1583 Edition | Book 11 | Page 1697 
Close
(d. 1555)
Martyr. Of Ashford, Kent.
Bland was imprisoned with Nicholas Sheterden and Humphrey Middleton. 1570, p. 1850, 1576, p. 1584, 1583, p. 1671.
Examination and condemnation. 1570, p. 1856, 1576, p. 1588, 1583, pp. 1675-76.
Humphrey Middleton was condemned by Richard Thornden on 25 June 1555. 1570, p. 1856, 1576, p. 1588, 1583, pp. 1675-76.
On 12 July 1555 Middleton was burned with John Frankesh, Nicholas Sheterden and John Bland at Canterbury. 1563, p. 1217, 1570, p. 1843, 1576, p. 1577, 1583, p. 1665.
Close
(d. 1555)
Vicar of Rolvenden and martyr.
Foxe records Frankesh's last examination and condemnation. 1570, p. 1856, 1576, p. 1588, 1583, pp. 1675-76.
Frankesh was condemned by Richard Thornden on 25 June 1555. 1570, p. 1856, 1576, p. 1588, 1583, pp. 1675-76.
On 12 July 1555 he was burned with John Bland, Nicholas Sheterden and Humphrey Middleton at Canterbury. 1563, p. 1217, 1570, p. 1843, 1576, p. 1577, 1583, p. 1665.
[Also referrred to by Foxe as Frank.]
Close
(1500? - 1555) (DNB)
Martyr.
Foxe describes Rogers' life and career. 1563, pp. 1022-23; 1570, p. 1656; 1576, p. 1413; 1583, p. 1484.
John Rogers preached a sermon at Paul's Cross on 6 August 1553 denouncing 'popery', for which he was placed under arrest. 1563, p. 1023; 1570, p. 1656; 1576, p. 1413; 1583, p. 1484. [NB: This contradicts the next two entries].
On 13 August 1553 Gilbert Bourne (Marian bishop of Bath and Wells) preached a sermon at Paul's Cross, praising Bonner and criticising Edward VI. This sermon incited a fanatic to throw a dagger at him and enraged the mob. John Rogers and John Bradford escorted Bourne to safety (1563, p. 905; 1570, p. 1570; 1576, p. 1339; and 1583, p. 1497 [recte 1409]. The story is in Rerum, pp. 464-65, but Rogers is not mentioned in that version).
[Back to Top]On 16 August 1553, Rogers was placed under house arrest by the privy council (1583, p. 1497 [recte 1409]).
He was committed to Newgate on 26 January 1554 (1570, p. 1637; 1576, p. 1396; 1583, p. 1467).
Ridley reported to Cranmer, in a letter written in the aftermath of the Oxford disputations in April 1554, that Crome, Rogers and Bradford would be taken to Cambridge for a disputation on similar lines to that held in Oxford (1570, p. 1634; 1576, p. 1394; 1583, p. 1464).
It was rumoured in May 1554 that Rogers, together with Bradford and Saunders, would take part in a disputation to be held in Cambridge (1570, p. 1639; 1576, p. 1399; 1583, p. 1469).
Rogers was one of the signatories to a letter of 8 May 1554 protesting against the proposed disputation. The letter is printed in 1563, pp. 1001-3; 1570, pp. 1639-41; 1576, pp. 1399-1400; 1583, pp. 1469-71).
He was summoned before Stephen Gardiner at St Mary Overies on 28 January 1555 (1570, p. 1655; 1576, p. 1412; 1583, p. 1483).
Rogers' examination took place on 29 January 1555. [BL Harley 421, fos.40r-41r. Not printed in Acts and Monuments or Letters of the Martyrs but mentioned in 1563, p. 1029 et seq.]
Bradford's second examination took place on 29 January 1555, directly after the excommunication of John Rogers. 1563, pp. 1188-92, 1570, p. 1784, 1576, p. 1524, 1583, p. 1607.
He was excommunicated and condemned to death by Stephen Gardiner on 29 January 1555 (1570, p. 1655; 1576, p. 1412; 1583, p. 1483).
His examination and condemnation: 1563, pp. 1026-31; 1570, pp. 1656-62; 1576, pp. 1414-19; 1583, pp. 1484-89. He was examined and condemned with John Hooper on. 1563, p. 1056; 1570, p. 1680; 1576, pp. 1433-34; 1583, p. 1507.
