Marginalia1554. Aprill.After which sentence of condemnation being awarded against them, they aunswered agayne euery one in their turne, in maner and effect of words, as foloweth, the Archbishop fyrst beginning thus. MarginaliaThe sentences of the Archb. and his fellowes after theyr sentence geuē.

From this your iudgement and sentence, I appeale to the iust iudgement of God almyghty, trusting to be present with hym in heauen, for whose presence in the Aultar I am thus condemned.

Although I be not of your company, yet doubt not I but my name is wrytten in an other place, whether this sentence wyl send vs soner, then we should by the course of nature haue come.

I thāke God most hartely, that he hath prolonged my lyfe to thys ende, that I may in thys case glorify God by that kynde of death.

MarginaliaWeston geueth sentēce against him selfe.If you go to heauen in this fayth, then wyll I neuer come thether, as I am thus perswaded.

After the sentence pronounced, MarginaliaThe Archbyshop and hys fellowprisoners separated.they were seperated one from the other, videlicet, the Archbishop was returned to Bocardo, D. Ridley was caried to the Shiriffes house, Maister Latimer to the Bailiffes.

On Saterday following they had a Masse with a generall Procession and great solemnitie. D. Cranmer was caused to beholde the procession out of Bocardo, D. Ridley out of the Sheriffes house. Latimer also being brought to see it, from the Bailiffes house, thought that he should haue gone to burning, and spake to one Augustine Cooper a Catchpole, to make a quick fire. But when he came to Karfox, and saw the matter, he ranne as fast as hys old bones would cary him, to one Spensers shop, and would not looke towardes it. Last of all, Doctor Weston caryed the Sacrament, & foure Doctors caried the Canipie ouer hym.

Immediatly after this sentence was giuen, D. Rydley writeth to the Prolocutor, in a maner as foloweth.

¶ Doct. Ridley to the Prolocutor.  

Commentary     Close

After adding a transitional sentence (textual variant 71), Foxe transposed Ridley's letter to Weston, which also protested the unfairness of the disputations, from after Ridley's disputation, to follow all the disputations. Foxe divided this letter into two parts (see textual transposition 18 and textual transposition 19). Between the two sections of the letter, Foxe interposed an account of Weston's having opened a letter which Cranmer had sent to Privy Council, his reading it and refusing to deliver it (textual variant 73). (This is based on material in Guildhall MS 9531/12, fol. 339r; a copy of this letter, in Matthew Parker's handwriting is Harley 422, fol. 46r-v). Foxe's insertion of this story in the letter gives the impression that there were two letters. The reason for this unusual editing is that Foxe apparently wanted the description of Weston's 'treachery' to precede Ridley's demand in the conclusion of his letter, that Weston exhibit this letter, as well as Ridley's written answers to the articles of disputation to Convocation. In this process, a few lines of the letter were (inadvertently?) omitted (see textual variant 72).

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaD. Ridleys letter to the Prolocutor.MAister Prolocutor, you remember, I am sure, how you promised me opēly in þ^e Scholes after my Protestatiō, that I should see how my aūsweres were there taken and written of the Notaries whom ye appointed, (me fateor neminē recusāte) to write what should be sayd, and to haue had licence for to haue added vnto them, or to haue altered them, as vpon more deliberation should haue semed me best. Ye graunted me also at the deliuery of my aunswere vnto your first propositiō, a copy of the same: MarginaliaPapistes haue small conscience in performing promises.these promises are not performed. If your sodeine departure be any part of the cause therof, yet, I pray you, remember that they may be performed: for performance of promises is to bee looked for at a righteous iudges handes. Now I send you here my aūsweres in writyng to your second and thyrd propositions, and do desire and require earnestly a copy of the same, and I shal by Gods grace procure the paines of the writer to be payd for and satsfied accordyngly. Maister Prolocutour, in the tyme of my aunsweryng in the Scholes, whē I would haue confirmed my sayinges with authorities and reasons, ye sayd then openly that I should haue tyme and place to say and bryng what soeuer I could another tyme, and the same your saying was then there confyrmed of other of the Commissioners: Yea and (I dare say) the audience also thought then that I should haue had an other day, to haue brought and said what I could for the declaration and confirmation of myne assertions. Now that this was not done, but so sodenly sentence geuen before the cause was perfectly heard, I cā not but maruaile. &c.

On Monday next ensuing MarginaliaAprill. 23.after these thynges done and past, being the. 23. of the sayd moneth of Apryll,  

Commentary     Close

After adding a transitional sentence (textual variant 71), Foxe transposed Ridley's letter to Weston, which also protested the unfairness of the disputations, from after Ridley's disputation, to follow all the disputations. Foxe divided this letter into two parts (see textual transposition 18 and textual transposition 19). Between the two sections of the letter, Foxe interposed an account of Weston's having opened a letter which Cranmer had sent to Privy Council, his reading it and refusing to deliver it (textual variant 73). (This is based on material in Guildhall MS 9531/12, fol. 339r; a copy of this letter, in Matthew Parker's handwriting is Harley 422, fol. 46r-v). Foxe's insertion of this story in the letter gives the impression that there were two letters. The reason for this unusual editing is that Foxe apparently wanted the description of Weston's 'treachery' to precede Ridley's demand in the conclusion of his letter, that Weston exhibit this letter, as well as Ridley's written answers to the articles of disputation to Convocation. In this process, a few lines of the letter were (inadvertently?) omitted (see textual variant 72).

