ded against George Browne, MarginaliaGeorge Brown.these were counted very heynous and hereticall:MarginaliaAgainst adoratiō of the crosse. First, that he had said, that he knewe no cause why the Crosse should be worshipped, seeing that the same was an hurt and paine vnto our sauiour Christe in the tyme of his Passion, and not any ease or pleasure, alledging for example, that if he had had a frend hanged or drowned, he would euer after haue loued that gallowes, or water (by the which his frend dyed) rather worse for that, then better.MarginaliaAgainst immoderate riches of the popes clergy. An other obiection was, that he had erroneously, obstinately, & maliciously said (for so are their words) that the Churche was too riche.  

This matter, I may tel you touched somewhat the quicke, and therfore no maruell though they counted it erroneous and malicious: for take away their gain, and and farewel their religion. They also charged him to haue refused holy water to be caste about his chamber, and likewise to haue spoken against priestes, with other vaine matters.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaIohn Wikes. THe greatest matter wherwith they burdened Iohn Wikes, was that he had often and of long time kept companie with diuers persons suspected of heresie (as they termed them) and had receiued them into his house, and there dyd suffer and heare them sundry times reade erroneous & heretical bookes, cōtrary to the faith of the Romish church, and dyd also him selfe consent vnto their doctrine: and had many times secretly conueyed them from the taking of such as were appoynted to apprehend them.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaIoh. Southacke.
Rich Butler. &c.
Vide inferius. LIke as the greatest number of those before mentioned: so were also Iohn Southacke, Richarde Butler, Iohn Samme, William Kyng, Robert Durdant, and Henrye Woolman,MarginaliaAgainst the reall presence. especially charged with speaking wordes against the real presence of Christes body in the Sacrament of the Altar, and also against Images, and the rest of the seuen Sacramentes. Howbeit they burdened the last v. persons with the reading of certaine Englishe heretical bookes accounting most blasphemously the Gospel of Iesus Christ, written by the 4. Euangelists, to be of that number, as appeareth euidētly by the viij. article obiected by Tho. Benet Doctour of lawe, and Chauncelour and vicare general vnto Rich. Fitziames then B. of London, against the saide Rich. Butler. The very words of which article (for a more declaration of trueth) I haue thought good here to insert: which are these.MarginaliaReading of English bookes. Also we obiect to you, that diuers tymes, & especially vpon a certaine night, about the space of three yeares last past, in Robert Durdantes house of Yuer court neare vnto Stanes, you erroneously and damnably read in a great booke of heresie of the sayd Robert Durdants, al that same night, certaine chapters of the Euangelists in English, conteynyng in them diuers erroneous and damnable opinions and conclusions of heresie, in the presence of the sayd Robert Durdant, Iohn Butler, Robert Carder, Ienkin Butler, William King, and diuers other suspect persons of heresie then beyng present, and hearing your sayd erreneous lectours and opinions. MarginaliaOf these men see more hereafter in the table followyng. To the same effect and purpose tended the tenour of some of the Articles propounded i the other foure. Whereby (as also by others like before specified) we may easly iudge what reuerence they which yet wil be counted the true and only church of Christ, did beare to the word and Gospell of Christ: who shamed not to blaspheme the same with most horrible titles of erroneous and damnable opinions, and conclusions of heresie. But why should we maruel thereat, seeyng the holy Ghost in sundrye places of the Scripture doth declare, that in the latter daies there shoulde come such proud and cursed speakers, whiche shall speake lyes through hypocrisie, and haue their consciences marked with an hot yron? Let vs therefore nowe thanke our heauenly father for reuealing them vnto vs, & let vs also pray him, that of his free mercyes in his sonne Christ Iesus, he would (if it be to his glory) eyther turne and mollifie al such harts, or els (for the peace and quietnes of his churche) he would in his righteous iudgement take them from vs.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaRichard Fitziames byshop of London. About this tyme Richard Fitziames ended his lyfe.  

MarginaliaCutbart Tonstall Bishop of London. After whose death Cutbert Tunstal (afterwards Bishop of Durham) succeded in the sea and bishoprike of London: who soone vpon his first entrie into the roome, mynding to folowe rightly the footsteps of his predecessour, caused Edmund Spilman priest, Henry Chambers, Iohn Higgins, and Thomas Eglestone, to be apprehended, and so to be examined vpon sundrie like Articles, as before are expressed, and in the end, eyther for feare of his crueltie, and the rigour of deth, or els through hope of his flattering promises (such was their weaknesse)MarginaliaThe reall presēce denied. he compelled them to abiure and renounce their true professed fayth touching the holy Sacrament of Christes body and blood: which was, that Christs corporal body was not in the sacrament, but in heauen, and that the Sacrament was a figure of his body, and not the body it selfe.

