Acts and Monuments Volume 1

A preface to the reader.

ACcording to the five sundry diversities and alterations of the Church, so have I divided hitherto the order of this present Church story into five principal partes, every part containing 300. years. So that now coming to the last 300. years, that is, to the last times of the Church, counting from the time of Wycliffe: For as much as in the compass of the said last 300 years, are contained great troubles and perturbations of the Church, with the marvelous reformation of the same through the wondrous operation of the almighty, all which things cannot be comprehended in one book, I have therefore disposed the said latter 30. years, into diverse books, beginning now with the sixth book, at the reign of king Henry the vi. In which book, beside the grievous and sundry persecutions raised up by Antichrist, to be noted, here in is also to be observed, that where as it hath of long time been received and thought of the common people, that this religion now generally used, hath sprong up and risen but of late, even by the space (as many do think) of 20. or 30. years, it may now manifestly appear, not only by the Acts and Monuments heretofore passed, but also by the histories here after following, howe this profession of Christ's religion hath been spread abroad in England of old and ancient time, not only from the space of these 200. late years, from the time of Wyckleffe, but hath continually from time to time sparkled abroad, although the flames thereof have never so perfectly burst out, as they have done within these hundred years and more: As by these histories here collected & gathered out of Registers, especially of the Diocese of Norwich, shall manifestly appear: wherein may be seen what men, and how many both men and women within the said Diocese of Norwich, have been, which have defended the same cause of doctrine, which now is received by us in the Church. Which persons although then they were not so strongly armed in their cause and quarrel, as of late years they have been, yet were they warriors in Christ's church, and fought for their power, in the same cause. And although they gave back through tyranny, yet judge thou the best good Reader, and refer the cause thereof to God, who revealeth all things according to his determined will and appointed time.

T His young prince being under the age of one year, after the death of his father, succeeded in his reign and kingdom of England, Anno 1422. and in the 8. year was crowned at Westminster: and the 2. year after was crowned also at Paris, Henry bishop of Winchester, Cardinal being present at them both, & reigned 38. years, and then was deposed by Edward the 4. as here after (Christ willing) shall be declared in his time. In the first year of his reign was burned the constant witness bearer and testis of Christ's doctrine, William Tailor, a Priest under Henry Chichesley Archbishop of Canterbury. Of this William Tailor I read, that in the days of Thomas Arundell, he was first apprehended, and abjured. Afterwarde in the days of Henry Chichesley, about the year of our Lord 1421. which was a year before his burning, the said William Tailor appeared again in the convocation before the Archbishop being brought by the Bishop of Worcester, being complained of to have taught at Bristow these Articles following.

First, that whosoever, hangeth any scripture about his neck, taketh away the honor due only to God, & giveth it to the Devil.

Secondly, that no human person is to be worshipped, but only God is to be adored.

Thirdly, that the Saints are not to be worshipped nor invocated.

Upon these Articles the said William Tailor being examined, denied that he did preach or hold them in way of defending them, but only did commune and talk upon the same, especially upon the second and third article, only in way of reasoning, and for argument sake. And to justify his opiniō to be true in that which he did hold, he brought out of his bosom a paper or libel written, wherein were contained certain Articles, with the testimonies of the Doctors alleged, and exhibited the same unto the archbishop. Who then being bid to stand aside, the Archbyshop consulting together with the bishops and other prelates, what was to be done in the matter, delivered the writings unto M. John Castle, and John Rikinghale, the two vicechauncelors of Oxford and Cambridge, and to John Langdon monk of Canterbury. Who advising with themselves, and with other deuines, about the Articles and allegations, on the monday following, presented the said Articles of William Tailor, to the Archbishop and Prelates, as erroneous and heretical. Wherevppon William Tailor being called before them, in conclusion was contented to revoke the same, and for his penance was by them condemned to perpetual prison.

