed, credible it is, that the said duke, in suffering or procuring the death of his brother, not only endamaged himself, and weakened his own power, but also provoked the chastisement of God’s scourge and rod, which did so light upon him.
Furthermore, as touching the death and decay of the lord Henry earl of Surrey, who also suffered at the Tower next before the lord admiral, the lord protector’s brother; because the casting of him was so near to the death of king Henry, as I know not upon whom or what cause the same did proceed, so I pass it over and leave it to the Lord. Notwithstanding, as for the duke of Somerset, whatsoever his other vices and virtues were, this is certain, that his end (the Lord so working with him) was constant in Christ’s truth, as his life was before a great maintenance of the same.
Moreover, on the 26th day of February in the same year, were sir Ralph Vane and sir Miles Partridge both hanged at the Tower-hill, and sir Michael Stanhope, and sir Thomas Arundel beheaded upon the scaffold; all which four were condemned by the said act of unlawful assembly, and as accessaries unto the duke of Somerset.
PETER MARTYR’S DISPUTATIONS HOLDEN AT OXFORD, ABOUT THE SACRAMENT OF THE LORD’S SUPPER.
Not long after the death of the duke of Somerset, in the next year following, deceased the king himself about the month of June, 11 whereof more shall be said (the Lord granting) in his due order and course hereafter.
In the mean season, before we come to close up the latter end and story of this good king, the place here present seemeth not unfit to intermit, by the way, a few other things before happening within the time of his reign; namely, concerning matters incident of the church, and of religion. Which state of religion began well to grow, and to come happily forward during this king’s days, had not the unhappy troubles of the outward state, among the lords, not agreeing within themselves, disquieted the good towardness of things begun. But the malice of the devil, how subtilely worketh it, if men could see it! So long as the lords agreed in concord among themselves, Winchester and Bonner, with all that faction, were cut short, and began to condescend to good conformity. But afterward, perceiving the states and nobles of the realm to be among themselves divided, and the lord protector the king’s uncle displaced, and his brother the admiral before beheaded, and the young king now left in that case, they began upon some hope to take more heart to them, till, at last, it came to pass as they themselves desired. And thus, though nothing else will lead us, yet experience may teach us, what discord worketh in public weals; and contrarily, what a necessary thing concord is, to the advancement especially of God’s matters appertaining to his church. Examples of this in this king’s days be not far to seek; for, as touching the success of the gospel of peace, while public peace and the gospel did join together, marvellous it was how Error and Popery were in themselves confounded, and ashamed almost to show their faces: insomuch that then, both Drs.
Smith, Chedsey, Standish, Young, and Oglethorpe, with many more recanted their former ignorance, whose recantations I have to show.
Bonner then, with his own hand, subscribed unto the king’s supremacy, and promoted his injunctions.
The same, also, did Stephen Gardiner, subscribing with his own hand to the first book of the king’s proceedings; and no doubt had done [no] less to the second book also set forth by the king, had not the unfortunate discord fallen amongst the nobles, in a time so unfortunate as then it did. Briefly, during all that time of peace and concord, what papist was found in all the realm, who, for the pope’s devotion, would or did once put his neck in the halter, to die a martyr for his sake?
I showed before, how, in these peaceable days of king Edward, Peter Martyr, Martin Bucer, Paulus Phagius, with other learned men more were entertained, placed, and provided for, in the two universities of this realm, Oxford and Cambridge, who there, with their diligent industry, did much good. The learned and fruitful disputations of whom I have likewise present in my hands here to insert, but that the bigness of this volume driveth me to make short, especially seeing their disputations to be so long and prolix as they be, and also in Latin; and require of themselves a whole volume to comprehend them.
First, Peter Martyr, being called by the king to the public reading of the divinity lecture in Oxford, amongst his other learned exercises did set up in the public schools three conclusions of divinity, to be disputed and tried by argument; at which disputations were present the king’s visitors, to wit, Henry bishop of Lincoln, Dr. Coxe, chancellor of that university, Dr.
Hains, dean of Exeter, master Richard Morison esquire, and Christopher Nevinson doctor of civil law. The conclusions propounded were these:
First : “In the sacrament of thanksgiving there is no transubstantiation of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.”
Secondly : “ The body and blood of Christ 71 be not carnally or corporally in the bread and wine, nor, as others use to say, under the kinds 72 of bread and wine.”
Thirdly : “The body and blood of Christ be united to bread and wine sacramentally.”
They that were the chief disputers against him on the contrary side, were Dr. Tresham, Dr. Chedsey, and Morgan. The reasons and principal arguments of Peter Martyr hereunder follow.
THE ARGUMENT OF PETER MARTYR UPON THE FIRST QUESTION.
The Scriptures most plainly do name and acknowledge bread and wine. In the evangelists we read that the Lord Jesus took bread, blessed it, brake it, and gave it to his disciples. St. Paul, likewise, doth ofttimes make mention of bread.
Ergo, We also, with the Scriptures, ought not to exclude bread from the nature of the Sacramen 73 .
Cyprian [saith], “As in the person of Christ, his humanity was seen outwardly, and his divinity was secret within 74 : so, in the visible sacrament, the divinity inserteth itself in such sort as cannot be uttered; that our devotion about the sacraments might be the more religious.” Ergo, As in the person of Christ, so in the sacrament, both the natures ought still to remain.
Gelasius [saith], “The sacraments which we receive of the body and blood of Christ, are a divine matter; by reason whereof, we are made partakers, by the same, of his divine nature; and yet it ceaseth not still to be the substance of bread and wine. And certes the representation and similitude of the body and blood of Christ be celebrated in the action of the mysteries,” etc. Augustine [saith], “As the person of Christ consisteth of God and man, when as he is true God and true man: for every thing containeth in itself the nature and verity of those things whereof it is made. Now the sacrament of the church is made of two things; that is; of the sacrament [that signifieth], and of the matter of the sacrament [that is signified],” etc. Theodoret [saith], “These visible mysteries which are seen 75 , he hath honored with the name of his body and blood, not changing the nature, but adding grace unto nature,” etc. 15 And the same Theodoret again saith, “Those mystical sacraments, after sanctification, do not pass out of their own proper nature, but remain still in their former substance, figure, and shape ,” etc. 16 Ergo, Like as the body of Christ remained in him, and was not changed into his divinity; so, in the sacrament, the bread is not changed into the body, but both the substances remain whole.
Origen [saith], “If whatsoever entereth into the mouth, goeth down into the belly, and so passeth through a man; even that meat, also, which is sanctified by the word of God, and by prayer, as touching that part which it hath material within it, passeth into the belly, and so voideth through a man. But through prayer, which is adjoined to it, according to the measure of faith, it is profitable and effectual,” etc. And he addeth moreover, “For it is not the outward matter of bread, but the word that is spoken upon it, that profiteth him which eateth it worthily,” etc. Irenaeus [saith], “Jesus, taking bread of the same condition which is after us,” that is, taking bread of the same nature and kind, which we use commonly to eat, “did confess it to be his body. And taking likewise the cup, which is of the same creature which is after us,” that is, which we commonly use to drink, “confessed it to be his blood,” etc. 18 Also “Like as bread which is of the earth, receiving the word and calling 77 of God, is now not common bread, but the eucharist, consisting of two things, the one earthly, the other heavenly; so our bodies receiving the sacred eucharist, be now not corruptible, having hope of resurrection,” etc. Argument.
The bread in the sacrament is so changed into the body, as our bodies are changed when they are made incorruptible [by hope].
But our bodies are not made incorruptible by changing their substance 80 :
Ergo, No more is the bread changed into the substance of the body.
Gregory [saith], “Notwithstanding, whether we take leavened or unleavened bread, we are all one body of our Lord and Savior,” etc.
Argument.
Where bread leavened or unleavened is taken, there is substance of bread; and not accidents only.
In the sacrament, bread is received either leavened or unleavened; Ergo, In the sacrament is substance of bread, and not accidents only.
Argument.
The body of Christ is named of that which is proportioned round, and is insensible in operation.
Accidents only of bread have no figure of roundness.
Ergo, The body of Christ is not named of accidents, but of very bread substantial.
Argument.
The words of the evangelist, speaking of that which Christ took, blessed, brake, and gave, do import it to be bread, and nothing else but bread.
Ergo, The substance of bread is not to be excluded out of the sacrament.
Chrysostome [saith], “Christ in giving bread and wine, said, Do this in remembrance of me.”10 Cyril [saith], “He gave to them pieces or fragments of bread.” Also the same Cyril saith, “In bread we receive his precious body, and his blood in wine.” 21 Ergo, By these doctors, it remaineth bread after the consecration.
Ambrose [saith], “Before the blessing of the heavenly words, it is called another kind of thing. After consecration, the body of Christ is signified.”
ARGUMENTS OF PETER MARTYR, DISPUTING WITH MASTER CHEDSEY UPON THE FIRST QUESTION.
The analogy and resemblance between the sacrament, and the thing signified, must ever be kept in all sacraments.
In the sacrament of the Lord’s body this analogy or resemblance cannot be kept, if bread be transubstantiated:
Ergo, The substance of bread must needs remain in the sacrament.
The major of this argument is certain by St. Augustine, 22 where he saith, “Sacraments must needs bear a similitude of those things whereof they are sacraments, or else they can be no sacraments.”
The minor is thus proved:
Argument.
The resemblance between the sacrament and the body of Christ is this, that as the properties of bread and wine do nourish outwardly, so the properties of the body of Christ do nourish spiritually.
Without the substance of bread and wine, there is no resemblance of nourishing:
Ergo, Without the substance of bread and wine, the analogy cannot hold.
Argument.
Again, another resemblance and similitude or analogy of this sacrament is this: that as one loaf of bread, and one cup of wine, containeth many corns, and many grapes; so the mystical congregation containeth many members, and yet maketh but one body.
Without the substance of bread and wine no such resemblance or similitude of conjunction can be represented:
Ergo, Without the substance of bread and wine, the analogy of this spiritual conjunction cannot hold.
Another Argument.
Every sacrament consisteth in two things, that is, in the thing signifying, and the thing signified.
Without the substance of bread and wine, there is nothing that signifieth in the sacrament.
Ergo, The substance of bread and wine, in the sacrament, can in no wise be transubstantiate from their natures.
The minor is thus to be proved:
There is no signification in any sacrament without the element.
The substance of bread and wine is the element of this sacrament.
Ergo, Without the substance of bread and wine, there is no similitude nor signification in this sacrament.
And forasmuch as the adversaries ground their transubstantiation so much upon these words of Christ, “This is my body,” which they expound only after the literal sense, without trope or figure; now that this their exposition is false, and that the said words are to be taken figuratively and spiritually, by three causes it is to be proved:
First, By the words of the Scripture.
Secondly, By the nature of a sacrament.
Thirdly, By the testimonies of the fathers. [The first cause why the words of Christ, “This is my body,” must be taken figuratively, is holy Scripture. ] 1. First, by these words of the Scripture, where he saith, “Do this in remembrance of me,” forasmuch as remembrance properly serveth not for things corporally present, but for things rather being absent. 2. Secondly, where he saith, “Until I come;” which words were vain, if he were already come by consecration. 3. Thirdly, where St. Paul saith, “The breaking of bread, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?” Which words of breaking, in no case can be verified upon the body of Christ, which, for the glory thereof, is unpassible. 4. Furthermore, whereas the Lord biddeth them to take and eat, it is evident that the same cannot be understood simply of the body of Christ, without a trope, forasmuch as he cannot be eaten and chewed with teeth, as we use properly, in eating other meats, to do. 5. The words moreover of Luke and Paul, spoken of the cup, do argue likewise, that the other words spoken of the bread, must needs be taken mystically; as where it is said, “This cup is the New Testament,” which words must needs be expounded thus: This cup doth signify the New Testament. 6. Item, These words of St. John, “My words be spirit and life. The flesh profiteth nothing,” etc. (John 6.) 7. Item, Where in the same place of St. John, Christ, to refel the carnal understanding of the Capernaites, of eating his body, maketh mention of his ascension, etc.
The second cause why the words of Christ, “This is my body,” cannot be literally expounded without a trope, is the nature of a sacrament; whose nature and property is to bear a sign or signification of a thing to be remembered, which thing, after the substantial and real presence, is absent. As touching which nature of a sacrament, sufficient hath been said before.
The third cause why the words of consecration are figuratively to be taken, is the testimony of the ancient doctors.
Tertullian [saith], “‘ This is my body;’ that is to say, This is a figure of my body.” Augustine [saith], “Christ gave a figure of his body.” 24 [Also he saith,] “He did not doubt to say, ‘This is my body,’ when he gave a sign of his body.” Jerome [saith], “Christ represented unto us his body.”
Augustine, in his book “De Doctrina Christiana” declareth expressly, that this speech, of eating the body of Christ, is a figurative speech. Ambrose [saith], “As thou hast received the similitude of his death; so thou drinkest the similitude of his precious blood.” Argument.
The death of Christ is not present really in the sacrament, but by similitude.
The precious blood of Christ is present in the sacrament, as his death is present.
Ergo, The precious blood of Christ is not present really in the sacrament.
The minor of this argument is proved before by the words of Ambrose.
THE ARGUMENT OF PETER MARTYR, UPON THE SECOND CONCLUSION. “The body and blood of Christ, be not carnally or corporally in the bread and wine, nor, as others use to say, under the kinds of bread and wine.”
Argument.
The true natural body of Christ is placed in heaven.
The true natural body of man can be but in one place at once, where he is. Ergo, The true natural body of Christ can be in no place at once, but in heaven where he is.
The major is plain by the Scriptures, “Jesus was taken up to heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God. (Matthew 26) ‘The poor ye have always with you, but me you shall not always have.” (John 12) “I leave the world, and go to my Father.” (John 16) “Many shall say in that day, Lo, here is Christ, and there is Christ; believe them not.” (Matthew 24) “Whom the heavens must receive for a time, until the restitution of all.” (Acts 3) “Seek those things that are above, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God.” (Colossians 3) The minor, likewise, is evident by St. Austin, who, speaking of the glorified body of Christ, affirmeth the same to be in one certain place, “Propter veri corporis modum,” that is, for the manner of a true body. Argument.
Every true natural body requireth one certain place.
Augustine [saith], Christ’s body, is a true natural body.
Ergo, Christ’s body requireth one certain place.
Argument.
Augustine giveth not to the soul of Christ to be in more places at once but one. Ergo, Much less is it to be given to the body of Christ, to be in more places at once, but in one.
Argument.
The nature of the angels is not to be in divers places, but they are limited to occupy one certain place at once. Ergo, The body of Christ being the true natural body of a man, cannot fill divers places at one time.
Argument.
Whatsoever is in many and divers places at once, is God.
The body of Christ is not God, but a creature.
Ergo, The body of Christ cannot be in more places together.
Argument.
We must not so defend the divinity of Christ, that we destroy his humanity. If we assign to the body of Christ plurality of places, we destroy his humanity.
Ergo, we must not assign to the body of Christ plurality of places.
Argument.
Whatsoever thing is circumscribed, that is to say, contained in the limits of any peculiar place, cannot be dispersed in more places at once.
The body of Christ is a thing circumscribed.
Ergo, The body of Christ is not dispersed in more places at one time.
Argument.
Every quantity (that is, every body having magnitude, length, and other dimensions) is circumscribed in one peculiar place.
The body of Christ hath its dimensions, and is a quantity.
Ergo, The body of Christ is circumscribed.
The major is proved by Cyril: “Whatsoever is understood to be a body, the same is verily in a place, and in magnitude and in quantity. And if it be in quantity, it cannot avoid circumscription;” that is, to have its place. 32 Argument.
If Christ had given his body substantially and carnally in the supper, then was that body either passible or impassible.
But neither can you say that body to be passible or impassible, which he gave at supper.
Ergo, He did not give his body substantially and carnally at supper.
The minor is proved thus: For if ye say, it was passible, Augustine is against it, who saith, “Ye shall not eat this body which you see, nor drink the same blood which they shall shed that shall crucify me,” etc. And if ye say, it was impassible, that may not be admitted by the words of the evangelist, who saith “Eat, this is my body which shall be given for you:” so that, that body was passible, and not impassible, wherein Christ was given. Vigil [saith], “One creature cannot receive in itself two contrary or divers things together. But these two things be diverse and far unlike, that is to say, to be contained in a place, and to be everywhere. For the word, is everywhere; but the flesh is not everywhere.” Argument.
Bodies organical, without quantity, be no bodies.
The pope’s doctrine maketh the body of Christ in the sacrament to be without quantity.
Ergo, The pope’s doctrine maketh the body of Christ in the sacrament to be no body.
Argument.
All things which may be divided, have quantity.
The body in the pope’s sacrament is divided in three parts.
Ergo, The body in the pope’s sacrament hath quantity, which is against their own doctrine.
Argument.
No natural body can receive in itself, and at one time, contrary or divers qualities. To be in one place local, and in another place not local; to be in one place with quantity, and in another place without quantity; in one place circumscript, in another place incircumscript, is for a natural body to receive contrary qualities.
Ergo, The body of Christ cannot be in one place local, and in another not local; in one place with quantity, and in another without quantity, as our adversaries do affirm.
Argument.
The wicked receive not the body of Christ.
The wicked do receive the body of Christ, if transubstantiation be granted. Ergo, Transubstantiation is not to be granted in the sacrament.
Argument for probation of the Major.
To eat Christ, is for a man to have Christ dwelling and abiding in him. The wicked have not Christ dwelling in them.
Ergo, The wicked eat not the body of the Lord.
Cyprian [saith], “The eating of Christ is our abiding in him.” Argument.
The Holy Ghost could not come, if the body of Christ were really present. That the Holy Ghost is come it is most certain.
Ergo, It cannot be, that Christ himself should be here really present.
For proof of the major: John 16, “Unless I go from you, the Holy Ghost shall not come: it is expedient for you that I go hence.”
ARGUMENT OF PETER MARTYR ON THE THIRD CONCLUSION. “The body and blood of Christ be united to bread and wine sacramentally.”
If the wicked, and infidels, do receive the body of Christ, they receive him either with sense, or reason, or with faith.
But they receive him neither with sense, reason, nor with faith.
Ergo, Wicked men and infidels receive in no wise the body of Christ.
For declaration of the major, if ye say, they receive him with sense, that is against their own lore, for the body of Christ in the blessed sacrament (say they) is not sensible, nor to be perceived by any sense: neither with reason can they receive him, by their own learning, for so much as this sacrament exceedeth all reason; “Nec fides habet meritum, ubi ratio praebet experimentum:” and if ye say, that they receive him with faith, how can that be, seeing infidels have no faith?
What it is to eat the body of Christ, the teaching of the papists herein is strange, and differeth from the old doctors. For whereas they teach that wicked persons and infidels, albeit they receive not the effect of the sacrament, yet the matter of the sacrament, which is the very body of Christ, they receive with their mouth, and with their sense the accidents of bread, and thus imagine a certain body of Christ, such as evil men and infidels may eat; and yet, being eaten, it giveth them no nourishment nor life, nor maketh them partakers of his spirit and grace; both Scripture, and the ancient expositors of the Scripture, do teach much otherwise. For the Scripture knoweth no such kind of eating Christ’s body, but only that which is fruitful, wholesome, and effectual. “He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, abideth in me and I in him,” etc. (John 6) And therefore it may appear, that the Scripture meaneth, by eating Christ’s flesh, to believe in Christ’s passion; which none can do but only the faithful. And to the same sense sound all the old doctors.
Cyprian [saith], “That we should know that eating is our dwelling in him, and our drinking is, as it were, a certain incorporation in him.” Item, The same Cyprian saith: “The eating, therefore, of his flesh, is a certain desire to abide in him;” and saith moreover, “None eateth of this lamb, but such as be true Israelites, that is, true christian men, without color or dissimulation.”
And again he saith, “As meat is to the flesh, the same is faith to the soul, the same is the word to the spirit.”
Moreover saith he, “And therefore doing this, we whet not our teeth to bite, but with pure faith we break the holy bread and distribute it.”
Augustine [saith], “It may not be said, that any such do eat the body of Christ, because they are accounted amongst the members of Christ. Neither can they be both members of Christ, and members of a harlot, etc. Furthermore, when Christ saith, ‘He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him;’ (John 6) he showeth what it is, not sacramentally, but indeed, to eat his body and drink his blood, which is, when a man so dwelleth in Christ, that Christ dwelleth in him. For so Christ spake those words, as if he should say; he that dwelleth not in me, and in whom I dwell not, let him not say nor think, that he eateth my body, or drinketh my blood.” Also in other places the said Augustine affirmeth, that “to drink, is to live;” and saith moreover, “Why preparest thou thy belly and thy teeth? Believe, and thou hast eaten,” etc.
All which kinds of eating cannot be said of the wicked and infidels, but only of the godly and faithful.
And thus, briefly, we have run over all the arguments and authorities of Peter Martyr, in that disputation at Oxford, with Drs. Tresham, Chedsey, and Morgan, before the king’s visitors above named, A.D. 1549.
Furthermore, whoso listeth more fully to be satisfied and resolved in all the points and occurrents, touching the matter of this sacrament, let him read the books first, of the archbishop Cranmer against Winchester; secondly, The Tractation of Peter Martyr made in Oxford, translated and extant in English; and thirdly, the book of bishop Ridley made in prison, called “A brief Declaration of the Lord’s Supper.”
The like disputation also, about the same time, was appointed and commenced at Cambridge, concerning the same matter of the sacrament, the king’s visitors being directed down for the same purpose by the king; the names of which visitors were these, Nicholas Ridley bishop of Rochester, Thomas bishop of Ely, master John Cheke the king’s schoolmaster, Dr. May civilian, and Thomas Wendy the king’s physician.
The conclusions in that disputation propounded were these: — THE FIRST DISPUTATION, HOLDEN AT CAMBRIDGE THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JUNE, A.D. 1549, BEFORE THE KING’S MAJESTY’S COMMISSIONERS By Dr. Madew respondent, whose first conclusion was this: “Transubstantiation cannot be proved by the plain and manifest words of Scripture; nor can thereof be necessarily collected, nor yet confirmed, by the consents of the ancient fathers for these thousand years past.” (Dr. Glyn, master Langdale, master Segewick, master Young, opponents.)