Rogers was degraded, with John Hooper, on 4 February 1555. 1563, pp. 1057-58; 1570, p. 1681; 1576, pp. 1434-35; 1583, p. 1508.
Rogers' martyrdom is described. 1563, pp. 1036-37; 1570, pp. 1663-64; 1576, pp. 1419-20; 1583, pp. 1492-93.
When examined by Bonner, John Leafe (who was burned with John Bradford) denied transubstantiation and admitted to being a scholar of John Rogers, and that he believed in the doctrine of Rogers, Hooper and Cardmaker. 1563, p. 1214, 1570, p. 1804, 1576, p. 1540, 1583, p. 1623.
In a letter to his mother and others, John Bradford asked that Rogers be remembered. 1570, pp. 1805-06,1576, pp. 1541-42, 1583, p. 1624.
John Rogers' martyrdom was referred to in Bradford's letter to the university town of Cambridge. 1563, pp. 1178-80, 1570, pp. 1808-09., 1576, p. 1545, 1583, p. 1627.
Grindal wrote to Ridley from his exile in Frankfort, to which letter Ridley replied. Ridley mentioned that he knew that Ferrar, Hooper, Rogers, Taylor of Hadleigh, Saunders and Tomkins had all been martyred, as had Cardmaker the day before he wrote this letter. 1570, pp. 1901-02, 1576, pp. 1628-30, 1583, pp. 1729-30.
[Back to Top]His other writings: (1563, pp. 1031-36; 1570, p. 1663; 1576, p. 1419; 1583, pp. 1489-92).
Rogers was involved in the debate over the clerical wearing of caps. 1563, p. 1732.
Close
(1519? - 1575)
Archdeacon of Canterbury; vicar-general of London. Author of the most important contemporary attack on the Acts and Monuments. Younger brother of John Harpsfield [DNB]
Nicholas Harpsfield discussed the sacrament and ceremonies with Thomas Hawkes on 30 June 1554, but soon gave up hope of changing Hawke's opinions. 1563, p. 1156; 1570, p. 1764; 1576, p. 1507; 1583, p. 1590
Harpsfield took depositions regarding John Tooley's heretical speech from the gallows. 1563, p. 1144
He examined Thomas Wattes on 4 May 1555 and he urged Wattes to recant. Wattes refused, telling Harpsfield that his efforts were in vain. 1563, p. 1165; 1570, p. 1771; 1576, p. 1512; 1583, 1596
Nicholas Harpsfield is described by Foxe as one who was occupied with dispatching the godly during Mary's reign. 1563, p. 1383, 1570, p. 1952, 1576, p. 1679, 1583, p. 1786.
On 28 May Nicholas Harpsfield had the mayor's sergeant bring John Bland before him, and Master Collins (comissary), in Thornden's house. Talk took place between Harspfield, Collins and Bland. 1563, pp. 1220-21, 1570, pp. 1845-46, 1576, pp. 1579-80, 1583, p. 1667.
On 21 May Bland appeared in the chapter house before Nicholas Harspfield. 1563, pp. 1221-23, 1570 p. 1846, 1576 p. 1580, 1583, p. 1668.
Bland asked that Richard Thornden, bishop of Dover, and Robert Collins, commissary, be present at the disputation over the sacrament between Nicholas Harspfield and Bland. 1563, p. 1222, 1570, p. 1846, 1576, p. 1580, 1583, p. 1668.
Nicholas Sheterden discussed eucharistic doctrine with the archdeacon Nicholas Harpsfield and Robert Collins. 1563, pp. 1231-32, 1570, p. 1853, 1576, pp. 1585-86, 1583, pp. 1673-74.
William Cokar was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Richard Thornden, Faucet and Robert Collins; he gave answers and was condemned. 1563, p. 1249, 1570, p. 1867, 1576, p. 1598, 1583, p. 1688.
Richard Colliar was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Richard Thornden, Faucet, and Robert Collins; he gave answers and was condemned. 1563, p. 1249, 1570, p. 1867, 1576, p. 1598, 1583, p. 1688.
William Hopper was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Richard Thornden, Faucet, and Robert Collins; he gave answers and was condemned. 1563, p. 1249, 1570, p. 1867, 1576, p. 1598, 1583, p. 1688.