Notwithstanding, through favor they were contented, that he should be released from his carceral indurance, in case he would put in sufficient surety in the kings Chancerye, and swear that he shall never hold or favor any such opinions hereafter. And thus the said William Tailor appointed to appear the next Wednesday at Lambeth before the Archbishop, to take his absolution from his long excommunication during y ^e time from Thomas Arundell, appeared again before him, where he laying a side his Arunlousa, that is: his cloke, his cap, and stripped unto his doublet, kneeled at the feet of the Archbyshop. Who then standing up, and having a rod in his hand, began the Psalm Misere. &c. his chaplaines answering the second verse. After that was said, the Collect, Deus cui proprium. &c. with certain other prayers. And so taking an oth of him, the Archbishop committed him to the custody of the Bishop of Worcester, to whom power and authority was permitted to release him, upon the conditions aforesaid. And thus was William Tailor, for that time absolved, being enjoined notwithstanding to appear at the next convocation whensoever it should be, before the said Archbishop or his successor that should follow him.

In the mean time, while William Tailor was thus in the custody of the Bishop of Worcester, there passed certain writings between him, and one Thomas Smith priest at Bristow, in the which writings William Tailor replied against y ^e said Thomas, concerning the question of worshipping Saints. Upon the occasion of which reply, being brought to the hands of the bishop of Worcester, William Tailor began a new to be troubled, & was brought again before the public convocation of the clergy, by the said bishop of Worcester, to answer unto his writings. This was an. 1422. the 11. day of February. Unto the which convocation the said William being presented, his writings were read to him, which he would not, nor could not deny to be of his own hand writing.

The tenor and effect of whose writing only tended to prove, that every petition and prayer for any supernatural gift, ought to be directed to God alone, & to no creature. All be it in this his writing he did not utterly deny, that it was not lawful in no respect to pray to Saints, (and bringeth for the same Thomas Aquine) but only in respect of that worship, which is called Cultus latriae : And further so prosecuteth his mind herein, that he seemeth little or nothing to differ from the superstition of the papists: as most plainly appeareth by his own words, saying: Nunquam 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, quae non fallit, & ex consona ration. &c. And moreover he inferreth the example of Moses, who prayed unto God, alleging the merits of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which were dead. &c. And furthermore passing from the testimony of Jerome, and alleging the example of Stephen, saith: Quod nunc magis exauditur pro veneratoribus suis, quam tunc exauditus est pro lapidatoribus. And at length he cometh to this conclusion, proving by S. Agustine, in this manner:

Thus much out of the foresaid writing of W. Tailor I have excerped, to the intent that the indifferent reader, using his judgment herein, may see how little matter was in this, wherefore he should be condemned by the Papists. And yet notwithstanding the same writing being delivered by the archbishop, to the four orders of Friers of London to be examined, was found erroneous and heretical in these points.

• 1. First, that every prayer, which is a petition of some supernatural gift or free gift, is to be directed only to God.
• 2. Item, that prayer is to be directed to God alone.
• 3. Item, to pray to any creature is to commit idolatry.
• 4. Also, another opiniō there was much like to the other, to make up the fourth, so that although all these opinions agreed in one, yet to make up a number every order of the four sortes of Friers, thought to find out some matter to offer up to the Archb. against him, least one order should seem more cunning or pregnant in finding out more, then could another: or else perchance least any of them should seem to favor the party, in bringing nothing against him, as the rest had done.

When the Saturday was come, which was the 20. day of February, upon the which day the 4. orders were appointed to declare their censure upon the Articles in the chapiter houses of Paul's, first appeareth Frier Tylle, for the Black Friers, then Frier Winchelsey: then Frier Low: After Frier Ashwel, eche Frier for his order severally bringing his heresy, as is above specified.

Thus the verdict of these 4. orders being given up to the Archb. and severally, eche order coming in with his heresy, which was the 20. day of February. Hereupon cometh down a wryt from the king, directed to the lord Major and Sheriffs of London. De heretico comburendo, dated the 1. day of March. Anno 1. of his reign. The copic whereof remaineth in the records of the Tower, beginning thus, Rex Maiori & vicecomitibus. Wherupon the said William Tailor condemned as a relapse, first was disgraded, and after to be burned, and so was committed to the seculare power, who their being had to Smithfield, the 1. day of Marche, with Christian constancy, after long imprisonment, there did consummate his Martyrdom. 1422.

