The conclusion to Ridley's account of his disputation, addressed to the reader, in which the bishop complained that promises which were made to him by Weston (that Ridley be allowed to examine the official records of the disputation, and that he be allowed to amend the record of his answers) were broken, was only printed in the 1563 edition (see textual variant 62; this conclusion was also printed in LM, pp. 112-13). This was probably because Foxe would go into this issue in more detail later in the 1570 edition.[Back to Top]
KNow (gentle Reader) that maister Prolocutour did promise me in the scholes, in the disputations, publikely, that I shoulde see myne aunsweres, howe they were collected and gathered of the Notaries, and that I shuld haue licence to adde, or diminyshe, to alter or chaunge afterwarde as I shoulde thinke beste would make for me to the answering of the propositiōs. He promised moreouer publikely that I shoulde haue bothe time and place for me to bring in frankely, all that I could for the confirmation of myne aunsweres. Nowe when he had promised all these thinges opēly in the hearing of the other Cōmissioners, & of the whole vniuersitie of Oxford (yet good Reader marke this) that in very deede he perfourmed nothing of all that he promised. what faithe then shall a man looke to finde at suche iudges handes in the secrete misteries of God, which in their promises so openly made, and so duely dette (I wil not speake of the witnes of the matter) ar found to be so faithles both to God and man. Well I wyll leaue it to the iudgement of the wyse.[Back to Top]
And nowe for that is left for vs to doo, let vs praye that God woulde haue mercie on his churche of England, that yet once, when it shal be his good pleasure, it may clearly see and gredely embrace in the face of Iesus Christe the will of the heauenly father, and that of his infinite mercy, he woulde either turne to him the raging and rauening wolues, and moste subtill seducers of his people, whiche are by them altogether spoyled and bewitched, either that of his moste righteous iudgement he woulde driue these faithles feedours from his flock, that they may no more be able to trouble and scatter abrode Christes sheepe from their shepeheard, and that spedely: Amen, Amen. And let euerye one that hath the spiritie (as S. Iohn sayeth) say Amen. Yet further knowe thou that when maister Prolocutor did put furthe three propositions, he did commaunde vs to aunswere particularly to them al. After our aunsweres, neither he, nor his fellowes did euer enter into any disputation of any one of them, then only of the first. Yea, when that he had asked vs after disputations of the first (as ye haue hearde for my part) whether we woulde subscribe to the whole, in such sort, forme, & wordes as ther are set fourth, without further disputation, (Which thyng we denied) by and by he gaue sentence against vs all, that is against me, Doctor Cranmer & Doctor Latimer, my moste dere fathers and brethren in Christ, condempning vs for heinous heretikes concerning euery of these propositions, and so separated vs one frō another, sending vs seuerally into sundry and diuerse houses, to be kept moste secretly to the daye of our burning, and as before, so still commaūded that all and euery one of our seruauntes should be kept from vs, whereto he added that at his departure thence, pēne, inke, and paper, should depart frō vs also. But thankes be to God that gaue me to wryte this before the vse of suche things were vtterly takē away. Almighty god which beholdeth the causes of the afflicted, and is wonte to lose and loke mercifully on the bōdes & gronyngs of the captiues, he vouchesafe now to loke vpō the causes of his poore church[Back to Top]
in England, and of his great wisdom and vnspeakeable mercie with speade to make an end of our mysery. Amen, Amen, Amen.
Further here is to be noted, that after these disputations ended, the Prolocutor layd vnto the charges of thē that were Exceptores argumentorum, that they were more diligent in writing of the other part then of his, and in very deede they coulde not agree amonge them selues for the first dayes worke, albeit they had conferred twise or thrise. Notwithstanding at length a conference was made, which beinge sealed with the vniuersitie seale, was exhibited vp in the Cōuocation house at London, þe sayd moneth of Aprill the. 27.[Back to Top]
Unlike the disputations of Cranmer and Ridley, Latimer's disputation was relatively unchanged from edition to edition. Partly this was because Foxe apparently used one source for this disputation. A complete copy of Latimer's disputation survives in Foxe's papers (BL Harley MS 422, fols. 92r-100v); this may well be Foxe's source for the disputation. (Whatever Foxe's source was, he had it before he wrote Rerum, which means that it almost certainly came from a protestant source and was probably the record of one of the protestant notaries). A copy of Latimer's protestation at the beginning of the disputation is in ECL MS 262, fols. 171r-174r; a version of this is also printed in Strype, EM III, 2, pp. 288-95. (Unless Strype greatly altered this document in printing it, it was not the same version as ECL 262, fols. 171r-174r). Further, a Latin summary of Latimer's disputation is also in Foxe's papers (Harley 422, fols. 65r-67r); this may well be the original version of the similar summary printed in (only) 1563, pp. 934-35.[Back to Top]
Another reason for Foxe's relative restraint in editing Latimer's disputation was that it, unlike the other disputations, was largely conducted in English rather than Latin, thus eliminating the need (so apparent in Cranmer's disputation) for Foxe to correct the work of earlier translators. Furthermore, Latimer eschewed elaborate theological or logical arguments during his disputation and quoted few patristic authors, thus obviating much of the need for the revisions which Foxe had made in the other two disputations.[Back to Top]
In the edition of 1563 Foxe added descriptions of the beginning of Latimer's disputation (1563, p. 978; 1570, p. 1622; 1576, p. 1384; 1583, p. 1454) and the conclusion (1563, p. 985; 1570, p. 1627; 1576, p. 1389; 1583, p. 1459); these almost certainly came from another eyewitness.
MEn and bretherne, we are come to gether this day (by the helpe of God) to vanquish the strength of the arguments, and dispersed opinions of aduersaries, against the truth of the reall presence of the Lordes body in the sacrament. And therfore, you father, if you haue anye thinge to aunswere, I do admonish you, that you aunswere in short and few wordes.[Back to Top]
Lat. I praye you good maister Prolocutor do not exacte that of me, which is not in me. I haue not these xx. yeares vsed any latin tong.
VVest. Take your ease father.
Lat. I thank you, sir, I am well. Let me here protest my fayth: for I am not able to dispute, and afterwardes do your plesure with me.