Henry Lawrence was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Richard Thornden, Faucet, and Robert Collins; he gave answers and was condemned. 1563, p. 1249, 1570, p. 1867, 1576, p. 1598, 1583, p. 1688.
William Sterne was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Richard Thornden, Faucet, and Robert Collins; he gave answers and was condemned. 1563, p. 1250, 1570, p. 1868, 1576, p. 1599, 1583, p. 1688.
George Brodbridge was examined by Nicholas Harpsfield and Thornden on 3 August for having refused to say confession to a priest. 1563, p. 1273. The examination is referred to in 1570, p. 1884, 1576, p. 1614, 1583, p. 1708.
Anthony Burwarde was examined by Nicholas Harpsfield and Thornden on 3 August. 1563, p. 1273.
Robert Streater was examined by Nicholas Harpsfield and Thornden on 3 August. 1563, p. 1273.
James Tutrye was examined by Nicholas Harpsfield and Thornden on 3 August. 1563, p. 1273.
John Webbe was examined by Nicholas Harpsfield and Thornden. 1563, pp. 1386-87, 1570, pp. 1959-60, 1576, p. 1687, 1583, p. 1794.
Harpsfield is described as a great persecutor. 1563, p. 1546, 1570, p. 2039, 1576, p. 1860, 1583, p. 1954.
Thomas Alsey met with John Kingston to discuss the delivery of forty-six shillings and eight pence to Nicholas Harpsfield. 1563, p. 1564, 1570, p. 2156, 1576, p. 1864, 1583, p. 1975 [incorrectly numbered 1971].
Martin Bradbridge was condemned by Richard Thornden and Nicholas Harpsfield. 1563, p. 1561, 1570, p. 2154, 1576, p. 1861, 1583, p. 1974 [incorrectly numbered as 1970].
Nicholas Final was condemned by Richard Thornden and Nicholas Harpsfield. 1563, p. 1561, 1570, p. 2155, 1576, p. 1861, 1583, p. 1974 [incorrectly numbered as 1970].
William Hay was condemned by Richard Thornden and Nicholas Harpsfield. 1563, p. 1561, 1570, p. 2154, 1576, p. 1861, 1583, p. 1974 [incorrectly numbered as 1970].
Thomas Hudson was condemned by Richard Thornden and Nicholas Harpsfield. 1563, p. 1561, 1570, p. 2154, 1576, p. 1861, 1583, p. 1974 [incorrectly numbered as 1970].
Stephen Kempe was condemned by Richard Thornden and Nicholas Harpsfield. 1563, p. 1561, 1570, p. 2155, 1576, p. 1861, 1583, p. 1974 [incorrectly numbered as 1970].
William Lowick was condemned by Richard Thornden and Nicholas Harpsfield. 1570, p. 2154, 1576, p. 2155, 1583, p. 1974 [incorrectly numbered as 1970].
John Philpot of Tenterden was condemned by Richard Thornden and Nicholas Harpsfield. 1563, p. 1561, 1570, p. 2154, 1576, p. 1861, 1583, p. 1974 [incorrectly numbered as 1970].
Matthew Plaise was examined by Thornden, Nicholas Harpsfield and Collins. 1570, pp. 2169-71, 1576, pp. 1873-75, 1583, pp. 1982-83.
Harpsfield took part in Richard Woodman's fifth and sixth examinations. 1563, pp. 1599-1601, 1570, pp. 2190-94, 1576, pp. 1890-93, 1583, pp. 1999-2002.
William Prowting was condemned by Richard Thornden and Nicholas Harpsfield. 1563, p. 1604, 1570, p. 2198, 1576, p. 1897, 1583, p. 2005.
Thomas Stephens was condemned by Richard Thornden and Nicholas Harpsfield. 1570, p. 2154, 1576, p. 2155, 1583, p. 1974 [incorrectly numbered as 1970].
William Waterman was condemned by Richard Thornden and Nicholas Harpsfield. 1563, p. 1561, 1570, p. 2155, 1576, p. 1861, 1583, p. 1974 [incorrectly numbered as 1970].
Nicholas Harpsfield urged on the condemnation of five martyrs at Canterbury so that they could be burned before the death of Queen Mary. 1563, p. 1673, 1570, p. 2253, 1576, p. 1946, 1583, p. 2053.
Harpsfield was committed to the Fleet after the death of Mary. 1570, p. 2301, 1576, p. 1992, 1583, p. 2102.
