substaunce of materiall breade and wyne.
I do so beleue. By me T. Tomkins.
The next day, being the. ix. of February at eyght of the clocke before noone, the sayd T. Tomkins, (accordyng to the former cōmaundement) was broughte agayne into the place aforenamed, before the Byshoppe and other his assistants, where the fore said articles wer propounded vnto him: the which he answered as foloweth.
This document is reprinted from Bonner's official records, probably from a court book which is now lost.
To the fyrst he sayd, that he dyd so beleue, as in the same is conteyned.
To the second he sayde that it was onelye breade, and a participacion of Christes death and passion, and so doth the scriptures teache.
To the third, he said and did beleue, yt was a false doctrine to beleue and thinke as is conteyned in this article.
To the fourth, he did also beleue the same. After this answere, he did also subscribe hys name to the saide articles. Whervpon the bishoppe, drawynge oute of hys bosome another confession, subscribed wyth Tomkyns owne hand, and also that article that was the first daye obiected agaynste hym, caused the same to be openly redde. And then willed him to reuoke and denye hys saide opynions. The which he vtterly refused to do, and therefore was commaunded to appeare before the Bishop agayne in the same place, at two of the clocke in the after noone.[Back to Top]
J Thomas Tomkins of the parish of Shordich, in the dyoces of London, hauing confessed and declared openly here to fore to Edmonde Byshop of London myne Ordinarie, that my beleife hath bene many yeres past and is at thys present: that the bodye of our sauiour Iesus Christ is not truelye, and in verye dede in the sacrament of the aultar, but onely in heauen, & so in heauen, that it can not now in dede be really and trulye in the sacrament of the aultar. And moreouer, hauing lykewise cōfessed & declared to my said Ordinary, opēly many times, þt although the church, called the catholicke church, hath allowed, & doth allowe the Masse, and sacrifice made and done therin, as a wholesome, profitable, and a godly good thyng: yet my beliefe hath bene many yeares past, and is at this present, that the said Masse is ful of superstition, playne idolatry, and vnprofitable for my soule, and so haue I called it many tymes, and take it at this present.[Back to Top]
Hauyng also lykewyse confessed and declared to my sayd Ordinarye, that the sacrament of Baptisme ought to be onely in the vulgar tongue, and not otherwise ministred, and also wythout anye suche ceremonies, as custo-
mably are vsed in the latine church, and otherwise not to be allowable.
Fynally being many tymes and ofte called openly before my sayd Ordynary, and talked withal, touching all my sayd confessions, and declarations, both by the sayd mine ordinary, and diuers other lerned men, aswell his chapleins as other, and counselled by all them to embrace the trouth, and to recant myne error in the premisses, whiche they told me was playne heresy and manyfest error: do testyfy & declare herby, that I do, and wyl continually stand to my sayd confession, declaration, and beleife, in all the premisses, and euery parte therof, and in no wyse recante or go from any parte of the same. In witnes wherof I haue subscribed, and passed this wryting the. xxvi. day of Septembre, in the yeare of our Lorde God. 1554.[Back to Top]
By me Thomas Tomkins aforesayd.
In many cases the accounts Foxe prints of a martyr's examination are drawn from the martyr's account or from accounts by his or her supporters. Foxe could apparently find no such accounts for Tomkins, since this account, in its brevity, is clearly an official record which is now lost.
This date is 15 March in 1563 and was corrected to 16 March in 1570.
The Rerum contains an account of Causton and Higbed being taken toLondon and prints the confession of faith Causton and Higbed made in Consistory Court (Rerum, pp. 426 and 428-31). This material was reprinted in the 1563 edition. Foxe also added accounts of their sessions in the Consistory Court of St Pauls, the articles presented against them with their answers and their condemnation, all drawn from Bishop Bonner's official records. A description of their condemnation may have been taken from the description of a spectator. In the second edition Foxe added nothing, but he arranged the material in chronological order. He also eliminated material from this narrative, and more unusually rewrote it. The account of Causton and Higbed remained unchanged in the third and the fourth editions.[Back to Top]
ALthough hetherto there hath bene no parte or dioces in England, (wherof there are many, and they large, within thys Reame) altogether cleare and free from this persecution (very fewe except:)