A city and county of itself, between the counties of Gloucester and Somerset. 34 miles south-west by south from Gloucester, 12 miles north-west from Bath. Bristol is the seat of a diocese, established in 1542. The city comprises the parishes of All Saints, St. Augustine, Christ Church, St. Owen, St. John Baptist, St. Leonard, St. Mary le Port, St. Mary Redcliffe, St. Michael, St. Nicholas, St. Peter, St. Werburgh, St. Stephen and St. Thomas. Also the Temple parish, and parts of St. James, St. Paul, St. Philip and St. Jacob. All are within the peculiar jurisdiction of the bishop. Christ Church, St. John Baptist, St. Mary le Port, St. Michael, St. Peter, St. Stephen and St. Werburgh are discharged rectories. St. Leonard, St. Mary Redcliffe, St. Nicholas, The Temple, St. Philip and St. Jacob are discharged vicarages. St. James and St. Thomas are perpetual curacies, the latter annexed to the vicarage of Bedminster, Archdeaconry of Bath, Diocese of Bath and Wells.[Back to Top]
English information from Samuel Lewis, A Topographical Dictionary of England (S. Lewis & Co: London, 1831)
Scottish information from Samuel Lewis, A Topographical Dictionary of Scotland (S. Lewis & Co: London, 1846)
Welsh information taken from Samuel Lewis, A Topographical Dictionary of Wales(Lewis & Co: London, 1840)
The reason for the use of these works of reference is that they present the jurisdictional and ecclesiastical position as it was before the major Victorian changes. The descriptions therefore approximate to those applying in the sixteenth century, after the major changes of 1535-42. Except for the physical locations, which have not changed, the reader should not therefore take these references as being accurate in the twenty-first century.[Back to Top]
Coordinates: 48° 52' 0" N, 2° 19' 59" E
Capital of France; cathedral city; university town
This Introduction to Book Six is noteworthy for two things. The first is a declaration of Foxe's chronological organization for the Acts and Monuments. Foxe probably always intended the Reformation period would require several books but it might well be that the decision to break the material from Wiclif to Luther into separate books was originally unintended and made suddenly. The other notable item is Foxe's declaration that the major purposes of the material in Book Six is to demonstrate the Antichrist's continuous persecution of the True Church and the existence of the True Church and its members in the centuries before Luther.[Back to Top]
Thomas S. Freeman
University of Sheffield
ACcording to the fiue sondry diuersities and alterations of the Churche, so haue I deuided hetherto the order of thys presente Church story into fiue principall partes, euery part containing 300. yeares. So that nowe comming to the laste 300. yeares, that is, to the last times of the Church, counting from the time of Wickleffe: For as muche as in the compasse of the sayd last 300 yeres, are contained great troubles and perturbations of the Church, with the meruailous reformation of the same through the wonderous operation of the almighty, all which things cannot be comprehended in one booke, I haue therefore disposed the sayd latter 30. yeares, into diuers bookes, beginning nowe with the sixt booke, at the raigne of king Henry the vj. In which booke, besides the greeuous and sundry persecutions raised vp by Antichrist, to be noted, here in is also to be obserued, that where as it hath of long time bene receyued and thought of the common people, that this religion now generally vsed, hath sprong vp and risen but of late, euen by the space (as many do thinke) of 20. or 30. yeares, it may now manifestly appeare, not onely by the Acts and Monuments heretofore passed, but also by the hystories here after following, howe this profession of Christes religion hath bene spread abroade in Englande of olde and auncient time, not onely from the space of these 200. late yeares, from the time of Wyckleffe, but hathe continually from time to time sparkled abroade, although the flames thereof haue neuer so perfectly burst out, as they haue done within these hundred yeares and more: As by these hystories here collected & gathered out of Registers, especially of the Diocesse of Norwich, shall manifestly appeare: wherein may be seene what men, and how many both men and women within the sayde Diocesse of Norwich, haue bene, which haue defended the same cause of doctrine, which now is receiued by vs in the Church. Which persones althoughe then they were not so strongly armed in their cause and quarel, as of late yeres they haue bene, yet were they warriours in Christes churche, and fought for their power, in the same cause. And although they gaue backe through tyrannie, yet iudge thou the best good Reader, and referre the cause therof to God, who reuealeth all things according to his determined will and appoynted time.[Back to Top]