Close
(d. 1555)
Martyr. Of unkown occupation and origin.
Nicholas Sheterden discussed eucharistic doctrine with the archdeacon Nicholas Harpsfield and Robert Collins. 1563, pp. 1231-32, 1570, p. 1853, 1576, pp. 1585-86, 1583, pp. 1673-74.
Sheterden's answered to the charges against him, to which Mylles and Thornden responded. 1563, pp. 1232-33, 1570, pp. 1853-54, 1576, pp. 1586-87, 1583, p. 1674.
Sheterden was said by Master Milles to have written a letter to his mother asking her to reform. 1563, p. 1232, 1570, p. 1854, 1576, p. 1586, 1583, p. 1674.
Loveles, a lawyer, claimed that Sheterden was unjustly imprisoned. 1563, p. 1233, 1570, p. 1854, 1576, p. 1587, 1583, p. 1674.
Sheterden was examined before the bishop of Winchester. 1563, pp. 1233-34, 1570, pp. 1855-56, 1576, pp. 1587-88 , 1583, p. 1675.
The last examination and condemnation of Nicholas Sheterden (with John Bland and Humphrey Middleton) was held on 25 June 1555. Condemnation was given by Richard Thornden. 1570, p. 1856, 1576, p. 1588, 1583, pp. 1675-76.
Sheterden's letters: 1563, pp. 1235-38, 1570, pp. 1856-59, 1576, pp. 1589-91, 1583, pp. 1676-78.
John Bland was imprisoned with Nicholas Sheterden and Humphrey Middleton. 1570, p. 1850, 1576, p. 1583, 1583, p. 1671.
Sheterden's prayer before his death. 1563, p. 1237, 1570, p. 1856, 1576, pp. 1588-89, 1583, p. 1676.
On 12 July 1555 Sheterden was burned with John Frankesh, John Bland and Humphrey Middleton at Canterbury. 1563, p. 1217, 1570, p. 1843, 1576, p. 1577, 1583, p. 1665.
Bradford wrote a letter to his friends N. S. and R. C. 1570, p. 1840, 1576, p. 1575, 1583, p. 1657.
Close
Commissary of Canterbury diocese. [BCL 1522 Foster
Foxe states that Collins was the cardinal's factor before coming to England 1563, p. 1229, 1570, pp. 1851-52, 1576, pp. 1585-86, 1583, p. 1672.
Robert Collins demanded that Bland return the following day but Bland did not appear, due to urgent business. Bland wrote a letter regarding this. 1563, p. 1223, 1570, p. 1847, 1576, p. 1580, 1583, p. 1668.
Bland asked that Richard Thornden, bishop of Dover, and Robert Collins, commissary, be present at the disputation over the sacrament between Nicholas Harspfield and Bland. 1563, p. 1222, 1570, p. 1846, 1576, p. 1580, 1583, p. 1668.
On 28 May Nicholas Harpsfield had the mayor's sergeant bring John Bland before him, and Robert Collins, in Thornden's house. Foxe reports the talk between Harspfield, Collins and Bland. 1563, pp. 1220-21, 1570, pp. 1845-46, 1576, pp. 1579-80, 1583, p. 1667.
Around 28 June Bland returned to Collins, where he proceeded against Bland before Master Cockes of Sturray and Markes the apparitor. 1563, p. 1223, 1570, p. 1847, 1576, p. 1581, 1583, p. 1668.
Bland remained in the castle of Canterbury until 2 March, when he was taken to the chapter house of Christ Church (Canterbury), to the suffragen of Canterbury, Master Collins, Master Mylles and others, then to Master Oxenden, Master Petit, Master Webbe and Master Hardes (these were all justices). 1563, p. 1224, 1570, p. 1848, 1576, p. 1581, 1583, p. 1669.
[Back to Top]Bland and Collins argued over abiding by the laws of the realm and of the sacrament. 1563, pp. 1224-25, 1570, p. 1849, 1576, pp. 1582-83, 1583, pp. 1669-70.
Nicholas Sheterden discussed eucharistic doctrine with the archdeacon Nicholas Harpsfield and Robert Collins. 1563, pp. 1231-32, 1570, p. 1853, 1576, pp. 1585-86, 1583, pp. 1673-74.