The manner of his disgrading was all one with the disgrading of John Hus before: for the Papists use but one form for all men. First disgrading them from Priesthode, by taking from them the chalice and patine. From deaconship, by taking from them the gospel book and tunicle. From Subdeaconship, by taking from them the Epistle book and Tunicle. From Accoluteship, by taking from them the Cruet and Candlestick. From an Exorcisie, by taking away the book of Exorcismes or Graduall. From the Sextonship, by taking away the churchdoore key and surplis. And likewise from Benet, in taking away the surplis, and first tonsure. &c. Al which they orderly accomplished upon this godly Martyr, before his burning.

John Florence a Turner.

IDon Florence a Turner, dwelling in Shelton, in the Diocese of Norwich, was attached for that he held and taught these heresies here under written (as they called them) contrary to y ^e determination of the Church of Rome.

In primis, that the pope and Cardinals have no power to make or constitute any laws.

Item, that there is no day to be kept holy, but only the Sunday which God hath hallowed.

Item, that men ought to fast no other time, but of the Quatuor temporum.

Item, that Images are not to be worshipped, neither that the people ought to set up any lights before them in the Churches, neither to go on pilgrimage, neither to offer for the dead, or with women that are purified.

Item, that Curates should not take the tithes of their parishioners, but that such tithes should be divided amongst the poor parishioners.

Item, that all such as swear by their life or power, shall be damned, except they repent.

Upon wensday, being the second day of August in the year of our Lord 1424. the said John Florence personally appeared before William Bernam, Chancellor to William bishop of Norwich, whereas he proceeding against him, objected the first article touching the power of the Pope and Cardinals: to which Article the said John Florence answered in this manner. If the pope lived uprightly as Peter lived, he hath power to make laws: otherwise, I believe he hath no power. But being afterward threatened by the judge, he acknowledged thathe had erred, and submitted himself to the correction of y ^e church, and was abjured, taking an oath that from that time forward he should not hold, teach, preach, or willingly defend 〈1 page duplicate〉 any error or heresy contrary to the determination of the church of Rome, neither maintain, help, or aide any that shall teach or hold any such errors or heresies, either privily or apertly, and for his offense in this behalf done, he was enjoined this penance following.

Three Sondaies in a solemn procession in the cathedral Church of Norwich, he should be displed before all the people. The like also should be don about his parish church of Shelton, three other several Sondaies, he being bare headed, bare footed & bare n • cked, after the manner of a public penitentiarie, his body being covered with a canues shirt, and canues breches, carrying in his hand a taper of a pound weight, and that done he was dismissed.

Richard Belward of Erisam in the Dioces of Norwich.

RIchard Belward of Erisam, in the Diocese of Norwich, was accused for holding and teaching these errors and opinions here under written, contrary to the determination of the church of Rome.

In primis, that Ecclesiastical ministers and Ordinaries have no power to excommunicate, neither can excommunicate: And all be it that a Bishop do excommunicate any man, God doth absolve him.

Item, that he held the erroneous opinions and conclusions, that Syr John Oldcastle held when he was in prison, & affirmed that Syr John Oldcastle was a true Catholic man, and falsely condemned and put to death without any reasonable cause.

Item, that such as go on pilgrimage, offering to images made of wood and stone, are excommunicate because they ought to offer to the quick, and not to the dead: and that the Ecclesiastical Ministers, that is to say the curates do sell God upon Easter day, when as they receive offerings of such as should communicate before they do minister the Sacrament unto them.

Item, that he counseled diverse women, y ^e they should not offer in the Church for the dead, neither with women that were purified.

Item, that he blamed diverse of his neighbors that refused his doctrine, saying unto thē: truly ye are sooles that deny to learn the doctrine of my sect, for your neighbors which are of my sect, are able to confound and vauquish all other that are of your sect.

Item, that the Saints which are in heaven, ought in no case to be prayed unto, but only God.

Item, that the said Richard keepeth schools of lolardy in the English tongue, in the town of Dychingham, and a certain Parchment maker bringeth him all the books containing that doctrine from London.