DR. MADEW’S DECLARATION84 . “First of all,” quoth he, “I am very sorry for, and do not a little lament the shortness of time, to declare and discuss such weighty matters of religion in, as these be. But, that notwithstanding, if I had had more plenty of time indeed; yet you shall understand how that I have ever, both in heart and mind (if otherwise I could have avoided it), abhorred all scholastical disputations, and subtile sophistications. In consideration whereof, I beseech those that are to dispute, not to allege or bring forth any dismembered, or curtailed sentences, or wrested (as happeneth many times), but the whole and full sentences either of the Scriptures, or of the ancient doctors; yea, and to avouch such authors’ sayings, as are not suspected, or feigned, but such as be their own very sayings indeed; which if they do, there is no doubt, but the clear light of this our disputation shall the sooner appear, and be manifest to this auditory. “And for a further declaration of my part, you shall understand, that this my preface, in my said former most catholic and godly conclusion, shall consist in three principal points. “First, What thing it was that Christ gave to his disciples. “Secondly, What season or time this Transubstantiation did begin. “Thirdly, How many devilish abominations have ensued upon that horrible and pestilent invention. “As concerning the first, that is, what thing Christ gave to his disciples, that may very well appear even by our own natural senses, as namely, by the sight, by the touching, by the tasting, which cannot be deceived of their natural judgment. For the eye seeth nothing but bread and wine; the tasting savoreth nothing else; and the hands touch nothing else. He gave, also, to their understanding, not only his holy and sacred doctrine, but also a special gift and pledge of his love. He gave the only material bread and wine sanctified, as the first rude and plain elements or principles to allure them withal; but he gave them the gift of his grace and heavenly doctrine, as the very things signified by the sensible elements; which thing plainly appeareth by the words of Christ our Savior, ‘Non bibam,’ etc. ‘I will not drink hereafter of the fruit of this vine, until I drink it new with you in the kingdom of God.’ Nor this fruit or juice of the vine, is nothing else but wine, as Chrysostome saith. And moreover, to prove the same true, if it be reserved after the consecration for a time, it becometh sour and tart; therefore it is but wine. “And as touching the bread, St. Paul saith thus: ‘Is not the bread which we break the communion, or participation of Christ’s body?’ He brake bread, therefore it was but bread which he gave them: for the body of Christ is not broken; as the Scripture saith of the same, ‘Os non comminuetis ex eo;’ ‘You shall not break a bone of him.’ Also he said, ‘This is my body;’ not that the bread was his body, and the wine his blood, but he spake those words to and of his own mortal body, there sitting amongst them at supper. Or he spake yet doubtfully, as thus: This signifieth my body, it is one thing which is seen, but it is another thing which is understood: for that which is seen hath a bodily form, but that which is understood thereby, hath a spiritual fruit. St. Augustine saith, ‘Let the word have access to the element, so is it made a sacrament;’ mark he saith, ‘Let the word have access’ — and not ‘success.’ Now the thing that hath access to another thing, doth not quench the thing that it cometh to, no more doth it here: ergo, it is bread and wine still, as before, howbeit sacred and holy. ‘What saw you yesterday,’ saith St. Augustine, ‘upon the altar? Truly bread and wine, which your own eyes can witness,’ said he. What plainer testimony can be had of so ancient a father as he was, and of so rare knowledge in the Scriptures of God? Seeing then that our eyes do behold nothing but bread and wine, it must needs follow that it is so indeed, or else our senses be deceived in their own proper object, which cannot be by any reason or natural philosophy. And yet, notwithstanding some papists dream and fancy such a corporal, real, and gross presence of Christ’s body in the sacrament, as they affirm it to be there, even as verily as it was upon the cross. Indeed the bread is changed after a certain manner into Christ’s body; for Christ gave not his own natural body to his disciples at his last supper, but only a sign or figure thereof.
Christ’s body is there with the bread; our senses cannot be deceived about the substance of bread, but they do judge there to be but one body, that is of bread: ergo, so it is. Also the very definition of a sacrament doth plainly repugn unto transubstantiation. Bread nourisheth the substance of Christ’s body, but the accidents do not so: ergo, the substance doth remain of the bread that nourisheth. It is also called bread in the Acts, and in divers other places of the Scriptures; wherefore it is so, but indeed after a sort more holy than before. What gave he in the supper? Bread, which is the body, that is to say, a holy sign of his body; as Augustine doth witness, saying, “He doubted not to say, ‘This is my body,’ when it was but a sign of his body. The unleavened bread was but a bare and naked sign of Christ’s body; and so is this bread the same body, even as baptism is. Now, indeed, there be two manner of signs; one that signifieth only, the other that doth exhibit, the thing itself. The first is applied to the old law chiefly, the other to the law of grace. The old, ancient, and learned fathers did never use to speak of the substantial change, because that all the mutation is but conditional, not substantial; nor do we deem the bodily substance sacramentally, but yet we say that this proposition ‘This is my body,’ is but a figurative speech, and no proper speech, as some do deem. But it is as much as to say, ‘This signifieth my body;’ or else thus; ‘This is a sacrament of my body:’ for the bodily bread and Christ’s body are not contained in place locally, but mystically. “This portentous and monstrous transubstantiation began first to enter, when the popish prelates and priests began first to understand this said proposition, ‘This is my body,’ of the carnal and real presence of Christ’s body; as Hugo de Sancto Victore, Gratian, Peter Lombard, and Innocent the Third, the very pestilent poison of all christian religion, unto whom we have, of long season, yea alas too long, given credit: under the which Innocent the said devilish term or vocable of ‘transubstantiation’ began in the year 1215. And Boniface [ after him bishop of Rome 85 ] made the said mad blind transubstantiation to be the third article of the faith: full wisely, no doubt! whereas another bishop of Rome before him affirmed plainly, against Eutyches and Nestorius the heretics, that bread remaineth still: whose name was Gelasius the first 86 . “Now, as touching the most shameful and detestable inconveniences, which must needs follow this devilish term or vocable of ‘transubstantiation,’ you shall understand the first is, that then such papists will have Christ’s body still prostituted and received, even of the wicked and naughty people; which is clean contrary to that place of our Savior Christ, where he saith, ‘Whosoever eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.’ Now it is plain, that evil persons dwell not in Christ, nor Christ in them; wherefore they receive not his body therein at all. For St. Augustine 41 saith, ‘It is but bread, which is seen after the consecration:’ ergo, the substance of bread is there still. “The second inconvenience that groweth hereof, is the fond and superstitious reservation of the sacrament in pixes, boxes, and such like, with vain tabernacles over the altar, where oftentimes it did putrify, for all their foolish honor; which began in Honorius’s days, the third of that name, bishop of Rome; which corruption declareth it to be but only bread — say all the papists what they list. “The third inconvenience that must needs follow transubstantiation, is adoration, which is too plain idolatry, as the papists do know themselves, if they list: but they are so stiffnecked, that they will not know it; and so both have kept, and yet also will keep, the world in blindness still, if they might be suffered. But to be short with you, even as we are changed into Christ by receiving the sacrament, so the bread is changed into the body of Christ. But our substance is not changed into Christ’s substance: ergo, the substance of the bread is not changed into Christ’s body. And to be short and plain with you, most honorable audience, the whole universal world hath been, and yet is, sore deceived and deluded about the estimation of this sacrament.
Therefore this is most true: when we do receive the said sacrament worthily, then are we joined by faith spiritually, to Christ our Savior. And thus much have I said, in this first matter.” “The second matter to be disputed of is this: “That in the Lord’s supper is none other oblation or sacrifice, than one only remembrance of Christ’s death, and of thanksgiving.” “In this conclusion I will be much shorter and more compendious than in the first. In consideration thereof you shall understand, that the same is a very godly and true catholic proposition; for to offer Christ, and to exhibit the same, is all one thing: for in that he is offered — he is set forth to eat — there is no difference at all between the maker of the sacrifice, or offerer, and the thing that was offered, which both were one Christ. The Lord did command, saying, “Do this in remembrance of me;” he made mention of the remembrance only, wherefore it can be none other sacrifice but only that. The apostle doth declare the manner of the thing doing, saying thus, “He took bread in his hands, he blessed it, he brake it, and gave it to his disciples. What gave he to them? Forsooth bread, which was the sacrament, and not his body. No earthly creature, nor heavenly, did ever offer up Christ at any time, but he himself, once for all, upon the cross; ergo, he cannot, nor ought not, to be many times and often — though that Pighius, with all the blind rabble of papists, say the contrary. For, truly, in this point especially, they know not what they say, being so led by the old pharisaical blindness. But to the purpose: you shall understand, good auditors, that the pure and clean oblation and sacrifice, spoken of by the prophet Malachi, is nothing else but devout and faithful prayer and thanksgiving, as Tertullian saith in his third book ‘contra Marcionem,’ expounding the Psalm, where it is said thus, ‘The sacrifice of laud and praise shall honor me.’ So do St.
Jerome, Irenaeus, and St. Austin say, also, upon Malachi; where also, they deny that Christ is essentially in the sacrament. Yea and St. Austin 42 witnesseth, that the mortifying of our earthly members is our true sacrifice, that be Christians. And all the ancient fathers do call prayers by the name of sacrifices. And for this purpose, whosoever list to read that most excellent and famous clerk Zuinglius, 43 shall find the same confirmed of him by most grounded reasons, whatsoever the papists do bark against it. Thus I have declared my mind in both matters now disputable; and, if my further declaration be required through the vehemency of arguments, I will perform the same in my answer thereunto.” (THERE DISPUTED AGAINST THIS DEFENDANT, DR. GLYN, MASTER LANGDALE, MASTER SEGEWICK, AND MASTER YOUNG, STUDENTS IN DIVINITY.) Glyn : — “Notwithstanding, right worshipful master doctor, that you have so exquisitely declared your mind and opinion in every one of these matters now in contention, before this honorable and learned audience, and also, though just occasion be ministered to me to infringe your positions in both conclusions, yet I will not invade the same as now indirectly, with contrarious and vain words to occupy the small time which is appointed us for the trial of the same, but we will go forthwith to the thing itself, which containeth in it matter enough. It is but folly to use many words, where few will serve our purpose, as saith the Master of the Sentences. All words may signify at pleasure, and commonly there be more things than vocables. Like as, sometimes, there was variance amongst learned men, of the unity of two substances in one personage of Christ, God, and man: so is there now, in our days, variance of transubstantiation of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. Wherefore I do require you, first, to show me here openly, what the said transubstantiation is, that we go not from the thing itself, which is our first and chiefest ground.” Madew : — “As for that, I need not to show you; for every man knoweth it.” Glyn : — “Peradventure it is not so, good master doctor. And I am perfectly assured, that every man doth not know it indeed; for it is not so light a matter as you make it to be.” Madew : — “Forsooth you know it yourself, and so do all men else.” Glyn : — “Well, yet I pray you show me, what thing Christ did demonstrate and show forth by that article of the neuter gender, where he said, ‘This is my body?’ What did he point at in that article ‘this?’
For if he meant by that, the bread, then Christ, in the sacrament, is not only of two natures, but of three natures, as of the nature of bread, of the nature of man, and of the divine nature; which to say, were blasphemy. The argument is good, and doth hold by that text, ‘He spake the word, and it was done; he commanded, and they were created.’ Moreover, if he should mean by that article of the neuter gender, ‘this,’ the material bread, then he would have said, ‘This bread is my body,’ so making the article of the neuter gender; or else he would have said thus, ‘Here, with this bread, is my body;’ to have avoided ever after all heresies, errors, and schisms. But he said not so, but spake the article of the neuter gender saying, This is my body, that is to say, the thing or substance contained under the form and kind of bread, which you see not with your bodily eyes, is my body, according to my promise made to you before, that I would give you my very flesh to eat. (John 6) In like manner when he gave the cup of his blood, he said not ‘this’ in the neuter gender, as he would have done, if he had meant the material creature of wine to have remained; but he said then in the masculine gender, ‘This is my blood:’ that is to say, the thing contained under the form of wine, which you see not with your bodily eyes, is my blood. For truly the Holy Ghost came down to lead us into all truth and verity, and not to deceive us in so notable a point of our faith. But, out of doubt, he should have deceived in this matter, if so be he had given us only material bread and wine, instead of his body and blood, and not have fulfilled his promise made in John 6, where he promised thus, ‘The bread which I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.’ Here be two givings spoken of, with two relatives, whereof the first, with his relative, must needs be referred to his gift in the last supper, and the second giving of the same flesh of his, with his relative, must be applied of necessity unto his giving of his body upon the cross: nor do we find in the whole Scripture, where Christ did fulfill his said promise made in John 6, but at those said two times. Wherefore if we be deceived in this matter of transubstantiation, we may well say, O Lord thou hast deceived us. But God forbid that we should once think such wickedness of him. He must also be unjust of his promise, if it be not performed at any season; as it is not indeed, if it were not at both the said times. Then, if it were performed (as the catholic church of Christ doth hold, determine, and believe), then must it needs be granted, that he gave, at his last supper, his own body and flesh indeed and verily, which he gave upon the cross for the life of the world, though not in so fleshly a manner and bloody, yet the very same flesh and blood really, after an unbloody sort, and spiritually. He said not, ‘This bread is my body, nor yet, ‘Here, with the bread, is my body;’ but, ‘This is my body, which shall be given for you.’ Neither said he, ‘This wine is my blood,’ nor ‘With this wine is my blood;’ which circumstance of plain speech he would have used, if the pure creatures should have remained: but he said, ‘This is my blood, which is shed for you and for many, for the remission of sins;’ that is to say, the substance hidden under these visible forms of bread and wine, is my very proper flesh and blood. I pray you where do you find, in the whole body of the Scripture expressed, or justly understood, that Christ gave but only a bare and naked sign, figure, or sacrament? or where find you that he gave his body with bread, it remaining bread still? And if you think to find it, I pray you show me here, whether that body that he gave with material bread were his true body or not?
If not, then it was fantastical; if it were his true body (as you do grant), then must there needs be two very true bodies in one place together.
Now, that it was his very true body and blood, it is certain, by the plain words of the text, saying thus, ‘which is betrayed or given,’ and ‘which is shed for you and for many.’ But I will let all this pass over, and I do require of you this one question, Whether that the sacraments of the old law and of the new law be all one?” Madew : — “If you do consider the things themselves, they be all one; but if you respect only the signs, figures, and sacraments outwardly, then they be divers.” Glyn : — “I do perceive your answer very well. Then further to our purpose, Was Christ, then, after the same manner in the bread that came from heaven, in the paschal lamb, and in Isaac, as he is in this sacrament? which if you do grant me, then these propositions were true, for Christ to say, ‘this manna is my body,’ ‘this lamb is my body,’ ‘this Isaac is my body.’ Moreover, if the sacraments of the old law, and of the law of grace, be all one in very deed and effect (as you seem to grant), then what difference is between the shew-bread in Moses’s law, and the bread that we do break, that St. Paul speaketh of? They then had that bread, which signifieth Christ; and so doth ours, as you say: that was bread, so is ours; and so, by your reason, there is no difference between them: yea their manna, because it came from heaven, was better than this earthly bread, that cometh from beneath — which is contrary to the truth; for St. John saith, ‘That the law was given by Moses, but the verity was given by Jesus Christ.’
Wherefore that which Christ gave, was not only a sign, but also the verity; that is to say, the living bread that came down from heaven, the true Lamb that taketh away the sins of the world, and Isaac himself, which is Christ: or else you must grant me that we Christians do receive less than the Jews did — for they received the bread, called manna, from heaven, and we only a poor morsel of bread from the earth; theirs was called angels’ food, and ours is, as you hold, little better than common bread. Me seemeth that you do distrust the doctrine of the faith of Christendom for these five hundred years, even as though Christ had forsaken his catholic church after one thousand years; but that is not so; for he promised his holy Spirit to assist his spouse the church, and to lead her continually into all truth from time to time, as need should require. As I remember, you said that adoration did follow upon transubstantiation: but the fathers, for one thousand years past, do grant adoration of the sacrament; therefore transubstantiation also. The minor I prove by the most clear testimonies of St. Austin, St. Ambrose, St. Denis, St. Basil, and St.
Chrysostome. Madew : — “I deny, master doctor, that I said any such thing; and therewith I say, that the fathers do understand by adoration, a certain reverent manner that we should receive the Lord’s supper with; which may be called a certain veneration, but no adoration.” Glyn : — “No, master? St. Austin ‘De civitate Dei,’ witnesseth, that the Ethnics and Paynims do esteem the Christians to worship and adore the God of wheat and barley called Ceres, and the God of wine called Bacchus. And again, St. Austin saith thus, Lo, no man eateth of that bread, except he first adore and worship it.” Madew : — “By your patience, St. Austin, in that place, speaketh of the honoring of Christ’s body now sitting in heaven.” Glyn : — “Yea, master doctor, think you so? And why not also of his blessed body in the sacrament; seeing that he saith it is there? ‘This is my body which is given for you,’ (Matthew 26, Mark 14) saith he.
More plainly he needeth not to speak for the real presence of his blessed body, being both able and willing to verify his word. For if a cunning lapidary should say to you or me, this is a true right diamond, a perfect carbuncle, sapphire, emerald, or any such precious stone, we would believe him, though we were ignorant of their natures.
Wherefore we ought much more to believe our Savior Christ, God and man, in that he saith, ‘This is my body.’ And why then ought we not to honor it in the sacrament? or how many bodies hath Christ, seeing you do grant his body in heaven to be honored, but not his body here in the sacrament?” Madew : — “Forsooth he hath but one very body and no more; but the same is sacramentally in the sacrament, and substantially in heaven; here by faith, and there in deed.” Glyn : — “Well yet once again to you thus: The very true body of Christ is to be honored, but the same very true body is in the sacrament: ergo, the body of Christ in the sacrament is to be honored.” Rochester — “Well-beloved friends, and brethren in our Savior Christ, you must understand that this disputation, with others that shall be after this, are appointed to search for the plain truth of the holy Scriptures in these matters of religion, which, of a long season, have been hidden from us by the false glosses of that great Antichrist and his ministers of Rome, and now, in our days, must be revealed to us Englishmen, through the great mercy of God principally, and, secondarily, through the most gentle clemency of our natural sovereign lord the king’s majesty, whom the living Lord long preserve to reign over us in health, wealth, and godliness, to the maintenance of God’s holy word, and to the extirpation of all blind glosses of men, that go about to subvert the truth. Because, therefore, that I am one that doth love the truth, and have professed the same amongst you, therefore, I say, because of conferring my mind with yours, I will here gladly declare what I think in this point now in controversy. Not because this worshipful doctor hath any need of my help in dissolving of arguments proposed against him, for, as me seemeth, he hath answered hitherto very well and clerkly, according to the truth of God’s word. But now to the purpose, I do grant unto you, master opponent, that the old ancient fathers do record and witness a certain honor and adoration to be due unto Christ’s body, but they speak not of it in the sacrament, but of it in heaven at the right hand of the Father, as holy Chrysostome saith, ‘Honor thou it, and then eat it:’ but that honor may not be given to the outward sign, but to the body of Christ itself in heaven. For that body is there only in a sign virtually, by grace, in the exhibition of it in spirit, effect, and faith, to the worthy receiver of it. For we receive virtually only Christ’s body in the sacrament.” Glyn: — “How then, if it please your good lordship, doth baptism differ from this sacrament? for in that, we receive Christ also by grace, and virtually. Rochester: — “Christ is present after another sort in baptism, than in this sacrament; for in that, he purgeth and washeth the infant from all kind of sin, but here, he doth feed spiritually the receiver in faith with all the merits of his blessed death and passion. And yet he is in heaven still really and substantially, as for example: the king’s majesty, our lord and master, is but in one place, wheresoever that his royal person is abiding for the time; and yet his mighty power and authority is everywhere in his realms and dominions: so Christ’s real person is only in heaven substantially placed, but his might is in all things created effectually; for Christ’s flesh may be understood for the power or inward might of his flesh.” Glyn: — “If it please your fatherhood, St. Ambrose and St. Augustine do say, that before the consecration it is but very bread, and after the consecration it is called the very body of Christ.” Madew: — “Indeed it is the very body of Christ sacramentally, after the consecration, whereas before, it is nothing but common bread; and yet, after that, it is the Lord’s bread: and thus must St. Ambrose and St. Augustine be understood.” (Here the proctors commanded the opponent to divert to the second conclusion; but he requested them that they would permit him as long, in this matter, as they would in the second; and so he still prosecuted the first matter as followeth:) Glyn: — “The bread, after consecration, doth feed the soul: ergo, the substance of common bread doth not remain. 44 — The argument is good, for St. Ambrose, ‘De Sacramentis,’ saith thus: ‘After the consecration there is not the thing that nature did form, but that which the blessing doth consecrate. And if the benediction of the prophet Elias did turn the nature of water, how much more then doth the benediction of Christ here both God and man.” Madew: — “That book of St. Ambrose, is suspected to be none of his works.” Rochester: — “So all the fathers say.” Glyn: — “I do marvel at that, for St. Austin, in his book of Retractations, maketh plain, that that was his own very work.” Rochester: — “He speaketh, indeed, of such a book so entituled, to St. Ambrose, but yet we do lack the same book indeed.” Glyn: — “Well, let it then pass to other men’s judgments. What then say you to holy St. Cyprian, one thousand two hundred years past, who saith, that the bread, which our Lord gave to his disciples, was not changed in form, or quality; but in very nature, and by the almighty word, was made flesh?” Madew: — “ I do answer thus: that this word flesh, may be taken two ways, either for the substance itself, or else for a natural property of a fleshly thing. So that Cyprian there did mean of a natural property, and not of fleshly substance. And, contrariwise, in the rod of Aaron, where both the substance, and also the property was changed.” Glyn: — “Holy St. Ambrose saith, ‘The body there made by the mighty power of God’s word, is the body of the Virgin Mary.’” Rochester: — “That is to say, that by the word of God the thing hath a being that it had not before, and we do consecrate the body, that we may receive the grace and power of the body of Christ in heaven by this sacramental body.” Glyn: — “By your patience, my lord, if it be a body of the Virgin, as St. Ambrose saith, which we do consecrate, as ministers, by God’s holy word, then must it needs be more than a sacramental, or spiritual body; yea a very body of Christ indeed; yea the same that is still in heaven without all moving from place to place, unspeakably and far passing our natural reason, which is in this mystery so captivate, that it cannot conceive how it is there, without a lively faith to God’s word.
But let this pass. You do grant that this bread doth quicken or give life; which, if it do, then it is not a natural bread, but a supersubstantial bread.” Rochester: — “So doth the effectual and lively word of God, which for that it nourisheth the soul, it doth give life; for the divine essence infuseth itself unspeakably into the faithful receiver of the sacrament.” Glyn: — “How then say you to holy Damascene, a Greek author, who, as one Trithemius 89 saith, flourished one thousand years past.