Richard Colliar was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Richard Thornden, Faucet, and Robert Collins; he answered and was condemned. 1563, p. 1249, 1570, p. 1867, 1576, p. 1598, 1583, p. 1688.
Anthony Burwarde was examined by Nicholas Harpsfield and Thornden, 3 August. 1563, p. 1273.
William Hopper was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Richard Thornden, Faucet, and Robert Collins; he answered and was condemned. 1563, p. 1249, 1570, p. 1867, 1576, p. 1598, 1583, p. 1688.
Henry Lawrence was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Richard Thornden, Faucet, and Robert Collins; he answered and was condemned. 1563, p. 1249, 1570, p. 1867, 1576, p. 1598, 1583, p. 1688.
William Sterne was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Richard Thornden, Faucet, and Robert Collins; he answered and was condemned. 1563, p. 1250, 1570, p. 1868, 1576, p. 1599, 1583, p. 1688.
John Newman was examined before Thornden, Collins and others. 1583, pp. 1686-87.
Richard Wright was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Thornden, bishop of Dover, Faucet and Robert Collins; he answered and was condemned. 1563, p. 1249, 1570, p. 1867, 1576, p. 1598, 1583, p. 1688.
William Cokar was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Richard Thornden, Faucet and Robert Collins; he answered and was condemned. 1563, p. 1249, 1570, p. 1867, 1576, p. 1598, 1583, p. 1688.
Collins took part in the examination of John Lomas, Agnes Snotten, Anne Albright, Joan Sole, and Joan Catmer. 1563, p. 1470, 1570, p. 2032, 1576, p. 1751, 1583, p. 1859.
John Newman was examined by Thornden and others, among whom was Robert Collins. 1570, pp. 2134-35, 1576, pp. 1856-57, 1583, pp. 1950-51.
Talk took place between Sir John Baker, Collins and Edmund Allin. 1570, pp. 2165-66, 1576, pp. 1870-71, 1583, pp. 1979-80.
Matthew Plaise was examined by Thornden, Nicholas Harpsfield and Collins. 1570, pp. 2169-71, 1576, pp. 1873-75, 1583, pp. 1982-83.
Close
(d. 1555)
Martyr.
William Cokar was imprisoned with John Bland. 1570, p. 1852, 1576, p. 1585, 1583, p. 1673.
Cokar was examined before Nicholas Harpsfield, Richard Thornden, Faucet, and Robert Collins; he gave answers and was condemned. 1563, p. 1249, 1570, p. 1867, 1576, p. 1598, 1583, p. 1688.
He was condemned '26 July' but this is referred to as occurring the day after the condemnation of Bland, Sheterden and Middleton, which was on 25 June. 1570, p. 1859,1576, p. 1591, 1583, p. 1678.
[or]
he was condemned 11 July 1555. 1570, p. 1867, 1576, p. 1598, 1583, p. 1688.
[Foxe also refers to him as 'Cocker'.]
MarginaliaAnno. 1555. Iuly.making his appearing agayne in the sayd Chapterhouse, there openly and boldly withstoode the authoritie of the Pope, whereupon his sentence was read, and so he condemned and committed to the secular power. MarginaliaM. Bland denyeth the Pope. M. Bland condemned.Touching the forme and tenor of the sentence, because all theyr sentences, of course agree in one, read before in þe historye of Maister Rogers.
Close
Foxe's removal of the sentence against Bland was one of the cuts he made to save paper in the 1570 edition.
Close
John Bland's sentence is given in the First Edition, p. 1230.
Close
A different version of this prayer is in ECL 261, fo. 62r.