The 5. day of July 1424. the said Richard Belward was brought before John, Bishop of Norwich sitting in place of judgment, whereas the foresaid Articles were objected against the said Richard, which he there denied: whereupō the bishop appointed him another day to purge himself, the monday next after the feast of S. Marget: upon which day being the 24. of July, in the year aforesaid, he appeared again before the Bishop, and brought with him 9. of his neighbors to purge him upon those articles, and there did solemnly purge himself. And afterward, for so much as the said Bishop suspected the said Richard Belward greatly of lolardie, he commanded him there presently to swear upon the Evangelists, that from that day forward he should not wittingly preach, teach, or defend any error or heresy, contrary to the church of Rome, neither aide, assist, favor or maintain, privily or apertly, any manner of person or persons, that should hold or maintain the said errors or heresies. In the presence of M. William Bernam, John Wadden, Robert Serle & John Berne Esquire, and other of his neighbors which came unto his purgation.

In like manner John Goddesel of Dichingham parchmentmaker, was detected and accused upon the same articles, and thereupon brought before the bishop: whereas he denying them, purged himself by his neighbors, as Richard Belward before had done, being sworn also in like manner, as he was, and so was dismissed and set at liberty, until the year of our Lord 1428. When as he was again apprehended, accused and abjured, as shall be more at large declared in the history when we come to that year. Syr Hugh Pie also, chaplain of Ludney in the diocese of Norwich, was likewise accused and brought before the bishop of Norwich y ^e 5. day of July. An. 1424. for holding of these opinions following.

That the people ought not to go on pilgrimage.

Item, that y ^e people ought not to give alms, but only unto such as beg at their doors.

Item, that the image of the cross and other images are not to be worshipped. And that the said Hugh, had cast the cross of Bromeholde into the fire to be burned, which he took from one John welgate of Ludney. Which articles as is aforesaid, being objected against him, he utterly denied: Wherupon he had a day appointed to purge himself by the witness of 3. lay men and 3. priests. That so done, he was sworn as the other before, and so dismissed.

After this, in the year of our Lord 1428. king Henry the 6. sent down most cruel letters of commission unto I. Exetor and Iacolet German, keeper of the castle of Colchester, for the apprehending of Sir William White Priest, and others suspected of heresies, the tenor whereof, hereafter ensueth.

By virtue of which commission we find in old Monuments, that within short space after. John Exeter, which was appointed one of the commissioners, attached 6. persons in the town of Bungay in the diocese of Norwich, and committed them to William Day, and William Roe, Constables of the town of Bungay, to be sent within 10. days following under safe custody, unto the castle of Norwich. Whose names, through the antiquity of the monument were so defaced that we could not attain to the perfect knowledge of them all: only 3. names partly remained in the book to be read, which were these.

John Waddon of Tenterdon, in the county of kent, Bartlemewe, Monk of Ersham, in the county of Norfolk, Corneleader, a martyed man. William Skuts.

These 3. were in the custody of the Duke of Northfolk, at his castle of Fremingham.

Besides these, we also find in the said old monuments within the diocese of Norffolke and Suffolk, specially in the towns of Beckels, Ersham, and Ludney, a great mumber both of men and women to have been vexed and ca •• e in prison, & after their abjuration, brought to open shame in churches and markets by the bishop of the said diocese called William, and his Chancellor William Bernham, John Exceter being the Register therein, so that within the space of 3. or 4. years, that is from the year 1428. unto the year 1431. about the number of 120. men and women are examined and sustained great vexatiō for the profession of the Christian faith: of whom some were only taken upon suspicion only for eating of meats prohibited upon vigil days, who of their purgation made, escaped more easily away and with less punishment, whose names here follow subscribed.

The names of them that were taken and examined upon suspicion of heresy.
• RObert Skiruing of Harlstone.
• Wiliam Skiruing.
• John Terry of Ersham.
• John Abtre of Ersham.
• John Middleton of Haluergate.
• John Wayde of Ersham.
• Rich. Clarke of Sething.
• Tho. White of Bedingham.
• M. Rob. Beete of Berry.
• Rich. Page of Clipsly.

The other were more cruelly handled, and some of them were put to death and burned, of whō we do specially find mention made of these three.

• Father Abraham of Colchester.
• William white Priest.
• John Waddon priest.

The residue, for a great number of good men and women, were forced to abjure, sustaining such cruel penance as pleased then the said Bishop and his Chancellor to lay upon them. The names of which both men and won̄ here follow together in this brief Catalogue to be seen.

