MarginaliaAn. 1553.tiks (or for what other cause God knoweth) that he sought to ryd him selfe out of this life by wounding hym selfe with a knife: and afterward was contented to say as they willed hym: wherupon he was discharged, but after that he neuer rested tyll he had drowned hym selfe in a riuer halfe a myle from his house in Kent.  

Commentary     Close

The material on the repeal of the Henrician and Edwardian religious statutes and the story of Judge Hales is taken entirely from Crowley's chronicle (cf. Crowley, Epitome, sig. Ffff2r with 1563, p. 905; 1570, p. 1571; 1576, p. 1339-40; 1583, p. 1410).

Commentary     Close

Foxe would later (in Book 11) repeat the story of Hales at greater length, drawing upon other sources.

MarginaliaA Conuocation begonne.During the tyme of this parlament, the Clergie likwise after their wonted maner, had a conuocation, with a disputation also appoynted by the Queenes commaundement, at Paules church in London the same time, which was about the. xviij. of Octob. In the which Conuocation, first M. Iohn Harpsfield Bacheler of Diuinitie, made a sermō ad Clerum, the. xvi. of Octob. After the sermō done, it was assigned by the bishops, that they of the Clergy house for auoyding confusion of wordes, should chuse them a Prolocutor. To the which roume & office by common assent was named doctor Weston Deane of Westminster, and presented to the Bishops, with an oration of M. Pye Deane of Chichester, and also of M. Wymbysley Archdeacon of London. MarginaliaOrations of M. Pie and M. Wymsley, of Doct. Weston and of B. Boner in the conuocation house.Which Doctor Weston beyng chosen and brought vnto the Bishops, made his gratulatory Oration to the house, with the answeare againe of Bishop Boner.

After these thinges thus sped in the Conuocation house, they proceeded next to the disputation appoynted, as is abouesaid, by the Queenes commaundement, about the matter of the sacrament. Which disputation continued sixe dayes. Wherein Doctor Weston was chiefe on the Popes part, who behaued hym selfe outragiously in tauntyng and checking. In conclusion, such as disputed on the contrary part were driuen some to flee, some to deny, and some to dy, though to the most mens iudgemēts that heard the disputation, they had the vpper hand, as here may appeare by the report of the sayd disputation, the copie wherof we thought here to annexe, as foloweth.

¶ The true report of the disputation had and begon in the Conuocation house at London, the eighteenth of October. Ann. 1553.  

Commentary     Close

Block 6: The Dispute in Convocation: 1553

In the 1570 and subsequent editions, Foxe replaced a short notice about the 1553 Convocation with a more detailed account of its commencement (see textual variant 10 and textual variant 11). The short notice in the 1563 edition was reprinted entirely from Crowley's chronicle (see Crowley, Epitome, sig. Ffff2r). Up to and including the 1563 edition, all the information Foxe had about the Convocation came from Crowley's brief description and, of course, Philpot's account of it; for the 1570 edition he clearly had consulted some records of it.

[Back to Top]

There is a complete version of Philpot's account of the 1553 Convocation in Rerum, pp. 215-30. The version in the 1563 edition is a reprinting of John Philpot, The trew report of the dysputacyon had and begonne in the convocacyon hows at London the XVIII daye of Octobre MDLIIII, (Emden, 1554), STC 19890. In fact, in the 1563 edition, Foxe reprinted the title of Philpot's book (including its erroneous date of 1554) as the heading of his account (1563, p. 906). In subsequent editions Foxe corrected the date to 1553. In the 1570 edition, Foxe made both stylistic and substantive changes to Philpot's text; the most important of these will be discussed below. For all practical purposes, this text remained unchanged in succeeding editions.

[Back to Top]

In the edition of 1570, Foxe recast the arguments presented in this Convocation into syllogisms. Moreover, on several occasions, Foxe went beyond this to re-word or even change Philpot's arguments.

Commentary on the Glosses     Close

The True Report

Foxe capitalises on Moreman's mistakes in this section, as with the glosses 'Moreman affirmeth that Christ did eate his owne body' and 'Moreman denieth the Sacrament to haue a promise of remission of sinnes annexed vnto it'. Moreman is perhaps meant to be thought of as arrogant as well as stupid, as is suggested by the formulation ('Moremans aunswere to S. Paul'): this formulation is sometimes used in later disputations to describe protestant responses to patristic authors, but never scriptural ones: its use here suggests presumptuousness.