He saith thus: ‘The body that is of the holy virgin Mary, is joined to the divinity, after the consecration, in verity and indeed: not so as the body, once assumpted into heaven, and sitting on the Father’s right hand, doth remove from thence and come down at the consecrationtime, but that the same bread and wine are substantially transumpted into the very body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. If,’ saith he ‘thou dost not know the manner how it is brought to pass, let it be enough to thee to believe, that it is done by the operation of the Holy Ghost, and we do know no more but that the living word of God is working and almighty, but the very manner how, is inscrutable to us: and no great marvel,’ saith he, ‘for we cannot well express how the material bread, wine, or water, are transumpted naturally into the same body and blood of the receiver, and be become another body than they were before. So,’ saith this great ancient clerk, ‘also this shewbread with wine and water are changed, by the coming of the Holy Ghost, into Christ’s body and blood, and they be not two bodies there, but very one (of Christ) and the same.” Rochester: — “First, I deny, master doctor, that Damascene was one thousand years past; secondarily, I say, that he is not to be holden as an ancient father, for that he maintaineth in his works evil and damnable doctrine, as the worshipping of images and such like.
Thirdly, I say, that indeed God, by his holy Spirit, is the worker of that which is done in the sacrament. Also I grant that there is a mutation of the common bread and wine spiritually into the Lord’s bread and wine, by the sanctifying of them in the Lord’s word. But I deny that there is any mutation of the substances; for there is no other change there, indeed, than there is in us, who, when we do receive the sacrament worthily, then are we changed into Christ’s body, bones, and blood; not in nature, but spiritually, and by grace. Much like as Isaiah saw the burning coal, even so we see not there the very simple bread, as it was before the consecration; for an union cannot be but of two very things. Wherefore, if we be joined to Christ, receiving the sacrament, then there is no annihilation of bread (which is, when it is reduced to nothing), as it is in your feigned transubstantiation.” Glyn: — “So, I perceive, you would have me to grant, that the sacrament is but a figure; which Theophylact doth deny.” Rochester: — “You say truth, he denieth it indeed to be a figure, but he meaneth that it is not only a figure.” Glyn: — “Whereas St. Paul saith, that we, being many, are one bread, he speaketh not, nor meaneth one material bread, as you do here: ergo, he speaketh of heavenly bread. And holy Chrysostome, upon Matthew, saith, that the paschal lamb was a figure, but the mystery is the verity. For the disciples would not have been offended to have drunk a figure of Christ’s blood, being well accustomed to figures. For Christ did not institute a figure for a figure, but the clear verity instead of the figure, as St. John saith, ‘Grace and verity was given by Christ.’ ‘Dost thou see bread,’ saith Chrysostome, ‘Doth it avoid or pass as other meats do which we receive? God forbid! Ergo,’” etc. Madew: — “That ancient clerk Origen, upon Matthew 15, saith thus, ‘As touching that which is material in the sacrament, it descendeth and issueth out as other nutriments do; but as concerning that which is celestial, it doth not so.’” Glyn: — “Chrysostome, 45 upon Matthew, saith, that we cannot be deceived of Christ’s word, but our natural senses may be deceived in this point very soon and easily: his said words cannot be false, but our senses be many times beguiled of their judgments. Because therefore that Christ said, ‘This is my body,’ let us not at any hand doubt (saith Chrysostome); but let us believe it, and well perceive it with the eyes of our understanding. And within a little after, in that place, he saith thus: ‘It was not enough, that he was become man, and afterwards was scourged for us; but also he did reduce and bring us to be as one body with him: not through faith only, but in very deed also, he maketh us his body.’ And after that he saith, that these works are not of man’s power; but the same things that he wrought in his last supper, he now worketh also by his precept to his right ministers, and we do occupy the place of the same ministers: but he it is that doth sanctify and transumpt the creatures; he performeth still the same.” Rochester: — “Master doctor, you must understand, that in that place St. Chrysostome showeth us, that Christ delivered to us no sensible thing at his last supper.” Glyn: — “Honorable sir, by your patience I grant that he gave to his disciples no sensible thing in substance, but a thing insensible, his own precious body and blood, under the only kinds of creatures. And truly, as it seemeth, Theophylact best knew the meaning of Chrysostome, because all authors accept him as a faithful interpreter of him; and he hath these same plain words, ‘transelemented’ and ‘transformed.’ Also Theophylact 90 of Achrida, upon Mark, Cyril, and St. Augustine, saith, that before the consecration it is bread, but, afterwards, it is Christ’s very body. In like manner St. Augustine, upon Psalm 33, saith, that in the last supper Christ did bear himself in his own hands. Now every man may bear the figure of his body in his own hands, but St.
Augustine saith it there, for a miracle. Irenaeus, in his fifth book, is of the same mind. And St. Augustine saith (I do remember the words), ‘The law and figures were by Moses; but the verity and body came by Christ.’” Rochester: — “Well, say what you list, it is but a figurative speech, like to this: ‘If you will receive and understand, he is Elias’ — for a property: but indeed he was not Elias, but John the Baptist. And so in this place Christ calleth it his body, when it was very bread. But better than the common bread, because it was sanctified by the word of Christ.” (HERE MASTER LANGDALE REPLIED TO DR. MADEW.) Langdale: — “Right worshipful master doctor, by your patience I have noted two things that you affirmed in your position even now, before this honorable audience, the which, as me seemeth, are not consonant to the truth of God’s word. The first is, as touching Christ’s saying, ‘I will not from henceforth drink any more of the fruit of the vine, until I drink it new with you,’ etc.; which place of the Scripture you did, as I think, understand, and interpret, as though nothing else remained after the consecration, but very wine still. Whereof I do not a little marvel, seeing that most famous clerk Erasmus, whose authority and sentence you refuse at this present only, yet, nevertheless, is very worthy, in this matter, of far better estimation amongst learned men.
Wherefore I trust I shall not offend, to allege him before this learned and honorable auditory. He plainly affirmeth, that for all his great labor in searching the Scriptures, he could never find either in the evangelists, or yet in the apostolical doctrine, that it might be or was called wine, after the consecration. And therefore I cannot but marvel, if the thing be so open and plain as in your declaration you seem to make it, that such a profound clerk as he was, could not find it out. For that said place he entreated of in his Paraphrases, in his annotations, and in other of his lucubrations; and yet he plainly denieth that same very thing to be found of him, which you here openly affirmed, that it is wine, or may be so called after the consecration duly performed by a right minister. I beseech you not to be offended, though I credit not your saying in this so weighty a matter of christian religion, as I do his.” Madew: — “No forsooth, I will not be offended one jot with you.
But, to content your mind in this point, it is most constant and sure, that Erasmus was of that mind and opinion, that it was enough for a Christian to believe Christ’s body and blood to be in the sacrament, in what manner or condition soever it were.” Langdale: — “ By your license, good master doctor, these be Erasmus’s words: ‘The church of Christ hath determined, very lately, transubstantiation in the sacrament. It was of a long season enough to believe Christ’s body to be either under the bread consecrated, or else to be present after any other manner. But yet,’ saith he, ‘after that the said church had pondered and weighed the thing more pithily with greater judgment, then she made a more certain determination of the same.’ In the which place (1 Corinthians 7) Erasmus saith, that the proceeding of the Holy Ghost equally from the Father and the Son, was also determined of the same church. But let this pass. And as touching the second point which I noted in your so eloquent declaration, which was, that you did wrest and wring the saying of Tertullian from the verity of his mind: for you said, that he doth interpret the prophet Malachi, speaking of our daily sacrifice in the new law, to mean nothing else by that sacrifice, in that place, but prayer and thanksgiving. But the said ancient clerk Tertullian hath not those words that you do allege of him, that is to say, ‘nothing else.’
And yet, though that OEcolampadius doth so interpret that place, yet (as me seemeth) the judgment of the whole christian church is to be preferred, in such a matter of religion. But I will pass over this point, and return to the matter itself: and first, I do require of your mastership, whether that this sentence, ‘This is my body,’ be spoken of Christ figuratively or not.” Madew: — “After the mind of the common gloss of Cyprian and Origen, it is so taken in very deed.” Langdale: — “That cannot be, by your patience; for it is taken there substantially: ergo, not figuratively.” Madew: — “I deny your argument.” Langdale: — “I prove my argument good, thus: This word ‘substance’ doth plainly repugn, and is contrary to, this word ‘figure:’ ergo, ‘substantially’ and ‘figuratively’ do also repugn. Moreover I ask of you, whether that this be a true proposition or not: ‘Bread is Christ’s body.’” Madew: — “Yea forsooth, it is a true proposition.” Langdale: — “Then thus to you: Christ’s body was given for us, but you say, that bread is Christ’s body: ergo, bread was given for us.” Rochester: — “Not so, sir, for your former proposition is of double understanding. Langdale: — “Well, yet you, master doctor, do grant that Christ is substantially in the sacrament.” Madew: — “No, I deny that I said so ever.” Langdale: — “Yea, do you so? Well, I pass not thereupon greatly, for I will prove it by another means. — Christ did suffer his most glorious passion for us, really and substantially: ergo, he is also in the sacrament substantially. The argument is good, because that it is the same here, that was there crucified for us; howbeit here invisibly, indeed spiritually and sacramentally; but there visibly, and after a mortal and most bloody manner.” Rochester: — “Master Langdale, your argument doth well conclude, in case that his body were here, in the sacrament, after such a sort as it was, when he was betrayed. But that is not so, for he was betrayed and crucified in his natural body substantially and really, in very deed; but in the sacrament he is not so, but spiritually and figuratively only.” Langdale — “By your good lordship’s favor, that is not so; for he is there not figuratively, but verily and indeed, by the power of his mighty word; yea even his very own natural body, under the sacrament duly performed by the lawful minister.” Madew: — “O say not so; for you speak blasphemy.” Langdale: — “No, no, master doctor; God forbid that either I, or any man else, should be noted of blasphemy, saying nothing but the very plain truth, as in my conscience and learning I do no less.” Rochester: — “O master Langdale! I wish it becometh you not here to have such words.” Langdale: — “If it like your good lordship, I gave not the first occasion of them, but only did refute that which I was unjustly burdened withal, as reason doth require; and it grieved me to hear it. He [Erasmus] saith, if it please your lordship, that there is a mutation or change of the bread after it is consecrated; which if it be so, as I grant no less, then I would require of him, whether it be changed in the substance, or in the accidents, or else in both, or in nothing? No man can justly say, that there is a change into nothing. And all ancient fathers do agree, that the same accidents are there still after, that were before; nor doth any doctor say, that there is any mutation both of the substance and accidents also: ergo, the substance of bread is changed into some other thing that is there really present under the forms of bread and wine, which, by Christ’s words, must needs be his own blessed body.” Rochester: — “Sir, you are deceived greatly, for there is no change either of the substances, or of the accidents; but in very deed there do come unto the bread other accidents, insomuch that whereas the bread and wine were not sanctified before, nor holy, yet afterwards they be sanctified, and so do receive then another sort or kind of virtue which they had not before. Langdale: — “By your patience, reverend father, by such means a man may easily avoid all the mysteries of our christian faith. As where it is said thus of God the Father, ‘This is my beloved Son,’ etc., a man may also wring that, to be understood thus: This is the image of my well-beloved Son; or, This is the virtue of my well-beloved Son: yea, much more justly than your good lordship doth the other; because St.
Paul to the Hebrews doth call the Son the image of the Father, and in another place, he calleth him the power or virtue of God, and God’s wisdom. Now, though he be so called in Scripture, God forbid that we should call him only God’s image or God’s virtue, and not God himself.” Rochester: — “O gentle master Langdale! you ought not to reason after such a sort as you do now, because that a trope or figurative speech is nocive somewhere — but not everywhere, nor in this matter.” Langdale: — “Yet by your license, honorable father, it doth appear to me no trope at all in these words of Christ, ‘This is my body which is given for you;’ and that for this reason: Christ did exhibit or give again the very same things at his last supper, by the which things he was joined to us; but he was joined or knit unto us, by his own natural flesh and blood: ergo, he did exhibit to us at his last supper no less again. My former proposition I prove by the testimony of St.
Chrysostome, whose words in Christ’s person are these: ‘I would be your brother. I took upon me common flesh and blood for your sakes; and even the same things by which I am joined to you, the very same I have exhibited to you again,’” etc. (HERE THE PROCTORS COMMANDED LANGDALE TO GIVE PLACE TO ANOTHER.) Rochester: — “We are not joined by natural flesh, but do receive his flesh spiritually from above.” (HERE MASTER SEGEWICK REPLIED.) Segewick: — “Right worshipful master doctor, I do also ask of you first of all, whether the Greek article ‘this,’ of the neuter gender, be referred to the word ‘bread,’ or to the word ‘body.’ If it be referred to the word ‘bread,’ then Christ would not have said ‘this,’ in the neuter gender; but rather ‘this,’ in the masculine gender.” Rochester: — “Forsooth that article is referred to neither of both; but may signify unto us any other kind of thing.” Segewick: — “No forsooth; but it doth note unto us some excellent great thing determinately, and not so confusedly as you say. For such a great heap of articles, in the Greek, doth notify unto us a great and weighty thing to be in the sacrament determinately, if we may credit the ancient fathers. Moreover this word ‘bread,’ is not always in the Scriptures taken after one sort: wherefore I desire you to show me how it is taken in this place of St. Paul, ‘We that are many, are one bread,’” etc. Madew: — “Forsooth of the very wheaten bread.” Segewick: — “Then, after your mind, we are all very wheaten bread.” Rochester: — “Forsooth we are bread, not for the nature of bread, but for the fellowship and unity that is noted by the coagulation of many grains into one bread or loaf.” Segewick: — “Well, let that pass; then thus: It is the body; ergo, no figure; because there is a perpetual contrariety between the law of Moses and the law of grace. Therein were figures and shadows, and herein is the verity indeed.” Rochester: — “I do grant it to be Christ’s true body and flesh, by a property of the nature assumpted to the Godhead; yea, and we do really eat and drink his flesh and blood after a certain real property.” Segewick: — “It is not the figurative paschal lamb; it is not the figurative manna, nor yet the figurative shew-bread, etc.: ergo, it is no figure.” Madew: — “I deny your argument.” Segewick: — “I maintain my argument thus: All the shadows are wholly past: ergo, so also be the figures; for every figure is a shadow.
If then it be but a figure, all the figures are not past as yet; but that is false: ergo, so is the other.” Rochester: — “It is nothing but a figure or token of the true body of Christ; as it is said of John the Baptist, he is Elias: not that he was so in deed or person, but in property and virtue he represented Elias.” Segewick: — “So: — But, most learned father, when Christ said, ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life,’ may it be understood as you do the other place thus: I am ‘the virtue of the way, verity and the life?
But now to the matter itself. It is verily meat: ergo: it is not figuratively.” Madew: — “This verb or word ‘is,’ in this place is taken for that which signifieth.” (HERE HE WAS COMMANDED TO REPLY IN THE SECOND MATTER.) Segewick: — “Now as touching our second conclusion, this I say:
Wheresoever Christ is, there is a sacrifice propitiatory; but, in the Lord’s supper, is Christ: ergo, in the Lord’s supper is a sacrifice propitiatory.” Madew: — “Christ is not offered in the Lord’s supper, but is received spiritually.” Segewick: — “The priesthood and the sacrifice be correspondent together; but Christ’s priesthood after the order of Melchizedek is perpetual: ergo, also so is his sacrifice.” Rochester: — “Christ is a priest for ever; that is to say, his priesthood and sacrifice, offered once for all, is available for ever, so that no other shall succeed him.” Segewick: — “Where there is no oblation, there is no sacrifice: ergo, if Christ be not perpetually offered, there is no perpetual sacrifice. Item, the same bloody sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, was the very fine and end of all the bloody sacrifices figured in the law after the order of Aaron’s priesthood. Wherefore you must needs grant, that he offered himself also, at his last supper, after the order of Melchizedek, under the forms of bread and wine; or else you must show the Scripture where he did so, which I cannot perceive to be done but at his last supper only, after an unbloody manner. Item, He is offered for the remission of sins daily: ergo, he is a sacrifice propitiatory still, in the new law, as St. Augustine saith, expounding these words of the Psalm, ‘Thou hast not willed to have sacrifice and oblation, but,’” etc. Rochester: — “St. Cyprian speaketh much like that sort, where he saith thus, ‘It is the Lord’s passion, which we do offer,’” etc. Segewick: — “In the old law there were many sacrifices propitiatory: ergo, there be also in the new law (or else you must grant that God is not so beneficial now to us, as then he was to them, seeing that we be as frail and as needy as ever were they), which must be, especially, the most pure daily sacrifice of Christ’s body and blood, that holy Malachi speaketh of.” Madew: — “As touching the place of Malachi the prophet, I answer, that it is nothing to your purpose for the offering of Christ daily in the sacrament. For that sacrifice there spoken of, is nothing else but the sincere and most pure preaching of God’s holy word, and of prayer and of thanksgiving to God the Father through Jesus Christ.” (HERE MASTER SEGEWICK WAS COMMANDED TO CEASE TO MASTER YOUNG.) Young: — “Worshipful master doctor, although you have learnedly and clerkly defended these your conclusions this day; yet, seeing that I am now placed to impugn them in place of a better, I do begin thus with you: It hath pleased Christ to make us partakers of his holy Spirit, and that in very deed, by receiving of the christian faith, hope, and charity: ergo, much more of his own blessed body and blood, spiritually and in very deed, in the Lord’s supper. Item, the angels’ food was altogether holy from above, and heavenly, called ‘manna:’ ergo, also this celestial and heavenly food can be justly esteemed to be of no less excellency than that; but without comparison better (and so no very wheat), after due consecration of it. Item, the words of holy Scripture are evermore effectual and working: ergo, they must perform the thing indeed, that they do promise. For he that might create, might also change at his pleasure the natures and substances of creatures, as appeareth that Christ did, by changing water into wine at a marriage in Galilee. But Christ in the Scripture did promise, (John 6) ‘that the bread that he would give is his flesh indeed; which promise was never fulfilled till in his last supper, when he took bread, gave thanks, blessed it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, ‘Take, eat; this is my body.’
Which bread, then, was his flesh indeed, as doth well appear in the said place, and next promise depending upon the same, thus: ‘which flesh I will give for the life of the world.’ This last promise was fulfilled by him upon the cross: ergo, the first was likewise at his last supper. So that it was but one and the same flesh, first and last, promised and performed.” Rochester: — “Indeed the words of holy Scripture do work their effects potentially and thoroughly, by the mighty operation of the Spirit of God.” Young: — “If it please your lordship, man is fed and nourished with Christ’s blood: ergo, then it is his blood indeed, though it do not so appear to our outward senses, which be deceived; for Christ saith, ‘This is my blood;’ and also, ‘My blood is drink indeed.’ And because that we should not abhor his blessed blood in his natural kind, or his flesh, if they should be so ministered unto us; of his most excellent mercy and goodness, condescending to our weak infirmities, he hath appointed them to be given us, under the sensible kinds of his convenient creatures; that is to say, of bread and wine. Also, our body is fed with Christ’s body, which is meat indeed; but it cannot be nourished with that that is not there present: ergo, Christ’s body that feedeth us, must needs be present, in very deed, in the sacrament. Item, the nature of bread is changed; but the nature of the bread, and the substance of it, is one and the same thing: ergo, the substance also is changed. My first proposition is St. Cyprian’s, ‘De Coena Domini,’ saying, that the bread in figure is not changed, but in nature.” Rochester: — “Cyprian there doth take this word ‘nature,’ for a property of nature only, and not for the natural substance.” Young: — “That is a strange acceptation, that I have not read in any author before this time: but yet, by your leave, the communion of Christ’s body cannot be there, where his body is not; but the communion of Christ’s body is in the sacrament: ergo, Christ’s body is there present in very deed.” Rochester: — “Grace is there communicated to us by the benefit of Christ’s body sitting in heaven.” Young: — “Not so only, for we are members of his flesh, and bones of his bones.” Rochester: — “We be not consubstantial with Christ — God forbid that: but we are joined to his mystical body through his holy Spirit; and the communion of his flesh is communicated to us spiritually, through the benefit of his flesh, in heaven.” Young: — “Well, I am contented; and do most humbly beseech your good lordship, to pardon me of my great rudeness and imbecility, which I have here showed.” (Here ended the first disputation, holden at Cambridge the 20th of June, 1549.)
THE SECOND DISPUTATION92 HOLDEN AT CAMBRIDGE THE 24 TH DAY OF JUNE, 1549.
THE DECLARATION OF DR. GLYN, UPON HIS FIRST CONCLUSION. “The mysteries of faith, as Augustine witnesseth, may very profitably be believed, but they cannot well be searched forth, as saith the Scripture, ‘I believed; therefore I spake:’ and ‘He that confesseth me before men, him will I confess before my Father which is in heaven.’ We believe every man in his art; therefore much more Christ our Savior in his word. Marvel not, most honorable lords and worshipful doctors, that I speak thus now; for once you yourselves spake the same. But, peradventure,’ some will say, ‘Believe not every spirit.’ I answer, ‘Charity believeth all things,’ but not in all things. If those things which I shall utter be convinced as false, I shall desire you to take them as not spoken at all. But these are the words of truth: ‘Hoc est corpus meum, ‘This is my body.’ Christ spake them; therefore I dare not say, This ‘bread’ is my body; for so Christ said not. Christ said thus, ‘This is my body;’ and therefore I, but dust and ashes, yea a worm before him, dare not say, this is a figure of his body. ‘Heaven and earth,’ saith he, ‘shall pass; but my word shall not pass.’
Whatsoever our old father Adam called every creature, that is his name to this day: the new Adam, Christ Jesus, said, ‘This is my body;’ and is it not so? He never said, This is a figure of my body, nor, Eat you this figure or sign of my body. And therefore, when the paschal lamb was set before him, he said not, This is my body.
Wherefore if, at the day of judgment, Christ should say to me, Why hast thou believed that this is my body, I would answer him, Because thou hast so called it. I believed it not to be a figure, because thou saidst not that it was a figure. “Other reasons to avouch I know not. For the word itself I contend not, but the thing itself I defend; for we must speak regularly. Thus Christ, thus the apostles, thus all the ancient fathers have spoken.
Our fathers had but only figures and shadows; but the church of God hath the truth itself with the signs. Tertullian saith, ‘One figure containeth not another;’ but Melchizedek was a figure: ergo, this is the body. The sacraments of the Jews were signs and tokens; but ours be both the signs, and the thing signified also.
