As with the sections that precede it, this one is strong on narrative, and many of the glosses reflect this (e.g., 'M. Rogers Chaplayne to the Marchaunt aduenturers at Antwerpe'; 'M. Rogers brought to the Gospell by M. W. Tindale, & M. Couerdale'; 'M. Rogers goeth to Wittenberge'; 'M. Rogers returneth from Saxonie into England in K. Edwards tyme'). In a departure from the usual practices in the 1563 edition, the names of speakers are placed in the margin during the portions of the text concerned with Rogers' examinations. The later editions insert the names into the text, reflecting their need to make space available for other forms of comment. The 1563 layout here is further evidence that Foxe had not yet fully worked out a set of conventions governing his annotations at this stage: 1563 was more experimental and irregular than later editions (but see the beginning of Book X for evidence which points another way).

Several changes after 1563 show Foxe sharpening his attacks on the papists in later years. For example, the gloss 'The catholike church' is replaced by the polemically more powerful 'No head of the Catholicke Church, but Christ' from 1570; other examples are 'The papistes ar loth to abide trial' and 'A fayre pretense to excuse your ignorance'; 'Catholike what yt signifieth' and 'The Popes church proued not to be Catholicke'; 'Mariage of priestes' and 'Lawfulnes of priestes mariage'. These examples suggest that Foxe's more comprehensive and careful annotating from 1570 onwards in part grew out of a desire to make the most of the opportunities it afforded for making polemic points. One example shows an interesting shift in tone after 1563: the more vindictive and demotic 'Here my Lorde lacked but an onion to make the teares com oute' comment of 1563 became 'These murderers pretend a sorrow of hart and yet they will not cease from murdering', which makes the same point, but more directly. Thus, Foxe after 1563 seems to have allowed more space for attacking the opposition, but did so in a more careful manner.

His attacks are often (following Rogers) procedural ('Steph Gardiner refused to haue the truth to be tryed by learning'; 'Gardiner wil compel to that, which he cānot teach to be true'; 'M. Rogers could not be heard to speake'; 'Confused talke without order'; 'M. Rogers imprisoned against all law and right'; 'M. Rogers punished before any law was broken'), and they also point out the cruelty ('The Pope a destroyer of maryage and maynteyner of whoredome'; 'M. Rogers could not be suffered of Boner to speake to his wife before his burning'), ignorance ('A fayre pretense to excuse your ignorance') and vice ('The Bishop of Winchester iudgeth M. Rogers, by his owne disease') of the persecutors, while also joining Rogers in capitalising on the past opinions and allegiances of the persecutors ('The Bishops contrary to theyr former doinges and wrytinges'; 'The Byshops neyther will stand by theyr assertion, nor yet will suffer other men so to doe'). The last of these glosses neatly combines an attack on the hypocrisy of the bishops who will not hold to their old opinion with criticism of their cruelty for persecuting Rogers for doing precisely that.

Providing contrast to the failings of the papists, the glosses emphasise Rogers' pious concern for his family ('M. Rogers carefull prayer for his wife and children'), his generosity ('Prouision by M. Rogers for the prisoners') and his steadfastness ('M. Rogers refuseth his pardon'). Two pairs of glosses contrast protestant virtue and papist vice ('M. Gosnold laboured for M. Rogers' and 'Great mercy of Winchest. no lesse then the Foxe hath to the chickenes, or the Wolfe to suck the bloud of Lambes'; 'The godly spirite of M. Rogers' and 'Marke here the spirite of this prelate'). A series of glosses concerned with Rogers' prophecies appears at the end of the section: 'M. Rogers seemeth to prophesie here of England, and that truely' notes that Rogers 'seemeth' to predict the defeat of the papists, and this gloss is followed by others predicting the return of the exiles and the gospel, and concerning Rogers' attitude to the ministry and 'Priestes cappes'. The 'seemeth' perhaps functions as a device to remind the attentive reader that the threat of antichrist is never entirely subdued. This is especially significant given the glosses which follow on the provision of preachers and caps: these glosses would have been read in the shadow of the fear of antichrist. In line with established practice, 1583 has 'read afore' where 1570 and 1576 give accurate references.

On the identification of John Rogers as Thomas Matthew, see Mozley (1953), pp. 131 and 136-41.

I.e., German

On this period of Rogers's life, see Mozley (1953), pp. 131-34.

Curiously, Foxe has not mentioned that Rogers was the vicar of St Sepulchre, a wealthy and important London living.