[Back to Top]

The term 'shift' is very often used to describe the intellectual moves of the papists ('Moremans shift is ouer throwen' and 'Philpots replication to Moremans shift'; 'Moreman desireth a day to imagine some crafty shift', 'M. Watson for a bare shift putteth the fault in the Printer', 'Watson is driuē to a shamefull shift, to deny the author when he cannot aunswer'). Many of the references in this section can be found in all editions, reflecting the relatively lively state of the 1563 margin for this section. As with later disputations, there are procedural complaints, such as 'Weston woulde know whether they were sufficiently answered, when he and his had answered no argument'; see also, 'D. Weston contrary to his owne wordes' (all editions), 'Pye and westō roūd together' (1563 only). Also highlighted are the threatening and bullying of Philpot, as when he was commanded to be silent and threatened with prison ('Philpot is commaunded to silēce note this geare' and 'Philpot is threatened to prison. A good solutiō for all his arguments')(1563); see also 'Weston is offended. Philpots replycation aunswered by commaunding him to silence' (all editions). Also interesting in this context is the gloss 'Weston rayleth against Philpot, to be a madde man': Weston is guilty of that which he sees in Philpot, as suggested by the term 'rayleth'. An example running counter to trends observed elsewhere is the use of the term 'alleaged' by a protestant ('The wordes of Theodoretus alleaged').

[Back to Top]

A great many of the glosses simply point out who is speaking. Perhaps because the text covers the material more briefly than is the case for the Oxford disputations, the glosses do not consider the issues in quite the depth that occurs later, nor do they have as many syllogisms or contentious theological or patristic questions to wrestle with or point out. A gloss highlighting Philpot's intention to use plain English ('Philpot speaketh playne Englysh') was dropped after 1563.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaOctober. 18.FIrst vpon wednesday, beyng the. xxiij. day of October at after noone, MarginaliaD. Weston Prolocutor agaynst the booke of Catechisme set forth in King Edwardes tyme.master Weston the Prolocutor certified the house, that it was the Queenes pleasure, that the company of the same house, being learned men, assembled, should debate of matters of Religion, and constitute lawes therof, which her grace and the parlament would ratifie. And for that (said he) there is a booke of late set forth, called the Catechisme (which he shewed forth) bearing the name of this honorable Synode, & yet put forth without your consents, as I haue learned, being a booke very pestiferous, and full of heresies, and likewise a booke of common prayer, very abominable (as it pleased hym to terme it) I thought it therfore best, first to begynne with the articles of the Catechisme, concernyng the sacrament of the aultar, to confirme þ^e natural presēce of Christ in þ^e same, & also trāsubstātiation: Wherfore (said he) it shal be lawfull on Fryday next ensuyng for all men freely to speake their conscience in these matters, that al doubtes may be remoued, and they fully satisfied therin.

MarginaliaOctober 20. Two billes exhibited in the Conuocation house by the Prolocutor.The fryday cōmyng being the. xx. of Octob. when men had thought they should haue entred disputation of the questions proposed, the Prolocutor exhibited two seueral byls vnto the house: the one for the natural presence of Christ in the sacrament of the aultar, the other concerning the Catechisme, that it was not of that houses agreemēt set forth, & that they dyd not agree therunto: requiryng al them to subscribe to the same, as he hym selfe had done. Wherunto the whole house dyd immediatly assent, except sixe,MarginaliaM. Phillips. M. Haddon. M. Philpot. M. Cheyny. M. Elmar. and one other refused to subscribe to the billes. which were the Deane of Rochester, the Deane of Exeter, the Archedeacō of Winchester, the Archdeacō of Hertford, the Archdeacon of Stow, and one other. And while the rest were about to subscribe these two articles, Iohn Philpot stood vp and spake first cōcernyng the article of the Catechisme, that he thought they wer deceyued in the title of the Cate-

chisme,MarginaliaThe boke of the Catechisme defended by . M. Iohn Philpot. in that it beareth the title of the Synode of London last before this, although many of them which then were present, wer neuer made priuy therof in settyng it forth, for that this house had graūted the authority to make ecclesiasticall lawes vnto certayne persons to be appoynted by the kynges maiesty, & what soeuer ecclesiasticall lawes they or the most part of them dyd set forth, accordyng to a statute in that behalfe prouided, it might be wel sayd to be done in the Synode of London, although such as be of this house now had no notice thereof before the promulgation. And in this poynt he thought he setter forth thereof nothyng to haue sclaundered the house, as they by their subscription went about to perswade the world, since they had our Synodall authoritie vnto them committed, to make such Spirituall lawes as they thought conuenient and necessary.