Luther himself confessed, that the body was present with the bread; and could not deny it. OEcolampadius took it for a figure only. Chrysostome demanding wherefore Christ gave his body before his passion, rather than at any other time; answereth, that he might tie the truth to the figure, saying, ‘Take, eat; this is my body;’ not a figure of my body. And the same Chrysostome saith again, ‘If it were but bare bread, or but a figure, wherefore should his disciples have been offended in eating a figure.’ Again, in his eighty-third homily upon Matthew: ‘They are not any human works which he did work at his last supper, he it is that worketh; he maketh perfect: we are his ministers; but it is he that sanctifieth and changeth the elements of bread and wine into his body and blood.’ Again, ‘Dost thou see bread and wine? Do they pass into the draught like other meats? God forbid,’ etc. Theophylact 91 of Achrida , upon these words of Mark the evangelist, ‘This is my body,’ saith, ‘This which I give, and which you receive, is not only bread, or a figure of Christ’s body, but the truth itself; for if it should appear, as it is, in form of flesh and blood, we should loathe it; and therefore the Lord, condescending to our weakness, retaineth the forms of bread and wine, and yet converteth the same into the truth of his body and blood.’ Theophylact saith, the bread and the wine is the very body and blood of Christ; and not a figure only. If you stand in suspense of the author, or approve him not, yet know you that he is counted and taken, amongst all the learned, for a most faithful interpreter of Chrysostome: ‘The bread,’ saith he, ‘is trans-elementate 93 , and transmuted into another substance than it was before.’ Augustine saith, ‘There was great heed taken in the primitive church, lest any part of the sacrament should fall down to the ground,’ etc. Cyril saith, ‘Lest we should abhor flesh and blood in the sacrament of the altar, God humbleth himself to our weakness, pouring and infusing the force of life into it, and making it the very truth of his own blessed body and blood.’ Damascene calleth it, a divine body, or a body deified. Origen, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Jerome, with all the rest of the ancient catholic fathers, are of the same opinion with me, all which to produce, it were too long.”
THE DECLARATION OF DR. GLYN UPON HIS SECOND CONCLUSION. “The sacrifice and offering up of Christ’s body in the sacrament of the altar, right honorable and worshipful, I will defend even to the effusion of blood, as a thing consonant to Scripture, whereof Paul speaketh to the Hebrews. But, perchance, some will object — Christ offered up himself: ergo, you ought not to offer him. I answer, Yea 94 , because he offered himself, therefore I offer him; for except he had offered himself, I could not have offered him. But you will say, Christ’s death is sufficient, and therefore you ought not to offer him again. I answer, So may we say, we need neither to fast nor pray, for Christ hath done both sufficiently for us. Again, you will object, if you offer him up again, you crucify him anew. I answer, Not so, for many have offered him, that have not crucified him; as Abraham, Isaac, Moses, the Levites, Anna, Samuel. We offer Christ, but not to the death, but in commemoration of his death, there being not only a commemoration thereof, but also the very presence of Christ’s body and blood. Irenaeus saith, ‘Christ counselled his disciples to offer the first fruits of all their goods to God — not that he needed any of them, but for that they should not show themselves fruitless or ungrateful: and therefore Christ took the creature of bread, gave thanks, and said, ‘This is my body;’ and likewise the creature of the cup, and confessed, saying, ‘This is my blood of the New Testament.’ Thus Christ hath taught a new kind of oblation, which the church, receiving from the apostles, offereth to God, throughout all the whole world; who only giveth unto us all kind of food, and the first fruits of his gracious gifts in the New Testament, whereof Malachi thus saith, ‘I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts. I will not receive any sacrifices at your hands, because my name is glorified amongst the nations from the East to the West, saith the Lord, and in every place is incense and pure sacrifice offered to my name.’ “But here it may be objected, Christ is the only sacrifice for sin, and without him there is no more. I answer, Notwithstanding we have this commandment, ‘Do this in remembrance of me;’ and although I deny not that it is a commemoration, yet I deny that it is only a commemoration; I deny his absence, and I affirm his presence.” (HERE MASTER PERNE BEGINNETH TO DISPUTE.) Master Perne: — “Whereas you say, most reverend master doctor, in your proposition, ‘I believed, and therefore I spake;’ and ‘We believe, and therefore do speak, our consciences suggesting the same unto us;’ and again, that mysteries are not to be searched, and the like; it seemeth you go about to restrain the searching of holy Scriptures — whereas Christ saith, ‘Scrutamini Scripturas,’ ‘Search the Scriptures.’ ‘Moreover, you have cited the fathers confusedly, and without order. You left transubstantiation, and endeavor yourself to prove the real presence in the sacrament: whereas we deny nothing less than his corporal presence, or the absence of his substance in the bread.” Glyn: — “You inveigh wonderfully, you know not against what; for neither do I, nor yet doth Augustine deny the searching of the Scriptures; but, I said out of Augustine, mysteries are not to be searched; it is another thing to search mysteries, than it is to search the Scriptures. Whereas you require of me a regular order of citing the doctors, I had not (as all men know) the liberty of time so to do; but if you desire me so earnestly to perform that, if time may be granted me, I will easily fulfill your request.” Perne: — “I pray you, let me ask you, what is a sacrament?” Glyn: — “A sacrament is a visible sign of an invisible grace.” Perne: — “Augustine, against Maximinus the Arian bishop, maketh this definition of a sacrament: ‘A sacrament is a thing signifying one thing, and showing another thing.’ 95 ” Glyn: — “I refuse not his reason.” Perne: — “What is the thing figured by the sacrament?” Glyn: — “The thing figured is twofold; to wit, the thing contained and signified, and the thing signified and yet not contained. For there be three things contained, the true body of Christ, the mystical body, and the fruit or benefit of the sacrament.” Perne: — “The forms and signs of bread nourish not: ergo, somewhat else besides the bare sign of bread doth remain, which nourisheth; that is, the substance of bread. For, in every sacrament, there is a similitude between the sign and the thing signified: but, betwixt the body of Christ, and the form or kind of bread, there is no similitude: ergo, the nature of a sacrament is taken away.” Glyn: — “I deny your minor, master doctor.” Perne: — “The forms nourish not; but the body nourisheth: ergo, there is no similitude betwixt them; and so is the nature of a sacrament clean destroyed.” Glyn: — “It is sufficient to similitudes, that the bread which was, doth nourish: and yet certain doctors do affirm, that the forms do nourish miraculously.” Rochester: — “Whosoever taketh away all the similitude of substances, consequently he taketh away the sacrament; for a similitude is threefold, namely, of nutrition, of unity, and of conversion. But, by a contrary similitude, he is not changed into our substance, but we into his; for in nutrition this is the similitude, that as our blood nourisheth our bodies, so the blood of Christ doth nourish us, but after a wonderful manner; to wit, by turning us into himself.” Glyn: — “I have answered your reason, most reverend father, in that I said, that the forms do nourish miraculously, as certain learned men do affirm.” Perne: — “By what authority can you say that bread doth not remain?” Glyn: — “By authority of Christ, who saith, ‘This is my body.’” Perne: — “By the same reason may we say that bread still remaineth: for St. Paul calleth it bread sundry times in his Epistles.” Glyn: — “I deny not that it is bread, but that it is material bread; for Paul always addeth this article ‘which,’ betokening (as all men hold) some chief thing.” Perne: — “We are changed into a new creature.” Glyn: — “Not substantially, but actually.” Rochester: — “‘This is that bread which came down from heaven:’ ergo, it is not Christ’s body, for his body came not from heaven.” Glyn: — “We may say that Christ, God and man, came down from heaven, for the unity of his person, or else for the mutual community of the same his two natures in one; for his human nature, I know, came not from heaven.” Rochester: — “The bread is his human nature; but that human nature of his came not from heaven: ergo, neither the bread.” Glyn: — “It is true that the bread came not from heaven as bread simply, but as celestial and heavenly bread. But I will answer to that:
Whereas you hold, that the body of Christ came not from heaven, I, by the body and flesh of Christ, do understand whole Christ, neither separating his soul, nor yet his deity; although his humanity is not turned into his divinity by confusion of substance, but is one by unity of both. Or else thus I may reason: The God of glory is crucified, and the Son of Mary created the world,” etc. Rochester: — “So it is. But he is called a rock and a vine, and so, after your judgment, he is both a material rock and also a material vine.” Glyn: — “The circumstances there, show plainly that there is a trope or figure; for it followeth, ‘I am the vine, you are the branches;’ but here is no trope. For after these words, ‘This is my body,’ he addeth, ‘which is given for you.’” Rochester: — “Your judgment herein is very gross, and far discrepant from the truth.” Glyn: — “ If my judgment in this be gross, most revered father, then are all the ancient fathers as gross in judgment as I in this point, and the catholic church also.” Perne: — “Show us one place, or one doctor, who saith, that it remaineth not bread after the consecration.” Glyn: — “I wonder that you are not ashamed to ask that of me; for have you not had almost infinite places and doctors alleged to you in my former declarations, proving as much as you request at my hands?” Perne: — “He took bread, he brake bread: ergo, it is bread.” Glyn: — “I have answered often hereunto, and I grant it is bread; but not only, or material.” Perne: — “Irenaeus affirmeth, that a sacrament consisteth of a double matter, of an earthly matter, and of a heavenly: ergo, the bread remaineth.” Glyn: — “Irenaeus, in that place, by the earthly matter, meaneth, the humanity of Christ, and by the heavenly matter the deity of Christ. Rochester: — “The humanity and the divinity of Christ make not a sacrament, which consisteth of a visible and an invisible nature; and I deny that Irenaeus can be so understood: therefore we desire the learned auditory to search Irenaeus at home, as opportunity will serve for this matter.” Glyn : — “I wish them so to do also, with all my heart.” (HERE MASTER GRINDAL BEGINNETH TO DISPUTE.) Grindal: — “Whereas you say, worshipful master doctor, that we speak not now, as sometimes we thought and judged in this matter, peradventure you, also, judge not so now all things, as you have done heretofore. But what we have once been it forceth not; God respecteth no man’s person. And whereas you say that you dare not, contrary to Christ, call it a sign or a figure, Augustine, notwithstanding, dareth to call it a figure, and Tertullian likewise, with many more.” Glyn: — “True it is, but they called it not a sign or a figure only; but prove you, if you can, that after the consecration remaineth any other substance than the real body of Christ.” Grindal: — “If the forms do nourish, as you contend, they nourish the natural and human body; for they be both as one, and are nourished alike.” Glyn: — “Your reason is merely physical, and therefore to be rejected in matters of faith: but I grant they nourish, but miraculously.” Grindal: — “If you grant that the forms do nourish, then you grant that bread remaineth. Glyn: — “I said even now that it is true; but the nature of it is changed, and that miraculously.” Grindal: — “If it be the real and substantial body of Christ, because Christ said, ‘This is my body;’ ergo, because the Lord said, ‘I will not drink of the fruit of this vine,’ and Paul calleth it bread after the consecration, it is therefore bread and wine.” Glyn: — “Truly, sir, you must bring better arguments, or else you will prove nothing for your purpose. For to your reasons thus I answer: Chrysostome saith, Christ did drink of the blood; but whether this sentence, ‘I will not drink of the fruit of the vine,’ be spoken of the blood, it is not certain. And truly Erasmus denieth that it is to be found in all the whole Scripture, that it is called bread after the consecration. Or else thus I may answer you: even as it is called bread, for the form, and kind, and accidents which remain; so for the form and similitude which it hath, it may be called the fruit of the vine, after the consecration. And whereas Chrysostome calleth it wine, he speaketh of the nature whereof the sacrament necessarily is made. And I deny not but it may be called wine, but yet eucharistically. Rochester: — “The evangelists Matthew, Mark, and Luke call it ‘the fruit of the vine,’ and say that the fruit of the vine is nothing else but wine; ergo, Christ gave them wine, and drank wine himself also, and not blood.” Glyn: — “Christ said twice, ‘I will not drink of the fruit of the vine;’ once at the eating of the paschal lamb (as Luke saith), and then was it wine indeed. And again, after the consecration of his body and blood he said the like; and then it was not wine, which methinks I can prove by the plain words of Luke, if we compare him with Matthew.For, if it were wine, as they both affirm, then the words of Christ cannot well stand, because first, as Luke showeth, he said at his legal supper, ‘I will not drink of the fruit of this vine,’ etc. And again in Matthew, after the consecration of his body and blood, ‘he drank;’ it followeth therefore, that that which he drank was not wine by nature, for then must Christ needs be a liar; which were blasphemy to say.” Rochester: — “Augustine doth thus reconcile those places, saying, it is spoken by a figure which we call ‘u[steron pro>teron’” Glyn: — “I know that Augustine saith so; but methinks that which I have said, seemeth to be the true meaning of the places.” Rochester: — “Augustine seeketh no starting holes, nor yet any indirect shifts to obscure the truth.” Glyn: — “Say your fatherhood what you will of Augustine, I think not so.” Grindal: — “‘This cup is the new testament in my blood;’ but here is a trope: ergo, in these words of Christ, ‘This is my body,’ is a trope also.” Glyn: — “I deny your argument; for whereas Luke saith ‘this cup,’ Matthew saith, this is my blood:’ and therefore, as Augustine saith, places that be dark are to be expounded by others that be light” Rochester: — “All of your side deny that Christ ever used any trope in the instituting of sacraments.” Glyn: — “For my part I hold no opinion but the truth, whereof you yourself also do pretend the like.” Rochester: — “What understand you by this word ‘hoc,’ ‘this,’ and in what words standeth the force or strength of the sacrament? — in this pronoun ‘hoc,’ ‘this?’ or in this verb ‘est,’ ‘is?’ or else in this whole sentence, ‘This is my body?’” Glyn: — “It is not made the true body except all the words be spoken, as in baptism, ‘I baptize thee in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ For neither doth baptism consist in this word ‘ego,’ ‘I,’ or in ‘baptize,’ or in this word, ‘te,’ ‘thee; or in these words, in nomine, in the name,’ etc., but in all the words spoken in order.” Grindal: — “If to eat the body of Christ be a figurative speech, as Augustine saith it is, ergo, then these words, ‘This is my body,’ are a figurative speech also.” Glyn: — “It is a figurative speech, because we eat not the body of Christ after the same manner that we do other meats,” etc. Grindal: — “Cyprian understandeth this of those that come unworthily, and make no difference of the Lord’s body, speaking of the dijudication of the sacraments, and not of the body of Christ.” Glyn: — “Truly he speaketh of the true body of Christ.” Rochester: — “They receive unworthily, who neither judge themselves, nor yet the sacraments, taking them as other common bread.” Grindal: — “Augustine upon the thirty-third Psalm saith, ‘Christ bare himself in his own hands after a sort; not indeed or truly,’” etc. Glyn: — “You omit many other things which Augustine saith; and I confess that he carried himself in his own hands, after a sort: but Augustine delivereth this unto us as a great miracle; and you know it was no great miracle, to carry a figure of his body in his hands. And whereas you say that Christ carried himself after a sort in his own hands, it is very true, but yet diversely; for he sat after one manner at his supper and after another manner he carried himself in his hands.
For Christ in the visible figure bore himself invisibly.” Grindal: — “Tertullian calleth it a figure: ergo, it is so.” Glyn: — “It is, as I have said, a figure; but not a figure only. But hear what Tertullian saith, he took bread and made it his body, saying, ‘This is my body,’” etc. Grindal: — “Hear what Chrysostome saith upon Matthew 96 (Homil. 11 super cap. 5), If vessels sanctified to holy uses,” etc. Glyn: — “That work is received not as Chrysostome’s, but some man’s else, as you know 97 . Or thus I answer, ‘It is not the true body in proper and visible form.’” ( HERE MASTER GEST DISPUTED98 ) Gest: — “The bread is not changed before the consecration: ergo, not after it either.” Glyn: — “I deny your argument, master Gest.” Gest: — “Christ gave earthly bread: ergo, there is no transubstantiation.” Glyn: — “I deny your antecedent.” Gest: — “That which Christ took he blessed; that which he blessed he brake; what he brake he gave: ergo, he, receiving earthly bread, gave the same bread.” Glyn: — “Your order in reasoning standeth not; for by the same reason may you gather, that God took a rib of man, and thereof built a rib, and brought it unto Adam: ergo, what he received he brought — but he received a rib: ergo, brought a rib.” Gest: — “How is the body of Christ in heaven, and how in the sacrament? whether circumscriptively or definitively?” Glyn: — “The body of Christ is in heaven circumscriptively, but not so in the sacrament. The angels also are contained definitively. But I have learned that the body of Christ is in the sacrament, but not locally; nor circumscriptively, but after an unspeakable manner unknown to man.” Rochester: — “Ah, know you not?” Glyn: — “Neither in other mysteries of faith do we know the mean how, although this may partly be proved by reason. For as my soul is wholly in my head, and wholly in my foot, and wholly in my finger, and so in other parts of my body; and as there is one voice or sound which all men hearing do understand: so the body of Christ, being one and the same, is wholly in the altar, and in many places else. For if God could do this in my soul, how much more in his own body.” Rochester: — “I beseech you show us what difference is betwixt these two: to be in a place circumscriptively and definitively.” Glyn: — “Your lordship knoweth very well: but yet if any would know the difference, let him read ‘August. ad Volusianum, et ad Dardanum,’” etc. Gest: — “If the bread be changed, it is made the body of Christ; but that is not so: ergo, it is not changed.” Glyn: — “I deny your minor.” Gest: — “It is not generate or begot: ergo, it is not the body.” Glyn : — “That followeth not; as though to be made, and to be generate or begot, were all one thing; or as though there were no other mutation than a generation: and so you impugn a thing that you know not. But what call you the generation?” Gest: — “The generation is the production of the accidents.” Glyn: — “A new definition of a new philosopher.” Gest: — “That which he took he blessed; that which he blessed, he brake, and gave it unto them: ergo,” etc. Glyn: — “Christ took bread, brake bread, and gave his body, that is, the substance of his body: saying, ‘This is my body.’” Gest: — “The bread is not changed into the blood of Christ: ergo, not into his body either.” Glyn: — “I deny your antecedent.” Gest: — “The Master of the Sentences saith it.” Glyn: — “You understand him not; for the bread is changed into the body of Christ by the power of God’s word.” Rochester: — “Ye dream of a real presence of Christ’s body in the sacrament, by the force of the words spoken; which the holy Scripture doth impugn.” Glyn: — “We say, that not only by the power of the word, but also by the spirit and secret virtue in the words, it is brought to pass; for there is no power in one word alone, as before in baptism, but in all the words duly prolated, according to the custom of the ancient catholic church.” Gest: — “If there were any transubstantiation, the accidents should not remain still; for they have no matter whereto they may lean or cleave. But the accidents remain not themselves alone: ergo,” etc. Glyn: — “I confess accidents cannot stand, themselves alone, by their own nature, without a subject; but by the power of God they may, not after the opinion of philosophers, but of the Scriptures: although I could show, out of the Scriptures, the accidents to have been without the subject; as in Genesis, the light was made without a subject, whereas the subject of the light was made the fourth day after, as Basil beareth me record.” (HERE MASTER PILKINGTON DISPUTED.) Pilkington: — “This one thing I desire of you, most worshipful master doctor, that you will answer me with like brevity as I shall propound. And thus I reason: The body of Christ that was broken on the cross, is a full satisfaction for the sins of the whole world; but the sacrament is not the satisfaction of the whole world: ergo, the sacrament is not the body of Christ.” Glyn: — “I deny your argument.” Pilkington: — “It is a syllogism.” Glyn: — “It is not so; for there be four ‘termines. 99 ’ Touching this word sacrament, it is manifold; but thus I answer: If you take the sacrament for the matter of the sacrament, that is, the body of Christ, then is your minor proposition true, and the matter of the sacrament is the satisfaction for the sins of the whole world; but, if you take the sacrament for the sign, which we call a sacrament, then is your minor proposition false.” Pilkington: — “The body of Christ hath satisfied for the sins of the whole world; but the sacrament hath not satisfied: ergo, the sacrament is not the body of Christ.” Glyn: — “I deny your minor, understanding the sacrament for the matter of the sacrament.” Pilkington: — “the sacrament only profiteth him that receiveth it; but many were saved before the institution of this sacrament was begun: ergo, the sacrament is not the body of Christ.” Glyn: — “If you mean of the bare sign only, it profiteth nothing; but if you mean the thing signified, then what is spoken of the body of Christ, is spoken also of the thing of the sacrament itself.” Pilkington: — “Transubstantiation is not a sacrament; but that which I mean is a sacrament: ergo, that which I mean is not transubstantiated.” Glyn: — “I mean not that transubstantiation is a sacrament, neither do I say that the sacrament is transubstantiate, but the bread.” Pilkington: — “The body of Christ is resident in heaven, and the body of Christ is in the sacrament: ergo, the sacrament is in heaven.” Glyn: — “A goodly reason, forsooth: but I answer, he is after one sort in heaven, and after another sort in the sacrament; for in heaven he is locally, in the sacrament not so; in heaven visibly and circumscriptively, but in the sacrament invisibly and sacramentally.” Rochester: — “St. Augustine saith, Take away the spaces from the bodies, and they shall be nowhere, and that which is nowhere,’ is not at all: so, whilst you take away the spaces and dimensions from the body of Christ in the sacrament, you bring to pass that it is not there at all.” Glyn: — “In that place Augustine speaketh of natural bodies, not of supernatural: otherwise I could deny that Christ had a true body, when he entered in to his disciples, the gates being shut.” Rochester: — “Of the gates being shut, a diverse and doubtful meaning may be gathered; for it may be, he entered in before the gates were shut, and afterwards opened them being shut,” etc. Glyn: — “Then it could he no miracle; but the evangelists, and all sound interpreters, say and affirm this to be a miracle of our Savior Christ.” Rochester: — “Whether Christ entered in miraculously, the gates being shut, or else open, the Scripture setteth not down.” Glyn: — “As Christ (the womb of the Virgin being shut) was born into the world without violation of her pure virginity, or apertion of her womb (for so he might have been polluted), so entered he through the doors to his disciples miraculously.” Pilkington: — “In the body of Christ which was given for us, there are no accidents of bread; but in the sacrament there be accidents of bread: ergo, in the sacrament there is not the body of Christ.” Glyn: — “In the matter of the sacrament, that is, in the body of Christ, are no accidents of bread; but accidents are the very sacrament itself.” Pilkington: — “I beseech you, what do we eat? the substance or the accidents?” Glyn: — “Both; as when we eat wholesome and unwholesome meats together, so we eat the substance of Christ’s body, and yet not without the accidents of bread.” Pilkington: — “I prove that the accidents are eaten, for whatsoever entereth in by the mouth, goeth into the privy; but the accidents go in by the mouth: ergo, into the privy.” Glyn: — “This sentence, ‘Whatsoever entereth in by the mouth,’ etc., is not meant of all kind of meats, as not of that which Christ did eat after his resurrection.” Pilkington: — “You shall not eat this body which you see.” Glyn: — “That is, not after that manner as you see it now, nor after the same visible form.” Pilkington: — “Wheresoever Christ is, there be his ministers also (for so he promised): but Christ as you hold, is in the sacrament: ergo, his ministers are there also.” Glyn: — “To be with Christ is spoken divers ways; as in heart and mind, and in place, and sometimes both: or, to be with Christ, is to minister unto him, and to do his will,” etc.