MarginaliaKing Henry 6.THis yong prince being vnder the age of one yeare, after the death of his father, succeeded in his reigne and kingdom of England, Anno 1422. MarginaliaAnno. 1422. and in the 8. yeare was crowned at Westminster: and the 2. yeare after was crowned also at Paris, Henry bishop of Winchester, Cardinall being present at them both, MarginaliaEx Scala mundi. & raigned 38. yeres, and then was deposed by Edwarde the 4. as heere after (Christ willing) shall be declared in his time. In the firste yeare of his raigne
In the Commentarii (fos. 82r-83r) and then the Rerum (p. 72), there is a brief account of William White, a Lollard leader in the diocese of Norwich. This account was taken word-for-word from a note John Bale made in the Fasciculus Zizanniorum (Bodley MS e Musaeo 86, fos. 63r and 98r-101r). In the 1563 edition, this account was replaced with material drawn from a Norwich diocese court book, covering a series of heresy trials that took place in 1428-31 Much of this court book survives as Westminster Diocesan Archives MS B.2. (This manuscript has been printed as Norwich Heresy Trials 1428-31, ed. Norman P. Tanner, Camden Society Fourth Series 20 ). The contents of this volume are now out of order, indicating that it has been unbound at some point, probably when Foxe used it. When the volume was unbound, material was apparently lost as Foxe records examinations for which material no longer survives: those of John Florence, Richard Belward, John Goddesel, Hugh Pye, John Exeter, Iacolet Germaine, the six Lollards in Bungay, Thomas Pie, John Mendham, John Beverley, Nicholas of Eye and the depositions of William Wright are no longer extant. In the 1563 edition, Foxe also added a description of William White's recantation taken from John Bale's Catalogus (pp. 564-5) and a description of White's execution that is clearly drawn from oral tradition. Finally Foxe 's account of Richard Howden was printed in the Commentarii (fo. 83r) and the Rerum (p. 72) and reprinted in all editions of the Acts and Monuments without change. It was drawn from a biographical note on Howden wriiten by Bale in the Fasciculi Zizaniorum (Bodley MS e Musaeo 86, fo, 63r). The 1563 account was reprinted without change, exception for the deletion of Latin versions of some documents, in subsequent editions. Foxe chose to print this material in such detail because it provided a convincing answer to the Catholic challenge of where was the Protestant Church before Luther. Yet, from Foxe's point of view, there were drawbacks to reprinting these records. For one thing, Foxe was clearly troubled by the number of Lollard abjurations and tried to explain this away by comparing the Norwich Lollards to 'new trained soldiours in gods field'. Foxe was even less comfortable with some of the views expressed by these Lollards. He 'explained' that statements by the Norwich Lollards denying that baptism was a sacrament, that tithes might lawfully be witheld from wicked priests and that marriages need not be celebrated in church, were really lies placed by the notaries recording the examinations. Although this disclaimer would seem to indicate that Foxe edited these records with a relatively light hand - he could have removed the offending passages rather than disavowing them - there are still examples of his rewriting the text. For example, Foxe has Margery Baxter describe William White as a good and holy man; what she actually said was that he was a 'magnus sanctus in celo' [a great saint in heaven] (Norwich heresy Trials, p. 47).[Back to Top]
Thomas S. Freeman
University of Sheffield
MarginaliaThree articles first obiected to W. Taylour.First, that whosoeuer hangeth any scripture about his necke, taketh away the honor due onely to God, & geueth it to the Deuill.
Secondly, that no humaine persone is to be worshipped, but onely God is to be adored.
Thirdly, that the Saints are not to be worshipped nor inuocated.