[Back to Top]

MOreouer, about the same tyme there were certaine Ar ticles obiected against Iohn Hyg,  

aliâs Noke, aliâs Iohnson, by the sayd Bishops vicar general. Amongest whiche, were these:MarginaliaAgaynst a priest to haue two benefices. First, that he had affirmed, that it was as lawfull for a temporall man to haue two wiues at once, as for a priest to haue two benefices. Also that he had in hys custody a booke of the foure Euangelistes in English, and dyd often reade therein:MarginaliaTestimony touching M. Luther. and that he fauored the doctrines and opinions of Martin Luther, openly pronouncing that Luther had more learning in his litle finger, then al the doctours in England in their whole bodyes: and that all the priestes in the church were blind, and had led the people the wrong way. Likewise it was alleged against him, that he had denyed Purgatorie, and had sayde, that while he were alyue he would do as much for him selfe as he could, for after his death he thought that prayer and almes dedes could litle helpe him.

[Back to Top]

These and suche like matters were they, wherewith these poore and simple men and women were chiefly charged and as heynous heretiques excommunicated, emprisoned, and at last compelled to recant: and some of them in vtter shame and reproche (besides the ordinary bearingMarginaliaThe maner of popish penaunce of fagots before the Crosse in procession, or els at a Sermon) wer enioyned for penance (as they termed it) as wel to appeare once euery yeare before their Ordynarye, as also to weare the signe of a fagot painted vpon their sleeues or other part of their outward garment, and that during their lyues, or so often and long as it pleased their Ordinarye to appoynt. By whiche long rigorous and open punishing of them, they ment (as it should seme) vtterly to terrifie and keepe backe all others from the true knowledge of Iesus Christe and his Gospel. But the Lord be euermore praysed, what effect their wicked purposes therein haue taken, these our most lightsome dayes of Gods glorious Gospel do most ioyfully declare.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaThe troubles of Elene Heyer and Robart Barkeway THere were also troubled besides these, certaine others more simple and ignorant: who hauing but a very small smacke or taste of the trueth, dyd yet at the first (as it maye seeme) gladly consent vnto the same: but beyng apprehended, they quickly agayn yeelded, and therfore had onely assigned them for their penaunce, the bearing of a litle candle before the crosse, without any further open abiuring or recantyng. Amongest which I find two especially: the one, a woman called Elene Heyer, to whō it was obiected that shee had neither confessed her selfe vnto the priest, nor yet receiued the sacrament of the altar by the space of 4. yeres, and notwithstanding had yerely eaten flesh at Easter, and after, as wel as others that had receyued the same, contrarye to the vsuall maner and conuersation of all other Christian people.

[Back to Top]

The other was a man named Robert Berkeway who (besides most wicked blasphemies against God, whiche he vtterly denyed) was charged to haue spoken heinous wordes agaynst the Popes holy and blessed Martyr Thomas Becket, callyng him micher and thiefe, for that he wrought by craftes and imaginations.

Thus haue I (as briefly as I could) sommarely collected the principal Articles obiected agaynst these weake, infirme, and earthy vessels. Not mynding hereby to excuse or condemne them in these their fearfull falles and daungerous defecions:  

but leauyng them vnto the vnmeasurable riche mercyes of the Lord, I thought onely to make manifest the vnsaciable bloudy crueltie of the Popes kingdome, against the Gospel and true church of Christ, nothyng mitigating their enuious rage, no not against the very simple idiotes, and that sometyme in most friuolous and irreligious cases. But nowe leauyng to say any further herein, I wil (by Gods grace) go forthward with other somewhat more seryous matters.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaWil. Sweting Iohn Brewster Martyrs. IN searching and perusing of the Register, for the collection of the names and articles before recited, I finde that within the compasse of the same yeares, there were also some others, who after they had once shewed them selues as frayle and vnconstant as the rest (beyng either therwith pricked in conscience, or otherwise zelously ouercome with the manifest truth of Gods most sacred worde) became yet againe as earnest professours of Christ, as euer they were before, and for the same profession were the second time apprehended, examined, condemned, and in the ende were most cruelly burned. Of the which nomber were, William Swetyng, and Iohn Brewster, who were both burned together in Smithfield, the xviij. day of October in the yeare of our Lord. 1511.  

the chiefest case of religion alleged against them in their articles, was their fayth concerning the Sacrament of Christes body and bloud. Which because it differed from the absurde, grosse, and Caparniticall opinion of

[Back to Top]