MarginaliaA prayer of M. Bland. THe Lorde Iesus, for whose loue I doe willingly leaue thys life, and desire rather the bitter death of this crosse, wyth the losse of all earthly thinges, then to abide the blasphemye of thy holye name, or els to obey man in breaking thy Commaundements, thou seest, Oh Lord, that where as I might liue in worldly wealth to worship false Gods, and honoure thy enemye, I chose rather the tormentes of this body, and losse of this my life, and haue counted al thinges but vile, dust, and dung, that I might winne thee: Which death is more deare vnto me, then thousands of gold and siluer. Such loue, Oh Lorde hast thou layde vp in my brest, that I hunger for thee, as the Deere that is wounded desireth the soyle. Send thy holy comfort, O Lorde, to ayd, comfort, and strengthen this weake peece of earth, whiche is voyde of all strength of it selfe. Thou remembrest, O Lorde, that I am but dust and not able to doe any thing that is good. Therefore, O Lorde, as thou of thy accustomed goodnes hast bidden me to this banket, and counted me worthy to drinke of thine owne cup amōgst thine elect: geue me strength against this element, that as it is to my sight most irkesome and terrible, so to my minde it may be at thy commaundement, as an obedient seruaunt, sweete and pleasaunt: and through the strength of thy holye spirite, I may passe through the strength of this fire into thy bosome, according vnto thy promise, and for this mortalitie, to receaue immortalitie, and for this corruptible, to put on incorruptible. Accept thys burnt offering and sacrifice, O Lorde, not for the sacrifice it selfe, but for thy deare sonnes sake my Sauiour: for whose testimony I offer this free wil offering with all my hart and with al my soule. O heauenly father, forgeue me my sinnes, as I forgeue the whole world. O sweete Sauiour, spread thy winges ouer me. O God, graunt me thy holy Ghost, through whose mercifull inspiration I am come hither. Conducte me vnto euerlasting lyfe. Lord into thy handes I commend my spirite: Lord Iesus receaue my soule. So be it.
[Back to Top]
Close
These particular martyrdoms posed a particular problem for Foxe. While Frankesh was unquestionably orthodox, Middleton and Sheterden were leading Freewillers (see Freeman [2002], pp. 130-31, 133-34 and 153). Not a hint of the backgrounds or beliefs of Middleton and Sheterden touches Foxe's account of their martyrdoms. This is a striking demonstration of Foxe's determination to avoid almost any mention of the dispute among Marian protestants over predestination. Even stronger was his determination to prevent any suspicion of unorthodoxy from being cast on any of the martyrs and, as a result, the radicalism of Middleton and Sheterden was completely concealed by Foxe.
[Back to Top]Foxe had obtained a copy of Sheterden's account of his first examination during his exile and printed it in the Rerum (pp. 503-05). Other than this, all Foxe wrote about these three martyrs in the Rerum was a note recording their execution together on 12 July 1555. In the 1563 edition, Foxe added Sheterden's account of his 'first answering', his notes on the sacrament of the altar, his account of his examination before Gardiner and his final prayer. In the 1570 edition, Foxe rearranged the material and added an account of the final examination of Bland,Frankesh, Sheterden and Middleton, which was taken from the Canterbury diocesan records. There was no change in this account in subsequent editions.
[Back to Top]MarginaliaIuly. 12. Iohn Frankesh, Humfrey Middleton, Nicholas Sheterden, Martyrs.HAuyng now passed ouer the examinations of Maister Bland, let vs further proceed to the rest of his felowes concaptiues, being ioyned the same time with him both in the like cause, and like affliction. The names of whome were Iohn Frankesh, Nicholas Sheterden, Humfrey Middleton, Thacker, and Cocker:
Close
The names of Thacker and Cocker were added in the 1570 edition, as was the date of 25 June. It appears that Foxe consulted an official document of this trial between 1563 and 1570.
MarginaliaThe talke of Nicholas Sheterden with the Archdeacon & Commissary, about the Sacrament of the body and bloud of Christ.FIrst the Archdeacon and Commissary affirmed that the very wordes of Christ, when he sayd: This is my bodye, did chaunge the substaunce, without any other interpretation or spirituall meaning of the wordes.
[Back to Top]Shet. Then belike when Christ sayd: This cup is my bloud, the substaunce of his Cup was chaunged into hys bloud, without any other meaning, and so the cup was changed, and not the wine.
Arch. Not so: for when Christ sayde: This cup is my bloud, be meant not the cup, but the wine in the cup. MarginaliaThe Romish catholickes cannot deny a figuratiue speach in the cup, & yet will not graunt the same in the bread.
Shet. If Christ spake one thing, and meant an other, then the bare wordes did not chaunge the substaunce: but there must be a meaning sought as well of the bread, as of the cup.
Arch. There must be a meaning sought of the cup otherwise then the words stand. But of the bread it must be vnderstand onely as it standeth, without any other meaning.
Shet. Then do ye make one halfe of Christes institution a figure, or borowed speache, and the other halfe a playne speach,
Close
Sheterden is accusing Harpsfield of understanding the sacrament of the altar both literally and figuratively at the same time.