[Back to Top]

way he opened the same, and seing the contents thereof, sent them backe agayne, refusing to cary them. &c. Likewyse Bishop Ridley, hearing of the Prolocutors going to London, writeth to him his letters, wherein he desireth hym to cary his aunsweres vp to certayne Bishops in London, the forme of which letters, first of D. Ridley, then of the Archbishop, and lastly, an other letter of D. Ridley to þ^e Archb. here in order foloweth.

¶ A letter of B. Ridley to the Prolocutor.  

Commentary     Close

After adding a transitional sentence (textual variant 71), Foxe transposed Ridley's letter to Weston, which also protested the unfairness of the disputations, from after Ridley's disputation, to follow all the disputations. Foxe divided this letter into two parts (see textual transposition 18 and textual transposition 19). Between the two sections of the letter, Foxe interposed an account of Weston's having opened a letter which Cranmer had sent to Privy Council, his reading it and refusing to deliver it (textual variant 73). (This is based on material in Guildhall MS 9531/12, fol. 339r; a copy of this letter, in Matthew Parker's handwriting is Harley 422, fol. 46r-v). Foxe's insertion of this story in the letter gives the impression that there were two letters. The reason for this unusual editing is that Foxe apparently wanted the description of Weston's 'treachery' to precede Ridley's demand in the conclusion of his letter, that Weston exhibit this letter, as well as Ridley's written answers to the articles of disputation to Convocation. In this process, a few lines of the letter were (inadvertently?) omitted (see textual variant 72).

[Back to Top]

MAister Prolocutor I desire you, and in gods name require you, that you truly bring forth and shew al myne aunswers, written and subscribed with myne own hand, vnto the higher house of the Cōuocation, and specially to my Lord Chauncellor, my Lords of Duresme, Ely, Worcester, Norwich, and Chichester, and also to shew and exhibite this my writing vnto them, which in these few lynes here I write vnto you: and that I dyd make this request vnto you by this my wryting, know ye that I dyd take witnes of them by whom I did send you this writing, and also of those which were then with them present, videlicet the two Bailiffes of Oxford, and of Maister Irish Alderman, then there called to be a wytnes.

By me Nicholas Ridley. 23. of Aprill
Anno. 1554.

¶ The copy of the Archbishop of Cant. letters to the Counsell sent by Doctour Weston, who refused to deliuer them.  

Commentary     Close

Foxe inserted the letter which Cranmer wrote and which Weston failed to deliver, together with a letter from Ridley to Cranmer (See textual variant 73). Cranmer's letter was first printed by Henry Bull in LM, pp. 16-17 and was presumably uncovered by Bull's research. (This would suggest that copies of the letter circulated among the Marian protestants, as Bull had no access to Privy Council records. A copy of the letter, made by Bull, is ECL MS 260, fol. 15r).

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaThe Archb. writeth to the Counsell.JN right humble wise sheweth vnto your honorable Lordshyps Thomas Cranmer late Archbishop of Canterbury, besechyng the same to bee a meanes for me vnto the Queenes hyghnes for her mercy and pardon. Some of you know by what meanes I was brought and trayned vnto the will of our late soueraigne Lord kyng Edward the vj. and what I spake agaynst the same: wherein I referre me to the reportes of your honours & worshyps. Furthermore this is to signifie vnto your Lordshyps, that vpon Monday, Tuesday, and Wedensday last paste, were open disputations here in Oxford agaynst me, M. Rydley, and M. Latymer, in three matters concernyng the Sacramēt: First of the reall presence, secondly of transubstantiation, & thyrdly of þ^e sacrifice of the Masse: vpon Monday agaynst me, vppon Tuesday agaynst Doct. Rydley, and vpon Wedensday agaynst M. Latymer. How the other two were ordered I know not, for we were seperated, so that none of vs knoweth what the other sayd, nor how they were ordered. But as concernyng my selfe I can reporte. Doct. Chadsey was appoynted to dispute agaynst me, but the disputation was so confused, that I neuer knew the like, euery man bringyng forth what hym lyked without order, and such hast was made, MarginaliaThe Archb. not suffered to aunswere fully to any argument.that no aunswere could be suffered to be takē fully to any argument before an other brought a new argument: and in such waighty matters the disputatiō must nedes be ended in one day, which cā scantly well be ended in three monethes. And when we had aunswered them, they would not appoint vs one day to bryng forth our proufes, that they might aunswere vs, beyng required by me thereunto, whereas I my selfe haue more to say then can be well discussed, as I suppose, in xx. dayes. The meanes to resolue the truth had bene to haue suffered vs to aunswere fully to all that they could say, and then they agayn to aūswere vs fully to all that we cā say. But why they would not aūswere vs, what other cause can there be, but that either they feared their matter, that they were not able to aunswere vs, or els for some consideration they made such hast, not to seeke the truth, but to condemne vs, MarginaliaHast made in condemning the Archb. and hys fellowes.that it must be done in post hast before the matters could bee throughly heard: for in all hast we were al three condemned of heresie. Thus much I thought good to signifie vnto your Lordshyps, that you may know the indifferent handlyng of matters, leauyng the iudgement therof vnto your wisedomes. And I besech your Lordshyps to remember me a poore prisoner vnto the Queenes Maiestie, and I shall pray, as I do dayly, vnto God for the long preseruation of your good Lordshyps in all godlynes and felicitie. Aprill. 23.

¶ Doctour Rydley to the Archbyshop of Canterbury.  

Commentary     Close

The source for the letter from Ridley to Cranmer is problematic; this letter is not in the Rerum, 1563 or in LM. A possible source was Cranmer's family; Thomas Norton, Cranmer's son-in-law, was Foxe's friend.

MarginaliaBish. Ridley writeth to the Archbyshop.J Wishe ye might haue sene these myne aunsweres before I had deliuered them, that ye might haue correc-