THE THIRD DISPUTATION HOLDEN AT CAMBRIDGE AS BEFORE.
THE DECLARATION OF MASTER PERNE UPON THE FIRST CONCLUSION. “Christ, at his last supper, took bread, brake bread, distributed bread: ergo, not his body, but a sacrament of his body; for the bones of Christ could no man break, as witnesseth the prophet saying, ‘Os non comminuetis ex eo,’ that is, ‘You shall not break a bone of him.’ — ‘This cup is the cup of the new testament in my blood.’ In this sentence there is a trope, by their own confession; wherefore there is in the other also, ‘This is my body;’ for the holy Scripture is a perfect rule not only of doing, but also of speaking.
Paul calleth it bread three times: ergo, it is bread, etc. And whereas they urge so much this pronoun, ‘illum’ it is not in the Greek canon, which hath ‘panem,’ ‘bread,’ not panem illum, that bread.
There was no transubstantiation in the manna: ergo, nor in the sacrament; for there is this particle, ‘est,’ if that can prove transubstantiation, as they suppose. And if manna were a figure, say they, then this is not. This mystery or sacrament we hold to be true bread, and true meat. Manna gave life unto them, as this doth unto us; yet was it but a figure. In every sacrament there ought to be a certain analogy, both of the intern and extern thing of the sacrament, as Augustine saith, writing to Boniface; but betwixt the forms of bread and wine, and the body of Christ, there is no analogy at all: ergo, they make not a sacrament. — ‘As of many grains,’ etc.: This similitude of Paul is spoken of the substance of bread, not of the form thereof, otherwise Paul should in vain compare us to bread. As in baptism there is material water; so in the sacrament of the eucharist is material bread. Dionysius called the sacrament of Christ’s body no otherwise than bread. Eusebius, in ‘Ecclesiastica Historia’ doth the same. Tertullian (lib. 4 against Marcion) saith thus: ‘He gave his body;’ that is, saith he, a figure or type of his body. Cyprian saith, ‘In his last supper he gave bread and wine, and his body upon the cross.’ The same Cyprian saith, Christ drank wine at his last supper, because he would root out the heresy of certain who only used water in the ministration thereof. Chrysostome 49 saith, ‘That only bread remaineth,’ etc.
Theodoret saith, 50 ‘Bread remaineth still in his first nature as before.’ Augustine saith, ‘The bread doth not lose his first nature after the consecration, but receiveth another quality, whereby it differeth from common bread.’ The same Augustine saith, ‘Sacraments are figures, being one thing indeed, and showing forth another thing.’ He speaketh of no transubstantiation here. Again, writing to Boniface he saith, ‘The sacrament of the body of Christ is the body of Christ, and so is the sacrament of wine also,’ etc.
The sacraments of the old and new law are all one in substance of matter, notwithstanding they be divers in signs: which sacraments, why should they not be one, when they signify all one thing? The body of Christ when it was on the earth was not in heaven; so now it, being in heaven, is not on the earth. Whereby it may appear that transubstantiation is a most blasphemous, sacrilegious, and damnable error, and a most vain, unsavoury, and devilish papistical invention, defended and maintained only by the papists, the professed and sworn enemies of all truth. Those who impugn this doctrine of transubstantiation are no new upstarts; as the enemies of the truth, the papists, bear the world in hand. But, contrarily, those who maintain this devilish doctrine are new-sprung-up cockatrices, as Manicheus, Eutiches, and others. Gelasius saith, that the sacraments which we receive are divine things; yet cease they not to be bread and wine in nature. Out of this puddle of transubstantiation have sprung up adoration of the sacrament, and inducing men to believe that Christ hath many bodies.”
THE DECLARATION OF THE MASTER PERNE UPON THE SECOND CONCLUSION. “Matthew, Mark, Luke, and the apostle Paul, call it a commemoration or remembrance of Christ’s body and blood; and Paul to the Hebrews saith, ‘By one only oblation once offered are we made perfect to eternal salvation,’ etc. ‘By him, therefore, do we offer up the sacrifice of laud and praise to God; that is, the fruit of the lips,’ etc. It is called the eucharist, because we offer to God praise and thanksgiving, with devout minds; and it is called the cup of thanksgiving, because we give thanks to God thereby also. ‘You shall preach forth the Lord’s death,’ etc.; that is, you shall give thanks and be mindful of his death, etc. ‘Give your bodies a quick and living sacrifice,’ etc. ‘The sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving shall honor me,’ etc. Chrysostome saith, ‘The wise men offered three kinds of sacrifices, gold, frankincense, and myrrh: so we do also, namely, virtue, prayer, and alms deeds. These be the sacrifices wherewith Christ is pleased.’ And Augustine saith, that there are no other sacrifices than prayer, praise, and thanksgiving, etc.
Chrysostome (Homil. 46, upon John) saith, ‘To be converted or turned into Christ, is to be made partaker of his body and blood.’” (THERE DISPUTED AGAINST HIM MASTER PARKER, MASTER POLLARD, MASTER VAVASOR, AND MASTER YOUNG.) Parker: — “Christ, whose words are to be believed, said, ‘This is my body.’ He said not, this bread is my body, or with this bread, or under this bread, or by this bread, but said plainly, ‘This is my body.’ And this he proved by these reasons: First, for that it was prefigured before. Secondly, for that it was promised. Thirdly, for that it was given. The transubstantiation of the bread was prefigured by the manna which came down from heaven: all that bread was heavenly, and without any earthly matter or substance annexed. Secondly, it was promised in those words of Christ, ‘The bread that I will give, is my flesh,’ etc. Thirdly, it was given by Christ, and exhibited in his last supper, saying, ‘Take, eat, this is my body.’” (HERE THEY WERE FORCED TO BREAK OFF THROUGH WANT OF TIME, YET PARKER REPLIED THUS AGAINST DOCTOR PERNE.) “We give thee thanks, most holy Father, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to babes; for pride is the root of all heresies whatsoever. And, on the other side, to acknowledge our own infirmity and imperfection is the first step to the right understanding of the truth. Nestorius the heretic affirmed, that there were two persons in Christ; one that was man, another that was God: therefore, he said, that in the eucharist was contained true flesh, but only of his pure manhood. Against him did the council of Ephesus conclude, saying, that there was the real flesh of the Son of God, etc. This he proved by the words of Christ, ‘My flesh is meat indeed:’ and what flesh that is, he teacheth upon John 6; ‘That is,’ quoth he, ‘the flesh united to the Deity, and quickened by the Holy Ghost,’ etc. Now that that flesh is in the sacrament, it is plain, by Hilary 52 He proved the same also out of Chrysostome; 53 ‘We are one body with him, members of his flesh, and bones of his bones,’ etc. Again, in the same Homily, ‘We are joined to his flesh, not only by faith and love, but also in very deed and truly.’ And again, ‘it pleased me to become your brother, and by the same things wherein I was joined to you, have I given myself again unto you,’” etc. Perne: — “I grant unto you that Christ is in the sacrament truly, wholly, and verily, after a certain property and manner: I deny not his presence, but his real and corporal presence I utterly deny; for doubtless his true and natural body is in heaven, and not in the sacrament: notwithstanding he dwelleth with us, and in us, after a certain unity. And also in the sixth chapter of John, he speaketh not of the flesh of Christ crucified,” etc. Parker: — “The flesh of Christ, as it is in the sacrament, is quick, and giveth life: ergo, his real and substantial flesh is in the sacrament.” Perne: — “The flesh of Christ, in that it is united unto the Deity, doth vivify, and giveth life; but not otherwise.” Rochester: — “Christ dwelleth in us by faith, and by faith we receive Christ, both God and man, both in spirit and flesh; that is, this sacramental eating is the mean and way whereby we attain to the spiritual eating: and indeed, for the strengthening of us, to the eating of this spiritual food, was this sacrament ordained. And these words, ‘This is my body,’ are meant thus: By grace it is my true body, but not my fleshly body, as some of you suppose.” Parker: — “We are joined to Christ, not only by faith, but also in very deed: ergo,” etc. Rochester: — “We are joined to Christ; that is, we are made partakers of his flesh and of immortality. And so, in like case, is there a union between man and woman; yet is there no transubstantiation of either, or both,” etc. Pollard: — “The sacrament is not bare bread, and nothing else, only because it is called bread so often in the Scriptures; and that I prove by three reasons. First, it is called bread because of the similitude.
Secondly, because of the mutation. Thirdly, for the matter whereof it is made and compact; as the angels are called men, the Holy Ghost a tongue, the rod of Aaron a serpent, and such like. The words of Christ do teach the same thing, as appeareth in the healing of the woman of Canaan’s daughter Jairus’s son, and many others, etc.: ergo,” etc.
Then he proved against Rochester, that somewhat else was in the sacrament besides power and grace, by this reason: ‘The evil receive the body of Christ, as is plain out of Augustine (Homil. De verbis Domini): but the evil and wicked receive not the virtue, or grace: ergo, there is not only grace and virtue in the sacrament.” Rochester: — “The evil do not receive the Lord in the sacrament, but the sacrament of the Lord, as Judas, who indeed did not eat the true body of the Lord.” Pollard: — “In the sacrament be three things; to wit, an outward sign, the matter of the sacrament, and the fruit of the same. The evil receive the outward sign, and the subject of the sacrament, but not the fruit of the sacrament: ergo, there is somewhat else in the sacrament than only grace. Also every sacrament ought to have a certain similitude with the matter of the sacrament; but the material bread hath no such similitude with the body of Christ, which is the matter of the sacrament: ergo, material bread is not a sacrament.” Perne : — “I deny your minor: for material bread doth so nourish the body, as the flesh of Christ doth the soul.” (HERE, HE BEING REQUESTED, GAVE PLACE TO MASTER VAVASOR AND OTHERS.) Master Vavasor: — “Through the shortness of time, I am so constrained, that neither I can speak without loss of my reputation, nor yet hold my peace without offense to God. For in speaking, as I do, without great premeditation before this honorable, worshipful, and learned audience, I shall but show forth my childishness herein; and if I should hold my peace, I might be thought to betray the truth of God’s cause. And therefore, while I can neither speak for the brevity of time, nor yet hold my peace, God’s truth being in controversy, I have determined (although with the impairing of my good name) to render a reason of my faith; which if I cannot afford probably in words, yet will I not fault in saying nothing at all. For it seemeth better that I be esteemed altogether foolish and unlearned amongst so many grave learned fathers and doctors, than to forsake the just defense of the truth, which every good christian man throughout the world hath ever holden inviolable: for whoso forsaketh the manifest known truth, had never any true faith therein. Which thing that I may overpass in Berengarius, Zuinglius 101 , OEcolampadius, and many others, who are certainly known to be at no less variance amongst themselves, than uncertain of their faith what to believe, Zuinglius writeth thus of himself: ‘Although this thing which I mean to entreat of, doth like me very well, yet, notwithstanding, I dare define nothing, but only show my poor judgment abroad to others, that, if it please the Lord, others may be thereby instructed by the Spirit of God, which teacheth all good things.’ In vain do I spend many words: you see plainly he dare not define any thing certainly, but doubteth whether it please God or not. O Ecolampadius, writing to a certain brother of his, saith thus, ‘Peace be with thee.
As far as I can conjecture out of the learned fathers, the words in John 6, and, This is my body, be figurative locutions,’ etc You see hereby how uncertain they be of their opinions. They lean not to the Scriptures, to doctors, nor yet to the truth; but to supposals and conjectures: who therefore hereafter will cleave unto them? But now I come to your oration, whose beginning pleaseth me very well, and whose progress therein offended me not; but, in the end, you concluded in such sort, that you left the whole matter to me, as it were confirming my parts by the same. And herein you framed a syllogism after this manner: What Christ took, that he blessed: what he blessed, that he brake; what he brake, that he gave: ergo, what he received he gave, etc. Whereto I answer with a like syllogism out of Genesis: God took a rib out of Adam’s side; what he took he built; what he built he brought; what he brought he gave to Adam to be his wife; but he took a rib: ergo, he gave a rib to Adam to wife, etc. Also, in your said oration you shoot much at those words of Paul where he calleth it bread so often, etc. But the Scripture, in another place, calleth it water, when indeed it was wine; a rod, when it was a plain serpent.” Rochester: — “You have pretended great zeal and words enough; but what pith or substance your reasons will afford, we shall see hereafter.” Vavasor: — “Christ gave the same flesh to us, which he received of the Virgin; but he took true and natural flesh of her: ergo, he gave us true and natural flesh. My major I prove by Augustine upon Psalm 98.” Rochester: — “Master Vavasor, you are in a wrong box; for the place maketh altogether for maintenance of adoration, if it make for any thing.” Vavasor: — “I know it very well, and therefore I allege it as the ground of my reason. These be Augustine’s words, ‘Christ of the earth received earth, and of the flesh of Mary he received flesh:’ acknowledge his substance therefore.” Rochester: — “I acknowledge it.” Vavasor: — “And in the very same flesh he walked here upon the earth: acknowledge his substance.” Rochester: — “I acknowledge it.” Vavasor: — “And the very same flesh he gave us to eat: acknowledge his substance.” Rochester: — “I acknowledge not his real substance to be there; but the property of his substance.” Vavasor: — Then Vavasor recited the place, to the end he might prove that his real substance ought to be acknowledged as well in the last place, as in the first and second; affirming it out of St. Augustine, who saith thus: “The disciples of Christ, approaching the Lord’s table, by faith drank the same blood which the tormentors most cruelly spilt,” etc. “But the tormentors spilt no figure of blood: ergo, etc. This place will not permit the other so to be illuded.” Rochester: — “It is no illusion, good master Vavasor; but surely you would move a saint with your impertinent reasons.” Vavasor: — “I beseech your fatherhood to pardon my rudeness; for surely. I cannot otherwise speak, without breach of conscience.” Perne: — “That place of Augustine is to be understood of a spiritual kind of eating.” Vavasor: — “I demand whether the faithful may receive spiritually, so as they need not to receive sacramentally.” Perne: — “They may.” Vavasor: — “Then thus to you: To the spiritual eating there is no need to come to the Lord’s table, for so it is the meat of the soul, not of the teeth — but the faithful come to the Lord’s table: ergo, that place is to be understood of a sacramental eating. And again, Augustine saith, that he carried himself in his hands.” Rochester: — “Augustine showeth a little after what he meaneth thereby, where he saith, he carried himself in his own hands after a certain sort or manner.” Vavasor: — “True it is, that after one manner he sat at the table, and after another manner was in the sacrament.” (MASTER YOUNG HERE DISPUTETH AGAINST PERNE AS FOLLOWETH.) Young: — “I understand the meaning of this word ‘proprietas,’ propriety, well enough; for, in Hilary and Eusebius, it signifieth not the virtue or power of any substance or being, but rather a natural being or substance.” Rochester: — “I commend your great diligence in searching of authors, but in divinity the matter standeth not so; for the propriety of essence in the Deity is the very essence, and whatsoever is in God is God.” Young: — “Trim it is, most reverend father, that this word ‘proprietas,’ ‘propriety,’ in Hilary, in his eighth book De Trinitate, entreating there of the divinity of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is so meant and taken; but the same Hilary, almost in the same place, speaketh of our communion and unity with Christ,” etc.
Tertullian also, writing of the resurrection of the flesh, affirmeth that the flesh of our Savior is that, whereof our soul is allied to God; that is, it which causeth that our souls are joined to him: but our flesh is made clean, that the soul may be purged; our flesh is anointed, that the soul may be made holy; the flesh is sealed, that the soul may be comforted; the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of the hands, that our soul may be lightened with the glory of the spirit; our flesh is clothed with a body and blood, that the soul may be fed and nourished of God.” Rochester: — “The flesh indeed is fed with the body and the blood of the Lord, when our bodies, by mortification, are made like to his body; and our body is nourished, when the virtue and power of the body of Christ doth feed us. The same Tertullian is not afraid to call it flesh and blood, but he meaneth a figure of the same.” Young: — “Then, by your leave, it should follow by good consequence,that where any mortification is, there must needs be a sacramental communion; which cannot be: ergo,” etc. (HERE ENDED THE THIRD AND LAST DISPUTATION HOLDEN AT CAMBRIDGE, 1549.)
This disputation continued three days. In the first, did answer Dr. Madew: against whom disputed Dr. Glyn, master Langdale, master Segewick, master Young.
In the second disputation, did answer Dr. Glyn: against whom disputed master Grindal, master Perne, master Gest, master Pilkington.
In the third disputation answered master Perne: against whom disputed one master Parker (not Dr. Matthew Parker), master Pollard, master Vavasor, master Young.
At length the disputations ended, the bishop of Rochester (Dr. Nicholas Ridley), after the manner of schools, made this determination upon the aforesaid conclusions, as here followeth.
THE DETERMINATION OF DR. NICHOLAS RIDLEY, BISHOP OF ROCHESTER, UPON THE CONCLUSIONS ABOVE PREFIXED.
There hath been an ancient custom amongst you, that after disputations had in your common schools, there should be some determination made of the matters so disputed and debated, especially touching christian religion. Because, therefore, it hath seemed good unto these worshipful assistants joined with me in commission from the king’s majesty, that I should perform the same at this time; I will, by your favorable patience, declare, both what I do think and believe myself, and what also others ought to think of the same. Which thing I would that afterwards ye did with diligence weigh and ponder, every man at home severally by himself.
The principal grounds, or rather head-springs, of this matter, are specially five.
The first is, the authority, majesty, and verity of holy Scripture.
The second is, the most certain testimonies of the ancient catholic fathers, who, after my judgment, do sufficiently declare this matter.
The third is, the definition of a sacrament.
The fourth is, the abominable heresy of Eutiches, that may ensue of transubstantiation.
The fifth is , the most sure belief of the article of our faith, “He ascended into heaven.”
THE FIRST GROUND.
This transubstantiation is clean against the words of the Scripture, and consent of the ancient catholic fathers. The Scripture saith, “I will not drink hereafter of this fruit of the vine,” etc. Now the fruit of this vine is wine. And it is manifest that Christ spake these words after the supper was finished, as it appeareth both in Matthew, Mark, and also in Luke, if they be well understood.
There be not many places of Scripture that do confirm this thing, neither is it greatly material: for it is enough if there be any one plain testimony for the same. Neither ought it to be measured by the number of Scriptures, but by the authority, and by the verity of the same. And the majesty of this verity is as ample in one short sentence of the Scripture, as in a thousand.
Moreover, Christ took bread, he gave bread. In the Acts, Luke calleth it bread. So Paul calleth it bread after the sanctification.
Both of them speak of breaking, which belongeth to the substance of bread, and in no wise to Christ’s body; for the Scripture saith, “Ye shall not break a bone of him.” (Exodus 12) Christ saith, “Do ye this in my remembrance.” St. Paul also saith, “Do ye this in my remembrance.” (1 Corinthians 11) And again, “As often as ye shall drink of this cup, do it in remembrance of me.” (John 6) And our Savior Christ (in John 6), speaking against the Capernaites, saith, “Labor for the meat that perisheth not.” And when they asked, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?” he answered them thus: “This is the work of God, that ye believe in him whom he hath sent.” (John 6) You see how he exhorteth them to faith: “For faith is that work of God.” Again, “This is the bread which came down from heaven.” But Christ’s body came not down from heaven. Moreover, “He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.” “My flesh,” saith he, “is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.” When they heard this, they were offended. And while they were offended, he said unto them, “What if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?” Whereby he went about to draw them from the gross and carnal eating. “This body’,” saith he, “shall ascend up into heaven;” meaning altogether, as St. Augustine saith, “It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I speak unto you, are spirit and life, and must be spiritually understood.”
These be the reasons which persuade me to incline to this sentence and judgment.
THE SECOND GROUND.
Now my second ground against this transubstantiation is the ancient fathers a thousand years past. And so far off is it that they do confirm this opinion of transubstantiation, that plainly they seem unto me, both to think and to teach the contrary.
Dionysius in many places calleth it bread. The places are so manifest and plain, that it needeth not to recite them. Ignatius 55 saith, “I beseech you brethren cleave fast unto one faith, and to one kind of preaching using together one manner of thanksgiving; for the flesh of the Lord Jesus is one, and his blood is one which was shed for us: there is also one bread broken for us, and one cup of the whole church.”
Irenaeus writeth thus: “Even as the bread that cometh of the earth, receiving God’s vocation, is now no more common bread, but sacramental bread, consisting of two natures, earthly and heavenly; even so our bodies, receiving the eucharist, are now no more corruptible, having hope of the resurrection.” 56 Tertullian is very plain, for he calleth it, “a figure of his body,” etc.
Chrysostome writeth to Caesarius the monk: albeit he be not received of divers, yet will I read the place to fasten it more deeply in your minds; for it seemeth to show plainly the substance of bread to remain. The words are these: “Before the bread is sanctified, we name it bread: but, by the grace of God sanctifying the same through the ministry of the priest, it is delivered from the name of bread, and is counted worthy to bear the name of the Lord’s body, although the very substance of bread notwithstanding do still remain therein; and now is taken, not to be two bodies, but one body of the Son,” etc.
Cyprian saith, Bread is made of many grains. And is that natural bread, and made of wheat? Yea, it is so indeed. The book of Theodoret in Greek was lately printed at Rome 102 , which if it had not been his, it should not have been set forth there; especially seeing it is directly against transubstantiation: for he saith plainly, that bread still remaineth after the sanctification.
Gelasius also is very plain in this manner: “The sacrament,” saith he, “which we receive of the body and blood of Christ, is a divine matter: by reason whereof we are made partakers, by the same, of the divine nature; and yet it ceaseth not still to be the substance of bread and wine. And certes, the representation and similitude of the body and blood of Christ be celebrated in the action of the mysteries,” etc. (After this he recited certain places out of Augustine and Cyril which were not noted.)
Isychius, also, confesseth that it is bread. Also the judgment of Bertram in this matter is very plain and manifest. — And thus much for the second ground.