Arch. Christ meant the wyne, and not the cup, though he sayd: This cup is my bloud.
Shet. Then shew me whether the words which the priestes doe speake ouer the cup, do chaunge the substaunce, or whether the minde of the priest doth it?
Arch. The minde of the priest doth it, and not the words.
Shet. If the minde of the prieste doth it, and not þe words if the Priest then doe minde hys harlot, or any other vaine thing, that thing so minded was there made, and so the people doe worship the priestes harlot in stead of Christes bloud: and agayne, none of the people can tell when it is Christes bloud, or when it is not, seeing the matter standeth in the minde of the Priest. For no man can tell what the priest meaneth, but himselfe: and so are they euer in daunger of committing idolatry. MarginaliaIf the mind and not the wordes of the Priest doth it: how then is it that Duns and his fellowes say, that the wordes be the forme & formall cause onely that maketh the Sacrament?
[Back to Top]Then was the Archdeacon somewhat moued,
Close
I.e., somewhat angered.
MarginaliaCollins the Commissary taketh the matter in hand.Commis. Your argumentes is much agaynst your selfe: for ye graunt that the bread is a figure of Christes body: but the Cup can be no figure of his bloude, nor yet his verye bloud: and therefore Christ did not meane the cup, but the wine in the cup.
Shet. My argument is not agaynst me at all: for I do not speake it to proue that the cup is his bloud, nor the figure of his bloud, but to proue that the bare wordes being spoken of the priest, do not chaunge the substaunce no more of the bread then they do chaunge the cup into bloud.
Commis. It coulde not be spoken of the Cup, when hee sayde: This Cup is my bloud, but he meant the wyne in the cup.
Shet. Then it remaineth for you to answere my question to the Archdeacon, that is, whether the minde of the priest when he speaketh ouer the cup, doth chaunge it into bloud or the bare wordes.
Commis. Both together doth it, the wordes and þe mind of the priest together: yea the intent and the wordes together doth it.
MarginaliaThe Commissary brought to an absurditye.Shet. If the wordes and intentes together doe chaunge the substaunce, yet must the cup be his bloud, and not the wyne, for as much as the wordes are, This cup is my bloud, and the intent, ye say, was the wyne: or els the words take none effect, but the intent onely.
[Back to Top]After, the Commissary in his chamber sayd, it was the intent of the priest before he went to masse, wythout the wordes: for the Priest did intend to doe as holy Churche had ordayned, then the intent made the sacrament to take effect.
Shet. If the Sacramentes take effect of the intent of the Priest, and not of Gods word, then manye Parishes hauing a Priest that intendeth not wel, are vtterly deceiued, MarginaliaThe intent of the priest maketh not the Sacrament.both in Baptising, and also worshipping that thing to be God, whiche is but bread, because for lacke of the priestes intente, the wordes doe take none effecte in it: so that by this, it is euer doubtfull whether they worship Christe, or bread, because it is doubtfull what the Priestes doe intende.
[Back to Top]Commis. Then the Commissary would proue to me, that Chrystes Manhood was in two places at one tyme, MarginaliaChristes body whether it may be in two places at once.by these woordes of Christ in Joh. the thyrd Chapiter, where he sayth, No man ascendeth vpp to heauen, but hee that came downe from heauen, that is to say, the sonne of man whiche is in heauen. By this he would proue , that Christe was then in heauen, and in earth also, naturally and bodily.
[Back to Top]Shet. This place and other must needes be vnderstand for the vnitie of persons, in that Christe was God & man, and yet the matter must be referred to the Godhead, or els ye must fall into great errour.
Commis. That is not so: for it was spoken of the manhoode of Christ, for as much as he sayth, the sonne of man whiche is in heauen.
MarginaliaThe Commissary brought to an other inconueniēce.Shet. If yee will needes vnderstande it to be spoken of Christes manhoode, then must ye fall into the error of the Anabaptistes, which deny that Christ took fleshe of þe virgin Mary: for if there be no bodye ascended vpp, but that whiche came downe, where is then his incarnation? for then he brought his body downe with him.
[Back to Top]Commis. Loe how ye seeke an errour in me, and yet see not how ye erre your selfe. For it cannot be spoken of the Godhead, except ye graunt that God is passible, for God cannot come downe because he is not passible.
Shet. If that were a good argumente that God could not come down because he is not passible: then it might be said