dayes, wherein Doctor Weston was chief on the Popes parte, who behaued hym selfe outragiously in tauntyng and checkyng. In conclusion, suche as disputed on the contrary part were dryuen some to flye, some to denye, and some to die, though to the moste mennes iudgementes that hearde the disputation, they had the vpper hande, as here may appeare by the reporte of the sayde disputation, the copie whereof we thought here to annexe, as followeth.[Back to Top]
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.
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]
MarginaliaOctob. 18.First vpon wednisday beyng the xviij. daye of October at after noone, maister Weston the Prolocutor certified the house, that it was the Quenes pleasure that the company of the same house being many learned mē assembled, should debate of matters of Religion, and constitute lawes thereof, whiche her grace and the parliament would ratifie. And for that ther is a boke of late set forth, called the Catechisme (which he shewed fourth) bearing the name of this honorable Synode, and yet put foorth without your consentes, as I haue learned, beyng a boke very pestiferous, and full of heresies (as he sayde) and likewyse the booke of common prayer, very abhominable (as it pleased him to terme it) he thought it therfore best first to begin with the articles of the Catechisme cōcerning the Sacrament of the altar, for to confirme the naturall presence of Christe in the same, and for transubstantiation. In the whiche, on fryday next ensuing, he wylled all men there frely to speake their conscience and learning, and they shoulde be fully satisfied.[Back to Top]
MarginaliaOctob. 20.The fryday comming being the xx. of October, whan men had thought they shoulde haue entred disputation of the questiōs proposed, the prolocutor did exhibite two seueral billes vnto the house: the one for the naturall presence of Christ in the Sacrament of thaltar, the other concerning the Catechisme, that it was not of that houses agreamēt set forth, and that they do not agree therunto. Requiring all them to subscribe to the same as he him self had done: wherunto the whole house did immediatly assent except sixe, whiche were the Deane of Rochester, the Deane of Exceter, the Archdeacon of Wynchester, the Archedeacon of Hertforde, the Archdeacon of Stowe and one other. And whyle the rest were about to subscribe these two articles, Iohn Fylpot stode vp & spake fyrst concerninge the article of the Catechisme, that he[Back to Top]
thought they were deceyued in the tytle of the catechisme, in that it beareth the title of the synode of london last before this, although many of them which then were present were neuer made pryuye thereof in settinge it fourth, for that this house had graunted the autority to make ecclesiastical lawes vnto certaine persōs to be appoynted by the Kynges maiestye, and what soeuer ecclesyasticall lawes they or the most part of them did set fourth, according to a statute in that behalfe prouided, it might be wel sayde to be done in the Synode of London all though such as be of this house now had no notice thereof before the promulgation. And in this poynt he thought the setter fourth thereof nothinge to haue slaundered the house, as they by theyr subscription went aboute to persuade the world, since they had our synodall autority vnto them committed to make such spiritual lawes as they thought conuenient and necessary. And moreouer he sayd as concerning the article of the naturall presence in the sacrament, that it was against reason and order of lerning and also very preiudiciall to the truth, that mē should be moued to subscribe before the matter were thorowelye examined and discussed. But whan he sawe that allegation mighte take no place, being as a mā astonied at the multitude of so many lerned men, as ther were of purpose gathered together to mainteine old traditions more then the truth of goddes hollye worde, he made hys requeste vnto the prolocutor, that whereas there were so many auncient lerned men present on that side, as in the realme the like again were not to be foūd in such nomber, and that on the other side of them that had not subscribed, were not past. v. or. vi. both in age and lerning far inferiour vnto them, therefore, that equalitie might be had in this disputation he desired that the prolocutor would be a mene vnto the lordes, that some of those that were lerned and setters fourthe of the same catechisme might be brought in to the house to shew theyr lerning, that moued them to set furth the same And that doctor Ridley and mayster Rogers with two or thre moo mighte be licensed to be present at thys disputacion, and to be associate with them. This request was thought reasonable and was proposed vnto the Bishoppes who made this answere, that it was not in thē to call such persons vnto our house, since some of them were prisoners. But they sayde they would be petitioners in this behalf vnto the coūcell, and in case any were absent, that ought to be of the house, they willed them to be taken in vnto them, if they listed. After this they mindinge to haue entred into disputacyon, there came a gentleman a messenger from the Lorde great maister signifienge vnto the prolocutor that the lord great maister and the Earle of Deuonshire would be present at the disputations and therfore he differred the same vnto monday at one of the cloke at afternone.
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]
MarginaliaOctob. 23.Vpon monday the xxiii. October at the time appoynted, in the presence of many Earles, lordes, knights gentlemen and diuers other of the court and of the citye also, the Prolocutor made a protestation that they of the house had appoynted this disputation, not to cal the truth in to doubt, to the which they had alredy al subscribed, sauing v. or vi. but that those gainsaiers[Back to Top]