THE THIRD GROUND.
The third ground is the nature of the sacrament, which consisteth of three things; that is, unity, nutrition, and conversion.
As touching unity, Cyprian thus writeth: “Even as of many grains is made one bread, so are we one mystical body of Christ.”
Wherefore bread must still needs remain, or else we destroy the nature of a sacrament.
Also, they that take away nutrition, which cometh by bread, do take away likewise the nature of a sacrament. For as the body of Christ nourisheth the soul, even so doth bread likewise nourish the body of man.
Therefore they that take away the grains, or the union of the grains in the bread, and deny the nutrition or substance thereof, in my judgment are sacramentaries; for they take away the similitude between the bread and the body of Christ. For they which affirm transubstantiation, are indeed right sacramentaries and Capernaites.
As touching conversion — that, like as the bread which we receive is turned into our substance, so are we turned into Christ’s body — Rabanus and Chrysostome are witnesses sufficient.
THE FOURTH GROUND.
They which say that Christ is carnally present in the eucharist, do take from him the verity of man’s nature. Eutiches granted the divine nature in Christ, but his human nature he denied. So they that defend transubstantiation, ascribe that to the human nature, which only belongeth to the divine nature.
THE FIFTH GROUND.
The fifth ground is the certain persuasion of this article of faith: “He ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God.”
Augustine saith, “The Lord is above, even to the end of the world: but yet the verity of the Lord is here also; for his body, wherein he rose again, must needs be in one place; but his verity is spread abroad everywhere. Also in another place he saith, “Let the godly also receive that sacrament; but let them not be careful (speaking there, of the presence of his body). (Matthew 28) For as touching his majesty, his providence, his invisible and unspeakable grace, these words are fulfilled which he spake, I am with you unto the end of the world.
But, according to the flesh which he took upon him, according to that which was born of the Virgin, was apprehended of the Jews, was fastened to a tree, taken down again from the cross, lapped in linen clothes, was buried and rose again, and appeared after his resurrection — so you shall not have me always with you, and why? Because that as concerning his flesh, he was conversant with his disciples forty days, and they accompanying him, seeing him, but not following him, he went up into heaven, and is not here, for he sitteth at the right hand of his Father, and yet he is here, because he is not departed hence, as concerning the presence of his Divine Majesty.” Mark and consider well what St. Augustine saith, “He is ascended into heaven, and is not here,” saith he. Believe not them therefore which say, that he is here still in the earth. Moreover, “Doubt not,” saith the same Augustine, “but that Jesus Christ, as concerning the nature of his manhood, is there from whence he shall come. And remember well and believe the profession of a christian man, that he arose from death, ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of his Father; and from that place and none other [not from the altars 103 ] shall he come to judge the quick and the dead. And he shall come, as the angel said, as he was seen to go into heaven; that is to say, in the same form and substance, unto the which he gave immortality, but changed not nature. After this form (meaning his human nature) we may not think that it is everywhere.” And in the same epistle, he saith, “Take away from the bodies limitation of places, and they shall be nowhere; and because they are nowhere, they shall not be at all.” Vigilius saith, “If the Word and the flesh be both of one nature, seeing that the Word is everywhere, why then is not the flesh also everywhere? For when it was in earth, then verily it was not in heaven; and now when it is in heaven, it is not surely in earth. And it is so certain that it is not in earth, that, as concerning the same, we look for him from heaven, whom, as concerning the Word, we believe to be with us in earth.” Also the same Vigilius saith, “Which things seeing they be so, the course of the Scripture must be searched of us, and many testimonies must be gathered, to show plainly what a wickedness and sacrilege it is, to refer those things to the property of the divine nature, which do only belong to the nature of the flesh; and contrariwise, to apply those things to the nature of the flesh, which do properly belong to the divine nature.” Which thing the transubstantiators do, whilst they affirm Christ’s body not to be contained in any one place, and ascribe that to his humanity, which properly belongeth to his divinity; as they do who will have Christ’s body to be in no one certain place limited.
Now in the latter conclusion concerning the sacrifice, because it dependeth upon the first, I will in few words declare what I think; for if we did once agree in that, the whole controversy in the other would soon be at an end. Two things there be which do persuade me that this conclusion is true; that is, certain places of the Scripture, and also, certain testimonies of the fathers. St. Paul saith, “Christ, being become a high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this building, neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood, entered once into the holy place, and obtained for us eternal redemption.” “And now, in the end of the world, he hath appeared once, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.” (Hebrews 9) And again, “Christ was once offered to take away the sins of many.” Moreover he saith, “With one offering hath he made perfect for ever, those that are sanctified.” (Hebrews 10) These Scriptures do persuade me to believe, that there is no other oblation of Christ (albeit I am not ignorant there are many sacrifices), but that which was once made upon the cross.
The testimonies of the ancient fathers, which confirm the same, are out of Augustine, Ad Bonif. epist. 23. Again, in his book of Fortythree Questions, in the forty-first question. Also in his twentieth book against Faustus the Manichean, chap. 21. And in the same book against the said Faustus, cap. 18, thus he writeth, “Now the Christians keep a memorial of the sacrifice past, with a holy oblation and participation of the body and blood of Christ.”
Fulgentius in his book “De Fide, calleth the same oblation a commemoration. — And these things are sufficient for this time, for a scholastical determination of these matters.
DISPUTATIONS OF MARTIN BUCER AT CAMBRIDGE.
Over and besides these disputations above mentioned, other disputations were also holden at Cambridge, shortly after, by Martin Bucer, upon these conclusions following:
CONCLUSIONS TO BE DISPUTED.
First : “The canonical books of holy Scripture alone, do sufficiently teach the regenerated all things necessarily belonging unto salvation.”
Secondly : “There is no church in earth which erreth not in manners as well as in faith.”
Thirdly . “We are so justified freely of God, that before our justification it is sin, and provoketh God’s wrath against us, whatsoever good work we seem to do. Then, being justified, we do good works.”
In these three propositions against Bucer disputed master Segewick, Young, and Perne: which disputations because they are long here to be recited, I mind (the Lord willing) to reserve them to some other convenient place. In the mean season, because great controversy hath been and is yet amongst the learned, and much effusion of christian blood about the words and meaning of the sacrament; to the intent that the verity thereof more openly may be explained, and all doubtful scruples discussed, it shall not be out of place to adjoin to the former discourses of Peter Martyr, and of Dr. Ridley above mentioned, another certain learned treatise in form of a dialogue, as appertaining to the same argument, compiled (as it seemeth) out of the tractations of Peter Martyr, and other authors, by a certain learned and reverend person of this realm; who, under the persons of Custom and Verity, manifestly layeth before our eyes, and teacheth all men, not to measure religion by custom, but to try custom by truth and the word of God: for else custom may soon deceive, but the word of God abideth for ever.
A FRUITFUL DIALOGUE DECLARING THESE WORDS OF CHRIST: “THIS IS MY BODY.”
CUSTOM AND VERITY. Custom: — “I marvel much what madness hath crept into those men’s hearts which now-a-days are not ashamed so violently to tread down the lively word of God, yea and impudently to deny God himself.” Verity: — “God forbid, there should be any such. Indeed I remember that the Romish bishop was wont to have the Bible for his footstool, and so to tread down God’s word evermore, when he stood at his mass. But, thanks be to God, he is now detected, and his abominations be opened and blown throughout all the world. And I hear of no more that oppress God’s word.” Custom: — “No more! say you? Yes, doubtless, there are a hundred thousand more, and your part it is, Verity, to withstand them.” Verity: — “As touching my part, you know it agreeth not with my nature to stand with falsehood. But what are they? Disclose them if you will have them reproved.” Custom: — “What! are you so great a stranger in these quarters? Hear you not how that men do daily speak against the sacrament of the altar, denying it to be the real body of Christ?” Verity: — “In good sooth I have been a great while abroad, and returned but of late into this country: wherefore you must pardon me, if my answer be to seek in such questions. But go forth in your tale.
You have been longer here, and are better acquainted than 1. What say they more than this?” Custom: — “Than this? Why, what can they possibly say more?” Verity: — “Yes, there are many things worse than this: for this seemeth in some part to be tolerable.” Custom: — “What! me thinketh you daily with me. Seemeth it tolerable to deny the sacrament?” Verity: — “They deny it not, so much as I can gather by your words.” Custom: — “Nay, then, fare you well: I perceive you will take their part.” Verity: — “I am not partial, but indifferent to all parties: for I never go further than the truth.” Custom: — “I can scarcely believe you. But what is more true than Christ, which is truth itself? or whoever was so hardy, before this time, to charge Christ with a lie for saying these words: ‘This is my body?’ (Matthew 26) The words are evident and plain: there is in them not so much as one obscure or dark letter; there is no cause for any man to cavil. And yet, that notwithstanding, whereas Christ himself affirmed it to be his body, men now-a-days are not abashed to say, Christ lied, it is not his body. The evangelists agree all in one; the old writers stand of our side; the universal and catholic church hath been in this mind these fifteen hundred years and more. And shall we think that Christ himself, his evangelists, all the whole catholic church, have been so long deceived, and the truth now at length begotten and born in these days?” Verity: — “You have moved a matter of great force and weight, and whereto, without many words, I can make no full answer.
Notwithstanding, because you provoke me thereto, if you will give me license, I will take part with them of whom you have made false report, for none of them ever reproved Christ of any lie: but, contrariwise, they say, that many men of late days, not understanding Christ’s words, have builded and set up many fond lies upon his name.
Wherefore, first I will declare the meaning of these words, ‘This is my body;’ and next, in what sense the church and the old fathers have evermore taken them. First, therefore, you shall understand, that Scripture is not so to be taken always as the letter soundeth, but as the intent and purpose of the Holy Ghost was,’ by whom the Scripture was uttered. For, if you follow the bare words, you will soon shake down and overthrow the greatest part of the christian faith. What is plainer than these words, ‘Pater major me est,’ ‘My Father is greater than I am?’(John 14) Of those plain words sprang up the heresy of the Arians, which denied Christ to be equal with his Father. What is more evident than this saying, ‘I and my Father are both one?’ (John 10) Thereof arose the heresy of them that denied three distinct persons, ‘They all had one soul and one heart. (Acts 4) was spoken by the apostle: yet had each of them a soul and heart peculiar to himself, ‘They are now not two, but one flesh,’ is spoken of the man and his wife: yet have both the man and the wife their several body. ‘He is our very flesh, (Genesis 37) said Reuben by Joseph his brother; who, notwithstanding, was not their real flesh. ‘I am bread,’ said Christ; yet was he flesh, and no bread. ‘Christ was the stone,’ saith Paul; (1 Corinthians 10) and was indeed no material stone. ‘Melchizedek had neither father nor mother;’ and yet indeed he had both. ‘Behold the Lamb of God,’ saith John Baptist by Christ: notwithstanding, Christ was a man, and not a lamb. Circumcision was called the covenant, whereas it was but a token of the covenant. The lamb named the passover, and yet was it eaten in remembrance only of the passover.
Jacob raised up an altar, and called it, being made but of lime and stone, ‘The mighty God of Israel.’ Moses, when he had conquered the Amalekites, set up an altar, and called it by the names of God, ‘Jehovah’ and ‘Tetragramatum.’ ‘We are all one loaf of bread,’ saith Paul; (1 Corinthians 10) yet were they not thereby turned into a loaf of bread. Christ, hanging upon the cross, appointed St. John to his mother, saying, ‘Lo! there is thy son;’ and yet was he not her son. ‘So many as be baptized into Christ,’ saith Paul, ‘have put on Christ;’ (Galatians 3) and ‘so many as are baptized into Christ, are washed with the blood of Christ:’ (Romans 6) notwithstanding no man took the font-water to be the natural blood of Christ. ‘The cup is the new testament,’ saith Paul; and yet is not the cup indeed the very new testament. You see, therefore, that it is not strange, nor a thing unwont in the Scriptures, to call one thing by another’s name. So that you can no, more, of necessity, enforce the changing of the bread into Christ’s body in the sacrament, because the words be plain, ‘This is my body;’ than the wife’s flesh to be the natural and real body and flesh of the husband, because it is written, ‘They are not two but one flesh;’ or the altar of stone to be very God, because Moses, with evident and plain words, pronounced it to be the mighty God of Israel. Notwithstanding, if you will needs cleave to the letter, you make for me, and hinder your own cause: for thus I will reason, and use your own weapon against you. The Scripture calleth it bread. The evangelists agree in the same.
Paul nameth it so five times in one place. The Holy Ghost may not be sent to school to learn to speak. Wherefore, I conclude by I your own argument, that we ought not only to say, but also to believe, that in the sacrament there remaineth bread.” Custom: — “Methinketh your answer is reasonable, yet can I not be satisfied. Declare you, therefore, more at large, what moveth you to think this of the sacrament. For I think you would not withstand a doctrine so long holden and taught, unless you were enforced by some strong and likey reasons. Verity: — “First, In examining the words of Christ, I get me to the meaning and purpose for which they were spoken. And in this behalf I see that Christ meant to have his death and passion kept in remembrance. For men, of themselves, be, and evermore were, forgetful of the benefits of God. And therefore it was behoveful, that they should be admonished and stirred up with some visible and outward tokens; as with the passover lamb, the brazen serpent, and the like. For the brazen serpent was a token, that when the Jews were stinged, and wounded with serpents, God restored them and made them whole. The passover lamb was a memory of the great benefit of God, who, when he destroyed the Egyptians, saved the Jews, whose doors were sprinkled with the blood of a lamb. So likewise Christ left us a memorial and remembrance of his death and passion in outward tokens, that when the child should demand of his father, what the breaking of the bread, and drinking of the cup, meaneth, he might answer him, that like as the bread is broken, so Christ was broken and rent upon the cross, to redeem the soul of man. And likewise, as wine fostereth and comforteth the body, so doth the blood of Christ cherish and relieve the soul. And this do I gather by the words of Christ, and by the institution and order of the sacrament: for Christ charged the apostles to do this in the remembrance of him. Whereupon thus I conclude:
No thing is done in remembrance of itself.
But the sacrament is used in the remembrance of Christ:
Therefore the sacrament is not Christ.
Christ never devoured himself.
Christ did eat the sacrament with his apostles:
Ergo, the sacrament is not Christ himself. “Besides this, I see that Christ ordained not his body, but a sacrament of his body. A sacrament (as St. Austin declareth) is an outward sign of an invisible grace. His words are ‘Sacramentum est invisibilis gratiae visibile signum.’ Out of which words, I gather two arguments. The first is this: the token of the body of Christ is not the thing tokened; wherefore they are not one. The second is this:
One thing cannot be both visible and invisible.
But the sacrament is visible, and the body of Christ invisible:
Therefore they are not one. “Which thing St. Augustine openeth very well by these words, ‘Aliud est sacramentum, aliud res sacramenti. Sacramentum est quod in corpus vadit: res autem sacramenti est corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi.’ Moreover, I remember that Christ ministered this sacrament not to great and deep philosophers, but to a sort of ignorant and unlearned fishers, who, notwithstanding, understood Christ’s meaning right well, and delivered it even as they took it at Christ’s hand, to the vulgar and lay people, and fully declared unto them the meaning thereof. But neither the lay people, nor scarcely the apostles themselves, could understand what is meant by transubstantiation, impanation, dimensions, qualitates, quantitates, accidens sine subjecto, terminus a quo, et terminus ad quem, per modum quanti. This is no learning for the unlearned and rude people; wherefore it is likely that Christ meant some other thing than hath been taught of late days. Furthermore, Christ’s body is food, not for the body but for the soul; and therefore it must be received with the instrument of the soul, which is faith. For as ye receive sustenance for your body, by your bodily mouth, so the food of your soul must be received by faith, which is the mouth of the soul. And for that, St. Augustine sharply rebuketh them that think to eat Christ with their mouth, saying, Quid paras dentem et ventrem? Crede et 65 manducasti; that is, Why makest thou ready thy tooth and thy belly? Believe and thou hast eaten Christ.
Likewise, speaking of eating the selfsame body, he saith to the Capernaites, who took him grossly as men do now-a-days: ‘The words that I speak, are spirit and life. It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing. (John 6) And St.
Augustine upon these words of Christ saith 105 , ‘Non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis, neque bibituri sanguinem, quem effusuri sunt qui me crucifigent. Sacramentum aliquod vobis trado.
Id spiritualiter acceptum vivificat: caro autem non prodest quicquam.’” Custom: — “What mean you by this spirit, and by spiritual eating? I pray you utter your mind more plainly. For I know well that Christ hath a body, and therefore must be eaten (as I think) with the mouth of the body. For the spirit and the soul as it hath no body and flesh, so it hath no mouth.” Verity: — “You must understand, that a man is shaped of two parts, of the body and of the soul; and each of them hath his life and his death, his mouth, his teeth, his food, and abstinence. For like as the body is nourished and fostered with bodily meats, or else cannot endure; so must the soul have his cherishing, otherwise it will decay and pine away. And therefore we do and may justly say, that the Turks, Jews, and heathen be dead, because they lack the lively food of the soul. But how then, or by what mean, will you aid the soul?
Doubtless not by the instrument of the body, but of the soul; for that which is received into the body, hath no passage from thence into the soul. For Christ saith, ‘Whatsoever entereth into the belly, is conveyed into the draught.’ (Matthew 5) And whereas you say that the spirit hath no mouth, like as it hath no body or bones, you are deceived; for the spirit hath a mouth, in his kind; or else how could a man eat and drink justice? For undoubtedly his bodily mouth is no fit instrument for it. Yet Christ saith, that he is blessed that hungereth and thirsteth for justice. If he hunger and thirst for justice, belike he both eateth and drinketh it; for otherwise he neither abateth his hunger, nor quencheth his thirst. Now, if a man may eat and drink righteousness with his spirit, no doubt his spirit hath a mouth. Whereof I will reason thus:
Of whatsoever sort the mouth is, such is his food.
But the mouth of the spirit is spiritual, not bodily:
Therefore it receiveth Christ’s body spiritually, not bodily. “And in like manner Christ, speaking of the eating of his body, nameth himself the bread, not for the body, but of life, for the soul; and saith, ‘He that cometh to me, shall not hunger; and he that believeth in me, shall never thirst. (John 6) Wherefore, whosoever will be relieved by the body of Christ, must receive him as he will be received, with the instrument of faith appointed thereunto, not with his teeth or mouth. And whereas I say that Christ’s body must be received and taken with faith, I mean not that you shall pluck down Christ from heaven, and put him in your faith, as in a visible place; but that you must with your faith, rise and spring up to him, and, leaving this world, dwell above in heaven; putting all your trust, comfort, and consolation in him, who suffered grievous bondage to set you at liberty and to make you free; creeping into his wounds, which were so cruelly pierced and dented for your sake. So shall you feed on the body of Christ; so shall you suck the blood that was poured out and shed for you. This is the spiritual, the very true, the only eating of Christ’s body: and therefore St.
Gregory calleth it, ‘Cibum mentis non ventris;’ that is, ‘The food of the mind, and not of the belly.’ And St. Cyprian saith likewise, ‘Non acuimus dentern, nec ventrem paramus:’ i.e. ‘We sharpen not our tooth, nor prepare our belly.’ “Now, to return to our former purpose: seeing it is plain that Christ’s body is meat for our spirit, and hath nothing to do with our body, I will gather thereof this reason. The sacrament is bodily food, and increaseth the body: ergo, the sacrament is not the very body of Christ. That it nourisheth the body it is evident; for Christ calleth it the fruit of the vine, whose duty is to nourish. And, for a proof, if you consecrate a whole loaf, it will feed you as well as your table-bread. And if a little mouse get a host, he will crave no more meat to his dinner. “But you will say, these are worldly reasons. What then if the old fathers record the same? Irenaeus saith, ‘Quando mixtus calix, et fractus panis 106 percipit verbum Dei, fit eucharistia corporis et sanguinis Domini, ex quibus augetur et consistit carnis nostrae substantia. 67 Bede witnesseth the same by these words, ‘Quia panis carnem confirmat, et vinum sanguinem operatur in carne, hic ad corpus Christi mystice, illud ad sanguinem refertur.’ Wherefore, as I said before, seeing that Christ’s body is spiritual meat, and the bread of the sacrament bodily, I may conclude that the sacrament is not Christ’s body. Beside this, whereas it was forbidden, in the old law, that any man should eat or drink blood, the apostles, notwithstanding, took the cup at Christ’s hands, and drank of it; and never staggered, or shrank at the matter: whereby it may be gathered, that they took it for a mystery, for a token and a remembrance, far otherwise than it hath of late been taken. “Again, when the sacrament was dealt, none of them all crouched down, and took it for his God, forgetting him that sat there present before their eyes; but took it, and ate it, knowing that it was a sacrament and remembrance of Christ’s body. Yea, the old councils commanded that no man should kneel down at the time of the communion, fearing that it should be an occasion of idolatry. And long after the apostles’ time, as Tertullian writeth, women were suffered to take it home with them, and lap it up in their chests.
And the priests, many times, sent it to sick persons by a child; who, no doubt, would have given more reverence thereto, if they had taken it for their God. But a great while after, about three hundred years ago, Honorius the Third, bishop of Rome, took him and hanged him up, and caused men to kneel and crouch down, and all to begod him. A.D. 1220. “Furthermore, if the bread be turned and altered into the body of Christ, doubtless it is the greatest miracle that ever God wrought.
But the apostles saw no miracle in it. Nazianzen an old writer, and Augustine, entreating of all the miracles that are in the Scripture, number the sacrament for none. As for the apostles, it appeareth well that they had it for no marvel, for they never mused at it, neither demanded how it might be; whereas, in other firings, they evermore were full of questions. As touching St. Augustine, he not only over-skipped it, as no wonder, but, by plain and express words, testifieth that there is no marvel in it. For speaking of the Lord’s supper, and of the other sacraments, he saith these words: ‘Hic sacramenta honorem ut religiosa habere possunt, stuporem autem ut mira non possunt’ 69 Moreover, a little before the institution of the sacrament, Christ spake of his ascension, saying, ‘I leave the world: I tarry but a little while with you. Let not your hearts be troubled, because I go from you: I tell you truth, it is for your profit that I go from you, for if I go not, the Spirit of comfort cannot come to you;” (John 14) with many other like warnings of his departure. St. Stephen saw him sitting at the right hand of his Father, and thought it a special revelation of God: but he never said, that he saw him at the communion, or that he made him every day himself. And, in the Acts of the Apostles, St. Peter saith, that Christ must needs keep the heaven till all be ended, (Acts 3) Isaiah, Solomon, and St. Stephen say, that God dwelleth not in temples made with man’s hand. (Acts 17) St. Paul wisheth that he were dissolved and dead, and were with Christ: not in the altar, doubtless, where he might be daily; but in heaven. And, to be brief, it is in our Credo, and we do constantly believe, that Christ is ascended into heaven, and sitteth at his Father’s right hand; and no promise have we, that he will come jumping down at every priest’s calling. Hereof I gather this reason:
Christ’s body cannot both be gone, and be here.