Vpon these Articles the sayde William Tailour being examined, denied that he did preache or hold them in way of defending them, but only did commune and talke vpon the same, especially vpon the second and third article, only in way of reasoning, and for argument sake. And to iustify his opiniō to be true in that which he did hold, he brought out of his bosome a paper or libell wrytten, wherein were contained certaine Articles, wyth the testimonies of the Doctours alleaged, and exhibited the same vnto the archbishop. Who then being bidde to stande aside, the Archbyshop consulting together with the byshops and other prelates, what was to be done in the matter, deliuered the wrytings vnto M. Iohn Castle, and Iohn Kikinghale, the two vicechauncelors of Oxforde and Cambridge, and to Iohn Langdon monke of Canterbury. Who aduising with themselues, and with outher deuines, about the Articles and allegations, on the Monday following, presented the sayde Articles of William Tailour, to the Archbishop and Prelates, as erroneous and hereticall. Wherevppon William Tailour being called before them, in conclusion was contented to reuoke the same, and for hys penaunce was by them condemned to perpetuall prison.[Back to Top]
Notwithstanding, through fauour they were contented, that he should be released from his carceral indurance, in case hee woulde putte in sufficient surety in the kinges Chancerye, and sweare that he shall neuer holde or fauour any such opinions hereafter. And thus the sayde William Tailour apoynted to appeare the next Wednesday at Lambeth before the Archbishoppe, MarginaliaThe forme of canonical absolution in the church vsed against thē that were excommunicate.to take his absolution from his long excommunication during þe time from Thomas Arundell, appeared againe before him, where he laying a side his Arunlousa, that is: his cloke, his cap, and stripped vnto hys doublet, kneeled at the feete of the Archbyshop. Who then standing vp, and hauing a rodde in hys hande, began the Psalme Misere. &c. hys chaplaines aunswering the second verse. After that was sayde, the Collect, Deus cui proprium. &c. with certaine other prayers. And so taking an oth of him, the Archbishop committed him to the custodie of the Byshop of Worcester, to whome power and authority was permitted to release him, vpon the conditions aforesaide. And thus was William Tailour, for that time absolued, being enioyned notwythstanding to appeare at the next conuocation whēsoeuer it shuld be, before the said Archbishop or his successour that should follow him.[Back to Top]
In the meane time, while William Tailour was thus in the custody of the Bishop of Worcester, there passed certaine wrytings betweene hym, and one Thomas Smith priest at Bristowe, in the which wrytings William Tailour replied against þe sayd Thomas, concerning the question of worshipping Saints. Vpon the occasion of which reply, being brought to the hands of the byshop of Worcester, William Tailour began a newe to be troubled, & was broughte againe before the publicke conuocation of the cleargy, by the said bishop of Worcester, to aunswere vnto his wrytings. This was an. 1422. the 11. day of Februarie. Vnto the which conuocation the sayd William being presented, his wrytings were read to him, which he woulde not, nor could not deny to be of his owne hand wryting.[Back to Top]
The tenour and effect of whose wryting onely tended to prooue, that euery petition and prayer for any supernaturall gift, ought to be directed to God alone, & to no creature. MarginaliaThe opinion of Wil. Taylour cōcerning worshipping of Saintes.All be it in this his wryting he did not vtterly deny that it was not lawfull in no respecte to pray to Saintes, (and bringeth for the same Thomas Aquine) but onely in respect of that worship, whych is called Cultus latriæ: MarginaliaCultus latriæ, this is, worship which is onely due to God. And further so prosecuteth his minde herein, that he semeth little or nothing to differ from the superstition of the papists: as most plainely appeareth by his owne wordes, saying: Numquam tamen negaui, aut negare intendo, merita aut sanctorum suffragia tam beatorum, quam viantium, tam viuis, quam mortuis ad hoc dispositis, quantum possunt, suffragari, vel proficere, quia hoc est elicibile ex Scriptura, quæ non fallit, & ex consona ratione. &c. And moreouer hee inferreth the example of Moses, who prayed vnto God, alleadging the merites of[Back to Top]