And moreouer he said, as concernyng the article of the naturall presence in the sacrament,MarginaliaAgaynst the article of naturall presence. that it was against reason & order of learnyng, & also very preiudicial to the truth, that men should be moued to subscribe before the matter were thorowly examined and discussed. But when he saw that allegation might might take no place, being as a man astonied at the multitude of so many learned men as there were of purpose gathered together to mainteyne olde traditions more thē the truth of Gods holy word, he made his request vnto the Prolocutor, MarginaliaM. Philpots request to the Prolocutor.that where as there wer so many ancient learned men present on that side, as in the Realme the like againe were not to be foūd in such nūber, & þ^t on þ^e other side of them that had not subscribed, were not past. v. or vj. both in age and learnyng farre inferior vnto them: therfore, that equalitie might be had in this disputation, he desired that the Prolocutor would be a meane vnto the Lordes, that some of those that were learned and setters forth of the same Catechisme might be brought into the house to shew their learnyng that moued them to set forth the same, MarginaliaRequest to haue Doct. Ridley and M. Rogers at the disputation.and that doctor Ridley and M. Rogers with two or three moe might be licenced to be present at this disputation, and to be associate with them.

This request was thought reasonable, and was proposed vnto the Bishops: who made this answeare, MarginaliaAunswere of the byshops vnto the request.that it was not in them to call such persons vnto our house, since some of them were prisoners. But they sayd, they would be petitioners in this behalfe vnto the Counsayle, and in case any were absent that ought to be of the house, they wylled them to be taken in vnto them, if they listed. After this they myndyng to haue entred into disputation, there came a Gentleman as messenger from the Lorde great master,  

Commentary     Close

Philpot states that a messenger came to Convocation on 20 October 1563 from the 'lord gret master' (Trew report, sig. A7r) and this is repeated in every edition of the Actes and Monuments (1563, p. 906; 1570, p. 1572; 1576, p. 1340; and 1583, p. 1411). In the Rerum the official's title is given as 'Domine magni oeconomi', but, more helpfully, a marginal note reads 'Is est Comes Arundellus, qui ad nobilitatis antiquiss. ornamenta, adiecit etiam eruditionem non vulgarem' (Rerum, p. 216). This not only identifies the office of 'lord gret master' (it is Lord High Steward, the Earl of Arundel's hereditary office) but it also confirms that Foxe did not even consult the Rerum, much less translate it, when printing Philpot's account of the Convocation for the 1563 edition.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaThe third Session.. October. 23.Vpon Monday the. xiij. of October, at the tyme appoynted, in the presence of many Earles, Lordes, Knights, Gentlemen, and diuers other of the Court and of the citie also, the Prolocutor made a protestation, that they of the house had appoynted this disputation, not to call the truth into doubt, to the which they had already al subscribed, sauyng fiue or sixe, but that those gaynsayers might be resolued of their argumentes in the which they stoode, as it shall appeare vnto you, not doubtyng but they wyll also condescend vnto vs.

Then he demaunded of master Haddon, whether he woulde reason against the questions proposed, or no. To whom he made answeare, MarginaliaM. Haddon and M. Elmar refuse to aunswere, except their request were graunted.that he had certified hym before by writing, that he would not, since the request of such learned men as were demaunded to be assistent with them, would not be graunted. Maister Elmar likewise was asked. Who made þ^e Prolocutor the like answeare, addyng moreouer this, that they had done too much preiudice alreadye to the truth, to subscribe before the matter was discussed: and litle or nothyng it might auayle to reason for the truth, since all they were now determined to the contrarye. After this he demaunded of MarginaliaM. Cheyny then Archdeacon of Herford now B. of Glocester.Master Cheyney, whom the Prolocutor sayde allowed the presence with them, but he denyed the transubstantiation by the meanes of certayne authorities vpon the which he standeth, and desireth to be resolued, as you shall heare whether he wyll propose his doubtes concernyng Transubstantiation, or no. Yea, quoth he, I would gladly my doubtes to be resolued which moue me not to beleue Transubstantiation.

MarginaliaM. Cheynies doubtes about transubstantiation.The first is out of S. Paul to the Corinthians, who speakyng of the sacrament of the bodye & bloud of Christ, calleth it oft tymes bread after the consecration.

The seconde is out of Origene, who speakyng of this sacrament, sayth that the material part therof goeth downe to the excrementes.