But he is gone, and hath left the world:
Therefore, it is folly to seek him in the world.” Custom: — “Fie, you be far deceived, I can in no wise brook these words. You shut up Christ too straitly, and imprison him in one corner of heaven, not suffering him to go at large. 70 No doubtless, he hath deserved more gentleness at your hand, than to be tied up so short.” Verity: — “I do neither lock up, nor imprison Christ in heaven; but according to the Scriptures, declare that he hath chosen a blessed place, and most worthy to receive his majesty; in which place whoso is enclosed, thinketh not himself (as I suppose) to be a prisoner. But, if you take it for so heinous a thing, that Christ should sit resident in heaven in the glory of his Father, what think you of them that imprison him in a little box; yea, and keep him in captivity so long, until he be mouldy and overgrown with vermin; and when he is past men’s meat, be not contented to hang him till he stink, but will have him to a new execution, and burn him too? This is wonderful and extreme cruel imprisoning. But to return to the matter: we are certainly persuaded by the word of God, that Christ, the very Son of God, vouchsafed to take upon him the body and shape of man; and that he walked and was conversant amongst men in that same one, and not in many bodies; and that he suffered death, rose again, and ascended to heaven in the selfsame body; and that he sitteth at his Father’s right hand in his manhood, in the nature and substance of the said one body.
This is our belief, this is the very word of God. Wherefore they are far deceived, who, leaving heaven, will grope for Christ’s body upon the earth.” Custom: — “Nay, sir, but I see now you are far out of the way. For Christ hath not so gross and fleshly a body as you think, but a spiritual and ghostly body; and therefore, without repugnance, it may be in many places at once.” Verity: — “You say right, well, and do grant that Christ’s body is spiritual. But, I pray you, answer me by the way, can any other body than that which is spiritual, be, at one time, in sundry places?” Custom: “No truly.” Verity: — “ Have we that selfsame sacrament, that Christ gave to his disciples at his maundy, or no?” Custom: — “Doubtless we have the same.” Verity: — “When was Christ’s body spiritual? was it so even from his birth?” Custom: — “No: for, doubtless, before he arose from death, his body was earthly, as other men’s bodies are.” Verity: — “Well, but when gave Christ the sacrament to his disciples?
Before he rose from death or after?” Custom: — “You know yourself he gave it before his resurrection, the night before he suffered his passion.” Verity: — “Why then, methinketh he gave the sacrament at that time when his body was not spiritual.” Custom: — “Even so.” Verity: — “And was every portion of the sacrament dealt to the apostles? and received they into their mouths the very real and substantial body of Christ?” Custom: — “Yea, doubtless.” Verity: — “Mark well what ye have said, for you have granted me great repugnance. First, you say, that no body being not spiritual, can be in sundry places at once. Then say you, that at the maundy, Christ’s body was not spiritual: and yet hold you, that he was there present visibly before the apostles’ eyes, and in each of their hands and mouths all at one time — which grants of yours are not agreeable.
But I will gather a better and a more formal reason of your words, in this sort:
No body being real, natural, and organical, and not spiritual, can be in many places at once.
Christ’s body in the sacrament was in the apostles’ hands and mouths at one time, which were many places:
Ergo, Christ’s body in the sacrament was not a real, natural, and organical body; but spiritual.” Custom: — “Indeed you have driven me into the straits, before I was aware of you; and I know not how I may escape your hands honestly.
But the best refuge that I have is this; that I will not believe you.” Verity : — “I desire you not to give credence to me. God; yea, believe your own belief: for they both witness against you, that Christ’s body is taken up into heaven, and there shall remain until he come to judge.” Custom: — “ Tush, what speak you of the word of God? there be many dark sayings therein, which every man cannot attain to.” Verity: — “I grant you there be certain obscure places in the Scripture, yet not so obscure but that a man, with the grace of God, may perceive; for it was written not for angels, but for men. But, as I understand, Custom meddleth but little with the Scripture. How say you by St. Augustine, St. Jerome, St. Ambrose? what if they stand on our side?” Custom: — “No, no, I know them well enough.” Verity: — “So well as you know them, for all old acquaintance, if they be called to witness, they will give evidence against you. For St. Austin commonly, in every of his books, but chiefly in an epistle to his friend Dardanus, declareth that Christ’s body is placed in one room. I marvel you be not nearer of his counsel. His words are these: 71 , Do not doubt the man Jesus Christ to be there, from whence he shall come. And remember well, and faithfully believe, the christian confession, that he is risen, ascended into heaven, sitteth at the right hand of God the Father, and from thence he shall come, and from no other place, to judge the quick and the dead. And shall come in the same substance of body, to which he gave immortality, and took not the nature from it.
After this form he is to be thought not to be dispersed in all places; for we must beware so to defend his divinity that we destroy not his humanity. And in another place of the same epistle 107108 , ‘Una persona Deus et homo; et utrumque est unus Christus. Ubique per id quod Deus, in coelo autem per id quod homo.’ Likewise upon Psalm 14 72 , While the world shall last, the Lord is above, and also the verity of the Lord is with us. For the body wherein he rose again must be in one place; but the verity of him is everywhere dispersed.’ In like manner writeth Damasus, an old bishop of Rome in his Credo 109 , ‘Devictis mortis imperils, cure ea carne in qua natus et passus est et resurrexit, ascendit in coelum, manente eadem natura carnis in qua natus et passus est.’ St. Ambrose, writing upon Luke 10, recordeth the same:, Wherefore neither above the earth, nor upon the earth, nor according to the earth, we ought to seek the Lord, if we will find him; for he did not seek him above the earth, who did see him sitting at the right hand of God. And Mary sought upon the earth to touch Christ and could not.
Stephen touched him, because he sought him in heaven.’ St. Jerome, in an epistle to Marcella, proveth that the body of Christ must needs be contained in some place, for he saith, 74 ‘The property of God is to be everywhere; the property of man is to be in one place.’ The same Jerome, in another place, calleth it a foolish thing to seek for him in a narrow place, or in a corner, who is the light of all the world: ‘Foolishness it is, in a small place or in a hid corner to seek him who is the light of the whole world.’ Origen saith likewise, 76 ‘They are not to be heard, who show Christ in houses. The same also recordeth Bede, writing upon these words of Christ: ‘Now a little while shall you see me.’ 77 He speaketh in Christ’s person. ‘Therefore,’ saith he, ‘shall you see me but a little while after my resurrection; because I will not still abide in the earth bodily; but, in the manhood which I have taken, will ascend up to heaven.’ What needeth more words? All the old fathers witness the same. You may by these soon judge the rest. Now to return to the matter: Seeing that the word of God in many and sundry places, the Credo, and the Abridgment of the Faith, seeing all the old fathers do constantly agree in one, that the body of Christ is ascended into heaven, and there remaineth at the right hand of the Father, and cannot be in more than in one place, I do conclude that the sacrament is not the body of Christ; first, because it is not in heaven, neither sitteth at the Father’s right hand; moreover, because it is in a hundred thousand boxes, whereas Christ’s body filleth but one place.
Furthermore, if the bread wre turned into the body of Christ, then would it necessarily follow, that sinners and unpenitent persons receive the body of Christ.” Custom: — “Marry, and so they do. For Paul saith plainly, that they receive the body of Christ to their own confusion.” Verity: — “No, not so. These are not Paul’s words, but he saith, ‘Whoso eateth of this bread, and drinketh of this cup unworthily, eateth and drinketh his own condemnation, not judging the body of the Lord. Here he calleth it, in plain words, bread. And although the sacrament be very bread, yet doth the injury redound to the body of Christ. As if a man break the king’s mace, or tread the broad seal under his foot, although he have broken and defaced nothing but silver and wax; yet is the injury the king’s, and the doer shall be taken as a traitor.
St. Ambrose declareth the meaning of St. Paul 111 by these words 78 , ‘Reus est corporis Domini, qui poenas dabit mortis Christi, quoniam irritam fecit mortem Domini.’ The cause of the ordinance thereof was the remembrance of the death of Christ, which whoso forgetteth, receiveth the sacrament to their condemnation. That same witnesseth St. Augustine: ‘For the sacrament,’ saith he, ‘is an outward token of love and charity. For like as many grains of corn are become one piece of bread, even so they that receive it, ought to be one.’ Then saith he, ‘Mysterium pacis ac unitatis nobis Christus in mensa sua consecravit.
Qui accepit mysterium unitaris et non servat unitatem, non mysterium accepit pro se, sed testimonium contra se.’ He that readeth the gospel, wherein is declared the passion and death of Christ, and liveth contrary to the gospel, shall doubtless be the more guilty of the death of Christ, because he heareth and readeth the word of God, and regardeth it not. “In a certain country the manner is, that when the gospel is read, the king shall stand up with a naked sword in his hand, declaring thereby that he beareth his sword in defense of the gospel. But if he himself oppresseth the gospel, he beareth the sword against himself; for the gospel shall turn to his judgment and condemnation. So will Christ so much more extremely punish a man, who, knowing himself to be wicked and without repentance, and therefore none of the flock of Christ, yet, notwithstanding, will impudently creep into the company of christian men, and receive the sacraments with them, as though he were one of the number.
And this meant St. Paul by the unworthy receiving of a sacrament of Christ’s body. Wherefore a man may unworthily take the sacrament, and he guilty of the death of Christ, although he receive not Christ’s body into his mouth, and chew it with his teeth. — But what if I prove that every massing priest is guilty of the body and blood of Christ?” Custom: — “I dare say you cannot prove it.” Verity: — “But if I do prove it, will you believe me? Custom: — “I may well enough, for it is impossible to do it; for priests commonly are confessed before they go to mass; and how can they then take the sacrament unworthily?” Verity: — “Indeed confession, if it be discreetly used, is a laudable custom, and to the unlearned man and feeble conscience so good as a sermon: but, notwithstanding, because it was never commanded of Christ, nor received of the apostles, nor much spoken of by the old doctors, it cannot make much for the due receiving of the sacrament.
But how like ye these words of St. Ambrose? 79 ‘He taketh it unworthily, that taketh it otherwise than Christ ordained it.’” Custom: — “This liketh me very well. But what gather you of it?” Verity: — “This will I gather. The massing priest taketh the sacrament otherwise than Christ either commanded or taught: ergo, he taketh it unworthily, and so consequently to his condemnation.” Custom: — “That is not so, for he doth altogether as Christ commanded him.” Verity: — “That shall appear; for Christ commanded it to be done in his remembrance: the priest doth it in remembrance of dead men. Christ took bread, and left it bread: the priest taketh bread and conjureth it away. Christ took bread and gave thanks: the priest taketh bread and breatheth upon it. Christ took bread and brake it: the priest taketh bread and hangeth it up. Christ took bread and dealt it to his apostles: the priest, because he is an apostle himself, taketh bread and eateth it every whit alone. Christ, in a sacrament, gave his own body to be eaten in faith: the priest, for lack of faith, receiveth accidents, and dimensions. Christ gave a sacrament to strengthen men’s faith: the priest giveth a sacrifice to redeem men’s souls. Christ gave it to be eaten: the priest giveth it to be worshipped. And to conclude, Christ gave bread: the priest saith he giveth a God. Here is difference enough between Christ and the priest. Yet moreover, Christ, at his supper, spake his words out, and in a plain tongue: the priest speaketh nothing but Latin or Greek, which tongues he ofttimes perceiveth not; and much he whispereth, lest any poor man should perhaps perceive him.
So it cometh to pass, that the priest knoweth no more what he himself saith, than what he doth. Thus you may see that the massing priest receiveth the sacrament of Christ’s body far otherwise than ever Christ minded; and so therefore unworthily, and to his condemnation. “Now, if you think yourself satisfied, I will return to my former question, and prove more at large, that Christ’s body cannot be eaten of the wicked, which thing must necessarily ensue, if the bread were turned into the body of Christ. Christ, in John 6, speaking of the eating of his body, saith, ‘He that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.’ Whereof I gather thus: but sinful men take the sacrament to their condemnation, and live not for ever; ergo, in the sacrament they receive not the body of Christ. Again, Christ saith, ‘He that eateth me shall live for my sake.’ Hereof I conclude thus: but impenitent persons cannot live for Christ’s sake.
Moreover Christ’s body must be received, not with the mouth, as Gregory recordeth, saying, that it is eaten with the teeth of the soul, not of the body, as I have above more largely declared. But wicked and impenitent persons lack faith; wherefore they cannot eat the body of Christ. Again, Christ’s body cannot he divided from his spirit; but wicked men have not the spirit of God: ergo, they have not Christ’s body. Hereunto agree all the old writers, affirming constantly, that the unfaithful be no meet vessels to receive the body of Christ. St. Augustine saith, Qui non manet in Christo,etin quo non manet Christus, procul dubio non manducat carnem Christi, nec bibit ejus sanguinero, quamvls tanae rei mysterium ad judicium suum manducet, ac bibat.’ And in the person of Christ, he saith likewise, ‘Qui non manet in me, et in quo ego non maneo, ne se dicat aut existimet manducare corpus meum, aut sanguinem meum bibere.’ Ambrose avoweth the same by these words: ‘Qui discordat a Christo non manducat carnem ejus, nec bibit sanguinem, etsi tantae rei sacramentum accipiat.’ In like manner writeth Prosper, ‘Qui discordat a Christo, nec carnem Christi edit, nec sanguinem bibit, etsi tantae rei sacramentum ad judicium suae praesumptionis quotidie accipiat.’ And therefore St.
Augustine saith, ‘Mali sacramentum habent, rem autem sacramenti non habent.’ Thus by the word of God, by reason, and by the old fathers it is plain, that sinful men eat not the body of Christ, receive they the sacrament never so oft: which thing could not be, if in the sacrament there remained nothing but the body of Christ. “The sacrament in holy Scripture is named ‘fractio panis,’ ‘the breaking of bread;’ which, to say the truth, were but a cold breaking, if there remained no bread to break, but certain fantasies of white and round. Yet whereas they, with words, crossings, blessings, breathings, leapings, and much ado, can scarcely make one god, they have such virtue in their fingers, that at one cross they be able to make twenty gods; for if they break the sacrament, every portion, yea, every mite, must needs be a god. After the apostles’ time there arose up heretics, who said that Christ, walking here amongst men bodily upon the earth, had no very body, but a thing like a body, and so therewith dimmed men’s sight. Against whom the old fathers used these arguments: Christ increased in growing, fasted, hungered, eat, wept, sweat, was weary, and in conclusion died, and had all other properties of a very body: wherefore he had a body. I will use the same kind of reasoning: It feedeth, it tasteth like bread, it looketh like bread, the little silly mouse taketh it for bread, and, to be short, it hath all the properties and tokens of bread: ergo, it is bread. The old fathers, when there remained any part of the sacrament more than was spent at the communion, they used to burn it, and of it there came ashes. But there is nothing in the sacrament that can turn to ashes but only bread (for I think they burned not Christ’s body to ashes): ergo, in the sacrament there remaineth bread. Henry the emperor, the sixth of that name 112 , was poisoned in the host, and Victor the bishop of Rome in the chalice. But poison cannot hang in God’s body and blood: wherefore there remaineth bread and wine. What needeth many words in a matter so evident? If you demand either God’s word, or the doctors and the ancient writers, or your reason, or your eyes, or nose, or tongue, or fingers, or the cat, or the ape, or the mouse, all these agree in one, and answer together, ‘There is bread.’ Wherefore, if you reject so many and so constant witnesses, and so well agreeing in their tale, specially being such as will lie for no man’s pleasure, I will appeal from you, and take you as no indifferent judge. If all these witnesses suffice you not, I will call the sacrament itself to record. It crieth unto you, and plainly doth advertise you, what you should think of it. ‘I am,’ it saith, ‘grated with the tooth; I am conveyed into the belly; I perish; I can endure no space; I canker; I suffer green mould, blue mould, red mould; I breed worms; I am kept in a box for fear of rats. If you leave me out all night, I shall be devoured before morning, for if the mouse get me, I am gone. I am bread; I am no God: believe them not.’ Thus crieth the sacrament daily, and beareth witness itself. Custom: — “The devil on such like reasons! and therefore I will never trouble my brains to make you answer: but, if it be true that you have said, why is the sacrament so well of Christ himself, as of his apostles, and the old fathers, called the body of Christ?” Verity: — “Because it is no strange thing in Scripture so to speak; as I have declared before. — But will you stand to St. Augustine’s arbitrement in the matter?” Custom: — “To no man sooner.” Verity: — “St. Augustine, in an epistle to his friend Boniface, giveth a good cause why the sacrament, although it be not the body of Christ, is, notwithstanding, called the body of Christ. His words be these: 80 , If sacraments had not a certain similitude of those things whereof they be sacraments, then were they no sacraments; of the which similitude many times they take their name. Wherefore, after a certain manner the sacrament of the body of Christ is the body of Christ; and the sacrament of the blood of Christ is the blood of Christ,’ etc. And upon Psalm 33, he writeth likewise, 81 ‘Christ, after a certain manner and fashion, as it were, did bear himself in his own hand, when he said, ‘This is my body.’ ‘In manner,’ he saith, ‘and after a fashion;’ not in very deed. Again, when faithful men receive the sacrament, they think not of the bread, nor mark the wine, but they look further, and behold the very body of Christ spread upon the cross, and his very blood poured down for their sakes. So in baptism men regard not greatly the water, but account themselves washed with the blood of Christ. So saith St. Paul, ‘Whatsoever we are that be baptized, we are washed in the blood of Christ.’ (Romans 6) Wherefore to the faithful receivers you may say, that the water of baptism is the blood of Christ, and the bread and wine the body and blood of Christ: for to them it is no less than if the natures were altered and changed. Which thing you may very well learn of Chrysostome, whose words are these: 82 ‘All mysteries must be considered with inward eyes, that is to say, spiritually. But the inward eyes, when they see the bread, they pass over the creatures, neither do they think of that bread which is baked of the baker, but of him which called himself the bread of eternal life.’ For these two causes the bread and wine are called the body and blood of Christ. Now I think you are satisfied concerning the meaning of these words: ‘This is my body.’” Custom: — “Yet one thing moveth me very much.” Verity: — “What is that?” Custom: — “The doctors and old writers, men inspired with the Holy Ghost, have evermore been against your doctrine; yea, and in these days the wisest men and best learned call you heretics, and your learning heresy.” Verity: — “As touching the old writers, I remember well they speak reverently of the sacraments, like as every man ought to do; but whereas they deliver their mind with their right hand, you, Custom, receive it with the left. For whereas they say, that it is the body of Christ, and that it must be verily eaten, meaning that it doth effectually lay before the eyes Christ’s body, and that it is to the faithful man no less than if it were Christ himself, and that Christ must be eaten in faith, not torn nor rent with the teeth: you say, that howsoever it be taken, it is Christ’s body, and that there is none other eating but with the mouth. “And that the fathers meant no other thing than I have said, it shall appear by their words. But as touching the learned and wise men of these days, I cannot blame them if they call my doctrine heresy; for they would condemn all ancient writers of heresy, if they were now alive. But I will answer you to them anon. In the mean while mark you how well their learning agreeth. They say, ‘You must follow the letter; you must stick to the letter.’ But Origen saith, ‘If ye follow after the letter that which is written, Unless ye shall eat the flesh of the Son of man, there shall be no life in you — this letter killeth.’ “Augustine in the third book, ‘De Doctrina Christiana;’ 84 First, thou must beware that thou take not a figurative speech after the letter. For thereto pertaineth that the apostle saith, The letter killeth. For when a thing is spiritually meant, and the same is taken literally as properly spoken, that is a carnal taking. Neither can any other be called the killing of the soul, rather than that.’ And in the same book he teacheth a man to know the plain sense from a figure, saying thus: 85 ‘If the commanding speech be such as commandeth a thing wicked and horrible to be done, or a charitable thing to be undone, then this is a figurative speech: Unless ye shall eat the flesh of the Son of man, and shall drink his blood, there shall be no life in you. Because in this speech he seemeth to command a wicked thing, it is therefore a figurative speech, commanding that we should communicate with the passion of our Lord, and sweetly to retain it in our remembrance. “In like manner Chrysostome plucketh you from the plain letter, and the bare words by this saying, 86 ‘The flesh profiteth not;’ that is to say, ‘My words must be taken and expounded after the Spirit.
For he that heareth after the flesh, gaineth nothing. Now what is it to understand carnally? To take things simply as they be spoken, and not to consider any meaning further therein. For things must not be judged as they are seen, but all mysteries must be seen with inward eyes, that is to say spiritually.’ “What is so heinous in these days, as to call the sacrament the token or the remembrance of Christ’s body? Yet did the old writers in manner never call it other. Tertullian in the fourth book against the Marcionists, 87 ‘Christ took bread and made it his body, saying, This is my body; that is to say, a figure of my body. Ambrose, upon Corinthians 6: 88 ‘Because we are delivered by the Lord’s death, in the remembrance of the same by eating and drinking, we signify the body and blood which were offered up for us.’
Chrysostome, in the eighty-third Homily upon the Gospel of Matthew: 89 ‘When they object unto us, and ask, How know you that Christ was offered up? then, alleging these things, we stop their mouths. For, if Christ died not, then whose sign or token is this sacrifice?’ Augustine to Adimantus: 90 ‘Christ doubted not to say, This is my body, when he gave but a sign of his body. ‘Augustine upon Psalm 3 91 ‘Christ received Judas to the supper, in which he commended and delivered a figure of his body and blood unto his disciples.’ Rubanus, 92 ‘Because the bread strengtheneth the body, therefore it is aptly called Christ’s body. And likewise the wine, because it increaseth blood in the flesh, it doth resemble the blood of Christ.’ The monk Druthmar, on Matthew: 93 ‘Wine maketh glad the heart, and increaseth blood; and therefore the blood of Christ is not unaptly signified thereby.’ Irenaeus witnesseth plainly, that in the sacrament remaineth bread and wine, by these words: 94 ‘As the earthly bread, receiving the vocation of God, is now no common bread, but the eucharist, consisting of two things, the one earthly and the other heavenly.’ Here he reeordeth, that there remaineth in the sacrament an earthly nature, which is either bread, or nothing. Gelasius writing against Nestorius avoweth the same, saying, 95 ‘In the eucharist the substance of bread and nature of the wine cease not to be. For the image and similitude of the body and blood of the Lord is celebrated in the action of the mysteries.’ Chrysostome 96 preferreth a poor man before the sacrament, and calleth him the body of Christ, rather than the other. Whereof I may gather this reason:
The poor man is not the natural and real body of Christ.
Every poor member of Christ is the body of Christ, rather than the sacrament: Ergo, the sacrament is not the natural and real body of Christ. “His words are: 98 ‘This altar thou dost reverence, because the body of Christ therein is set before thee. But him that is the body of Christ indeed, thou dost spitefully entreat, and dost neglect him ready, to perish. Chrysostome in the eleventh Homily upon Matthew: 99 ‘If it be so perilous a matter to translate these sanctified vessels unto private uses, in which not the true body of Christ, but a mystery of the body of Christ is contained, how much more then these vessels of our body?’ Athanasius upon these words: ‘Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, saith: 100 ‘The words that Christ here speaketh, be not carnal, but spiritual. For what body might have sufficed for all that should eat, to be a nourishment of the whole world? But therefore he maketh mention of the ascension of the Son of man into heaven, to the intent to pluck them away from that corporal cogitation.’
Augustine to Marcellinus: 101 ‘In those carnal oblations the flesh of Christ was figured, which he should offer for our sins, and the blood which he should bestow for us; but, in this sacrifice, is the giving of thanks and memorial of the flesh of Christ which he hath offered for us, and of the blood which he hath shed for us. In that sacrifice, therefore, is signified figuratively what should be given for us; in this sacrifice what is given to us is evidently declared. In those sacrifices the Son of God was before preached to be slain; in this sacrifice he is showed to be slain already for the wicked.’ “Origen, upon Matthew, expounding these words, ‘This is my body,’ saith: 102 ‘The bread which Christ confesseth to be his body, is a word nutritive of our souls.’ Augustine: 103 ‘No man ought in any wise to doubt but that every faithful man is then partaker of the body and blood of the Lord, when in baptism he is made a member of Christ. For he shall not be deprived of the participation and benefit of that sacrament, when he findeth in himself that thing which the sacrament doth signify.’ Ambrose: 104 Such is the force and strength of the word, that the bread and wine remain the same, as they were, and yet are changed into another thing.’ For it is not any longer common bread, but it is turned into a sacrament; yet notwithstanding there remaineth bread and wine. Tertullian writing against a heretic named Marcion, who taught that the creatures of God, as flesh, bread, and wine, and such like, were naught and uncleanly: 105 ‘God hath not cast away his creature, but by it he hath represented his body.’ Origen upon Leviticus, speaking of the drinking of Christ’s blood, saith, 106 ‘We do not desire the blood of the flesh, but the blood of the word.’ Ambrose called the sacrament, ‘typum corporis Christi,’ and Basil ‘antitypum,’ which is as much as to say, as a token, a figure, a remembrance, and example of Christ’s body. Origen upon Matthew 14: 107 , In this bread that thing which is material passeth through man’s body: but that which is made by the word of God, by means of faith doth profit.’ And lest perhaps you think that he spake those words of our common table-bread, he concludeth the matter himself with these words: 108 ‘These things we have spoken of the mystical bread.’ Augustine declareth, that it must needs be a figure and a remembrance of the body of Christ: 109 ‘These things are understood figuratively, according to the rule of sound and true faith. For otherwise it seemeth to be more horrible to eat man’s flesh, than to kill a man; and more horrible to drink man’s blood, than to shed it.’ And therefore he saith upon Psalm 98 110 ‘Ye shall not eat this body which you see, and drink that blood which they shall shed that shall crucify me; I commend unto you a sacrament.’
Tertullian: 111 ‘Jesus hath another body than bread; for bread was not given for us, but the very true body of Christ was given upon the cross; which body was exhibited in the supper under the figure of bread.’ This recordeth Theodoret, an ancient writer, and avoweth, that there is no turning or altering of the bread in the sacrament. His words are these: 112 ‘He hath honored and dignified the visible signs with the name of his body and of his blood, not changing the nature, but adding grace to nature.’ And in another place, where he maketh a true christian man to reason with a heretic, he giveth to the heretic this part: to hold with the turning of bread and wine into the natural body and blood of Christ. The heretic’s words are these: 113 ‘The sacraments of the Lord’s body and blood before invocation, are one thing; but after, they are changed and made another.’ This maketh Theodoret to be on the heretic’s part. Then he bringeth forth the true christian man, who reproveth the heretic for so saying: 114 ‘Thou art fallen into the snares which thou thyself hast laid. For those selfsame holy signs after the consecration, do not go from their nature, for they abide still, both in their former substance and figure; and may be both with eyes seen, and felt with hands, as before.’ To the same agreeth well Chrysostome, saying, 115 After the bread is sanctified, it is called bread no more, although the nature of the bread still remain.’
Hereby you may understand, how and in what sort the old fathers, how the primitive and beginning church, how the apostles, and how Christ himself, took these words, ‘This is my body.’ “Now, to withstand and stoutly to go, not against only ancient writers, or the congregation of christian people (which at that time was not overgrown, no, neither spotted with covetousness and worldly honor), but the apostles also, and God himself, no doubt it is great fondness. But what speak I of the old fathers? It is not long since the sacrament grew out of its right understanding. For this word ‘transubstantiatio,’ whereby they signify the turning of the bread into the body of Christ, was never either spoken or heard or thought of, among the ancient fathers, or in the old church. But about five hundred years past, pope Nicholas II., in a council holden at Lateran in Rome, confirmed that opinion of the changing of bread, and would have made an article of faith, and placed it in the ‘Credo.’ After which time ensued Corpus Christi day, masses of Corpus Christi, reservation of the sacrament with honor, with canopies, with censing, with kneeling, with worshipping and adoration, and with so much as any man could devise. For they thought they could not do too much to him, after that the bishop of Rome had allowed him for a God. “But not fully two hundred years before that time, when this doctrine first began to bud (and yet notwithstanding had not so prevailed, but that a great number of learned and good men could know the sacrament to be a sacrament, and not Christ himself), Charlemagne, king of France and emperor of Germany, demanded of a great learned man, whose name was Bertram, what he thought of that strange kind of calling down Christ from heaven, and turning a little gobbet of bread into his natural body. To whom Bertram made answer in this wise: 116 ‘This we say, That there is a great difference and separation betwixt the body in which Christ suffered, and the blood which he shed upon the cross, and this body which every day is celebrated in the mystery of the passion of Christ. For this body is a pledge and similitude, but the other is the very truth itself. Ergo, it appeareth that these are separated asunder by no less difference than is between a pledge, and the thing whereof the pledge is given; or than is betwixt an image of a thing, and the thing itself whereof the image is; or than is between the form of a thing, and the verity itself. This wrote Bertram, Druthmar, and many others, and yet were never in all their time once reproved of heresy. This wrote Johannes Scotus also, in whose lifetime men had not eyes to espy his heresies: but, about two hundred years after his death, he was judged and condemned for a heretic, and his books burned, in a council holden at Vercelli in Lombardy, in the year of our Lord God 1050. Since which time, even until this day, although idolatry had great increase, yet there never wanted some good men, who boldly would profess and set forth the truth; although they were well assured that their worldly reward should be spite, malice, imprisoning, sword, fire, and all kinds of torments. Thus, so shortly, and in so few words as I could, I have declared unto you what Christ meant by these words, ‘This is my body;’ what the apostles taught therein, and in what sort they delivered them to their successors; in what sense and meaning the holy fathers and old writers, and the universal and catholic church, have evermore taken them.”
THE END AND DEATH OF KING EDWARD THE SIXTH.
Thus, having discoursed things done and past under the reign of king Edward, such as seemed not unfruitful to be known, we will now draw to the end and death of this blessed king, our young Josias; who, about a year and a half after the death of the duke of Somerset his uncle, A.D. 1553, entering into the seventeenth year of his age, and the seventh year of his reign, in the month of July was taken from us, for our sins no doubt; whom if it had so pleased the good will of the Lord to have spared with longer life, not unlike it was, by all conjectures probably to be esteemed by those his toward and blessed beginnings, but proceeding so as he began, he would have reformed such a commonwealth here in the realm of England, as by good cause that might have been said of him, which was said in the old time of the noble emperor Augustus, in reforming and advancing the empire of Rome: 1 “Which empire he received (as he said) of brick, but he left it of fine marble.” But the condition of this realm, and the customable behavior of English people (whose property is commonly to abuse the light of the gospel when it is offered), deserved no such benefit of so blessed a reformation, but rather a contrary pledge of deformation, such as happened after his reign, as you shall hear, the Lord granting, in the next queen’s days that followed.
Thus then this godly and virtuous imp, in the time and month above mentioned, was cut from us, whose worthy life and virtues have been partly before declared. Nevertheless, to have some monument of him remaining, to testify of the good nature and gentle disposition of that prince, we will add here, for a remembrance, this little epistle of his own handwriting to the archbishop of Canterbury his godfather, as followeth:
AN EPISTLE OF YOUNG PRINCE EDWARD TO THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, HIS GODFATHER.
Impertio to plurima salute, colendissime praesul, et charissime susceptor. Quid abes longe a me, vellem libenter audire to esse incolumem. Precor autem ut vivas diu, et promoveas verbum Del.
Vale.
Antilae, 18. Junii. Tuus in Christo filius, Edwardus Princeps ANOTHER EPISTLE OF THE YOUNG PRINCE EDWARD TO THE ARCHBISHOP HIS GODFATHER.
Etsi puer sum, colendissime susceptor, non tamen immemor sum vel officii erga to mei, vel humanitatis tuae quam indies mihi exhibere studes. Non exciderunt mihi humanissimae tuae liteterae pridie divi Petri ad me datae. Quibus antehac respondere nolui, non quod illas neglexerim, aut non meminerim, sed ut illarum diuturna meditatione fruerer, fidelique memoria reponerem, atque demum bene ruminatis pro mea virili responderem. Proinde afectum erga me tuum vere paternum, quem in illis expressisti, amplector et veneror, optoque ut multos vivas annos, tuoque pio ac salubri consilio pergas esse mihi venerandus pater. Nam pietatem ante omnis mihi amplectendam et exosculandam esse duco, quoniam divus Paulus dicit, (1 Timothy 4) pietas ad omnia utilis est.
Optime valeat tua paternitas in plurimos annos.
Hartefordiae, 13. Januarii. Tui studiosissimus, Edwardus Princeps.
THE ANSWER OF THE ARCHBISHOP TO PRINCE EDWARD’S EPISTLE.
Non magis poterat ipsa me servare salus (fill in Christo charissime) quam salus tua. 3 Mea vita non dicenda est vita absque tua et salute et valetudine. Quapropter cum to incolumem ac salvum intelligo, vitam etiam mihi integram esse et incolumem sentio. Neque certe absentia mea tam est injucunda tibi quam sunt literae tuae perjucundae mihi. Quae arguunt tibi juxta adesse et ingenium dignum tanto principe et praeceptorem dignum tanto ingenio. Ex quibus tuis literis to sic literas video colere, ut interim doctrinae coelestis tua nequaquam minima sit cura; quee cuicunque sit curee, non potest ilium quaevis cura frangere. Perge igitur qua via incepisti, princeps illustrissime, et Spartam quam nactus es hanc orna ut quam ego per literas video in to virtutis lucem, eadem olim iliuminet universam tuam Angliam. Non scribam prolixius, tum quidem ut me intelligas brevitate non nihil affici, tum etiam quod credam to aetate quidem adhuc parvulum parvo gaudere, et similem simili; turn etiam praeterea ne impolita mea oratio in causa sit, quo generosa ilia tua indoles barbarie vitium contrahat.
THE REPORT OF THE PRINCE’S SCHOOLMASTER, IN COMMENDATION OF HIS TOWARDNESS, TO THE ARCHBISHOP.
Right honorable and my singular good lord, after my most hearty commendations: the opportunity of this messenger forceth me to write at this time, having little matter but only to signify unto your grace, that my lord’s grace your godson is merry and in health, and of such towardness in learning, godliness, gentleness, and all honest qualities, that both you and I and all this realm, ought to think him, and take him, for a singular gift sent of God, an imp worthy of such a father; for whom we are bound ‘sine intermissione’ to render to God most hearty thanks, with most humble request of his long and prosperous continuance. He hath learned almost four books of Cato to construe, to parse, and to say without book. And of his own courage now, in the latter book, he will needs have at one time fourteen verses, which he conneth pleasantly and perfectly, besides things of the Bible, Satellitium Vivis 117 ,A Esop’s Fables, and Latin- making, whereof he hath sent your grace a little taste. — Dominus Jesus to diutissime servet. Thus much hitherto having declared, touching the worthy virtues and singular towardness of this godly imp, king Edward the Sixth, although I have not, neither can, insert all things due to his commendation, but am enforced to let pass many memorable matters, well worthy to be prosecuted, if they might have come to our hands: yet this one brief note I thought not to overslip (something to recreate the weary reader in such a doleful story), being notified to me by one master Edward Underhil, who, waiting the same time with the rest of his fellow-pensioners and men at arms, as sir Henry Gates, master Robert Hall, master Henry Harston, and master Stafforton, heard these words between the king and his council.
The relation and testimony of which person and persons above-named come to this effect: That king Edward the Sixth, the fourth year of his reign, being then but thirteen years old and upward, at Greenwich, upon St. George’s day, when he was come from the sermon into the presencechamber, there being his uncle the duke of Somerset, the duke of Northumberland, with other lords and knights of that order called the Order of the Garter, he said to them, “My lords, I pray you, what saint is St. George, that we here so honor him?” At which question the other lords being all astonied, the lord treasurer that then was, perceiving this, gave answer, and said, “If it please your majesty, I did never read in any history of St. George, but only in ‘Legenda Aurea,’ where it is thus set down: That St. George out with his sword, and ran the dragon through with his spear.”
The king, when he could not a great while speak for laughing, at length said, “I pray you, my lord, and what did he with his sword the while?” “That I cannot tell your majesty,” said he. And so an end of that question of good St. George. Now to return again from whence we have digressed, which is to signify some part of the order and manner of his godly departing. As the time approached when it pleased Almighty God to call this young king from us, which was the sixth day of July, the year above said, about three hours before his death, this godly child, his eyes being closed, speaking to himself, and thinking none to have heard him, made this prayer which followeth:
THE PRAYER OF KING EDWARD BEFORE HIS DEATH.
Lord God, deliver me out of this miserable and wretched life, and take me among thy chosen: howbeit not my will, but thy will be done. Lord, I commit my spirit to thee. O Lord! thou knowest how happy it were for me to be with thee: yet, for thy chosen’s sake, send me life and health, that I may truly serve thee. O my Lord God, bless thy people, and save thine inheritance! O Lord God, save thy chosen people of England! O my Lord God, defend this realm from papistry, and maintain thy true religion; that I and my people may praise thy holy name, for thy Son Jesus Christ’s sake!
Then turned he his face, and seeing who was by him, said unto them, “Are ye so nigh? I thought ye had been further off.” Then Dr. Owen said, “We heard you speak to yourself, but what you said we know not.” He then (after his fashion smilingly) said, “I was praying to God.” The last words of his pangs were these, “I am faint; Lord have mercy upon me, and take my spirit.” And thus he yielded up the ghost,5 leaving a woeful kingdom behind unto his sister. Albeit he, in his will, had excluded his sister Mary from the succession of the crown, because of her corrupt religion; yet the plague which God had destined unto this sinful realm, could not so be avoided, but that she, being the elder daughter to king Henry, succeeded in possession of the crown: of whose dreadful and bloody regiment it remaineth now, consequently, to discourse.
This briefly may suffice to understand, that for all the writing, sending, and practising with the lady Mary, by the king and his council, and also by bishop Ridley, yet would she not be reclaimed from her own singular opinion, fixed upon custom, to give any indifferent hearing to the word and voice of verity. The which set will of the said lady Mary, both this young king, and also his father, king Henry before him, right well perceiving and considering, they were both much displeased against her: insomuch that not only her brother did utterly sequester her in his will, but also her own father, considering her inclination, conceived such heart against her, that for a great space, he did seclude her from the title of princess; yea and seemed so eagerly incensed against her, that he was fully purposed to proceed further with her (as it is reported), had not the intercession of Thomas Cranmer, the archbishop, reconciled the king again to favor and pardon his own daughter. For the better understanding whereof, by these her own letters copied out of her own handwriting, which I have to show, something may be perceived, and more, peradventure, may be guessed.
The words out of her own handwriting be these. And first her letter to king Henry her father here followeth.
A LETTER OF THE LADY MARY TO KING HENRY HER FATHER.
In my most humble wise I beseech your grace of your daily blessing. Pleaseth it the same to be advertised, that this morning my lord my chamberlain came and showed me, that he had received a letter from sir W. Paulet, comptroller of your house; the effect whereof was, that I should with all diligence remove unto the castle of Hertford. Whereupon I desired him to see the same letter, which he showed me: wherein was written, that the lady Mary, the king’s daughter, should remove to the place before said, leaving out in the same the name of princess. Which when I heard, I could not a little marvel, trusting verily that your grace was not privy to the same letter as concerning the leaving out of the name of princess; forasmuch as I doubt not in your goodness, but your grace doth take me for your lawful daughter, born in true matrimony.
Wherefore, if I should agree to the contrary, I should in my conscience run in the displeasure of God, which I hope assuredly your grace would not that I so should. And in all other things your grace shall have me always as humble and obedient a daughter and handmaid as ever was child to the father, which my duty bindeth me to; as knoweth our Lord, who have your grace in his most holy tuition, with much honor, and long life to his pleasure.
Written at your Manor of Beaulieu, the second day of October, By your humble daughter, Mary, Princess.
PROTESTATION OF THE LADY MARY TO CERTAIN LORDS SENT BY THE KING HER FATHER, WITH CERTAIN REQUESTS UNTO HER.
My lords, as touching my removing to Hatfield, I will obey his grace, as my duty is, or to any other place his grace will appoint me. But I protest before you and all others that be here present, that my conscience will in no wise suffer me to take any other than myself for the king’s lawful daughter, born in true matrimony, or princess; and that I will never willingly and wittingly say or do, whereby any person might take occasion to think that I agree to the contrary. Not of any ambition or proud mind, as God is my judge; but that, if I should say or do otherwise, I should, in my conscience, slander the deed of our mother holy church, and the pope, who is the judge in this matter, and none other; and also dishonor the king my father, the queen my mother, and falsely confess myself a bastard; which God defend that I should do, seeing the pope hath not so declared it by his sentence definitive; for to his judgment I submit me.
As you have heard some part already of the stout courage of the lady Mary toward her father, and also by her letters no less was declared toward king Edward her brother and others of his council, well may appear by the letters above specified between the king her brother and his council: so now let us infer somewhat, likewise, of the stout talk and demeanor of the said lady Mary toward Doctor Ridley bishop of London, who, gently coming to her of mere good will, had this communication with her, and she with him, as here followeth:
About the eighth of September, 1552, Dr. Ridley then bishop of London, lying at his house at Hadham in Hertfordshire, went to visit the lady Mary then lying at Hunsdon, two miles off; and was gently entertained of sir Thomas Wharton, and other her officers, till it was almost eleven of the clock; about which time the said lady Mary came forth into her chamber of presence, and then the said bishop there saluted her grace, and said, that he was come to do this duty to her grace. Then she thanked him for his pains, and, for a quarter of an hour, talked with him very pleasantly; and said, that she knew him in the court when he was chaplain to her father, and could well remember a sermon that he made before king Henry her father, at the marriage of my lady Clinton that now is, to sir Anthony Brown, etc.: and so dismissed him to dine with her officers.
After dinner was done, the bishop being called for by the said lady Mary, resorted again to her grace, between whom this communication was. First the bishop beginneth in manner as followeth: Bishop: — “Madam, I came not only to do my duty, to see your grace, but also to offer myself to preach before you on Sunday next, if it will please you to hear me.”
At this her countenance changed, and, after silence for a space, she answered thus: Mary: — “My lord, as for this last matter I pray you make the answer to it yourself.” Bishop: — “Madam, considering mine office and calling, I am bound in duty to make to your grace this offer, to preach before you.” Mary: — “Well, I pray you make the answer (as I have said) to this matter yourself; for you know the answer well enough. But if there be no remedy but I must make you answer, this shall be your answer: the door of the parish-church adjoining shall be open for you if you come, and ye may preach if you list; but neither I, nor any of mine, shall hear you.” Bishop: — “Madam, I trust you will not refuse God’s word.” Mary: — “I cannot tell what ye call God’s word: that is not God’s word now, that was God’s word in my father’s days.” Bishop: — “God’s word is all one in all times; but hath been better understood and practiced in some ages than in others.” Mary: — “You durst not, for your ears, have avouched that for God’s word in my father’s days, that now you do. And as for your new books, I thank God I never read any of them: I never did, nor ever will do.”
And after many bitter words against the form of religion then established, and against the government of the realm and the laws made in the young years of her brother (which, she said, she was not bound to obey till her brother came to perfect age, 6 and then, she affirmed, she would obey them), she asked the bishop whether he were one of the council. He answered, “No.” “You might well enough,” said she, “as the council goeth now-a-days.”
And so she concluded with these words: “My lord, for your gentleness to come and see me, I thank you; but for your offering to preach before me, I thank you never a whit.”
Then the said bishop was brought by sir Thomas Wharton to the place where they dined, and was desired to drink. And after he had drunk, he paused awhile, looking very sadly; and suddenly brake out into these words: “Surely I have done amiss.” “Why so?” quoth sir Thomas Wharton. “For I have drunk,” said he, “in that place where God’s word offered hath been refused: whereas, if I had remembered my duty, I ought to have departed immediately, and to have shaken off the dust of my shoes for a testimony against this house.” These words were by the said bishop spoken with such a vehemency, that some of the hearers afterwards confessed their hair to stand upright on their heads. This done, the said bishop departed, and so returned to his house. And thus, making an end of this ninth book, touching the story and reign of king Edward, and having also somewhat said before of the nature and disposition of the lady Mary, whereby the way may be prepared the better to the troubles of the next book following; we intend, the grace of God assisting us therein, now further to proceed in describing the acts and proceedings of the said lady Mary, coming now to be queen, and advanced, next after this godly king Edward, to the crown of this realm of England. GOTO NEXT CHAPTER - LIFE OF FOXE INDEX & SEARCH
|