• John Beuerley.
• John Wardon.
• John Baker. John Midleton.
• John Kynget.
• Margery Backster.
• John Skilley.
• John Godhold.
• Thomas Albecke. John Pierce.
• Nicholas Canon of Eye.
• Thomas Pye.
• John Mendham.
• John Middleton.
• Thomas Chatris.
• Thomas Wade.
• William Taylor.
• John Cupper, vicar of Tunstall.
• Sir Hugh Pye Priest.
• Bartholomew Tatcher.
• Thomas James.
• John Fouling.
• Bertram Cornmonger.
• Thomas Swerdin.
• Alanus Andrew.
• William Wright.
• William Euerden.
• William Taylor.
• Auis the wi • e of Thomas Moon and her daughter.
• Richard Fletcher of Beckles.
• Nicholas Belward.
• Thomas Grenemere.
• John Clarke. William Bate.
• William Scherming.
• William Osburne.
• John Rene of Beckles.
• Baldwine Cooper of Beckles.
• John Pert. M Mones servant.
• Rob. Brigs, John Finch.
• John Wropham. Thomas Mone.
• Isabell Chaplain of Martham.
• William Mass of Ersham.
• John Goodwin of Ersham.
• Henry Latchcold of Ersham.
• Henry Boode of Ersham.
• Rich Horne of Ersham.
• John Belward senior of Ersham.
• John Belward iunior of Ersham.
• John Spire of Bungay.
• Rob. Colle of Turning.
• The heard of Shepemedow
• Isabell Dauy of Costes.
• Sibill wife of John Godefell of Dicham.
• John Pyry of Bartham.
• John Baker. Margery Wright.
• Thomas Burrell and his wife.
• John Pert. Edm. Archer.
• The Clarke of Ludney.
• Rich Clarke of Sething.
• Katherine the wife of William Wright, William Colin of Southcreke.
• Rich King of Windeham.
• Tho Plowman. John Fellis.
• Tho. Love of Rokeland.
• Rich Knobbing of Beckles.
• Rich. Grace of Beckles.
• John Eldon of Beckles.
• William Hardy, Will. Bate.
• John Weston.
• Katherine Hobs.
• John Daw.
• Rob. Grigs of Martham.
• Will. Calis Priest.
• Tho. Pert. Priest.
• Katherine Dauy.
• Jacob Bodhome, & Margaret his wife.
• John Manning of Marton.
• John Culling of Beemster.
• Rich Fletcher of Beckles and Matild his wife.
• John Eldon of Beckles.
• Rob. Canel Priest.
• Nich. Drey.
• Will. Hardy of Mundham.
• John Poleyne.

These forenamed persons and soldiers of Christ, being much beat̄ with the cares and troubles of those days although they were constrained to relent and abjure, that is to protest otherwise with their tongues, then their harts did think, partly through correction and partly through infirmity (being as yet but new trained Soldiers in God's field) yet for their good will they bare unto y ^e truth, although with their tongues they durst not express it, we have thought good that their names should not be suppressed, as well for other sundry causes, as especially for this: either to stop the mouths of malignant adversaries, or to answer to their ignorance: Who following rather blind affection thē the true knowledge of times and antiquities, for lack of knowledge, blame that they know not, accusing the true doctrine of the word of God, for newelty and carping, the teachers thereof for new broached brethrē. Who, if they did as well foresee times passed, as they be unwilling to follow times now present, they should understand as well by these stories as other before, how this doctrine of the grace of God lacking no antiquity, hath from time to time continually sought to burst out, and in some places hath prevailed, although in most places through tyranny and the malice of men, Christ's procedinges have been suppressed and kept under from rising, so much as man's power and strength joined with craft and subtlery, could labor to keep down the same: as here by these good men of Norfolk and Southfolke, may well appear. For if the knowledge and the good towardness of those good mē, had had the like liberty of time, with the help of like authority as we have now, and had not ben restrained thorough the iniquity of time and tyranny of Prelates: it had well appeared how old this doctrine would have been, which now they contemn and reject for the newness thereof: neither needed Boner to have asked of Tho. Hawkes, and such other, where their Church was for xl. years ago, in as much as for xl. years ago, and more, within the country of Norfolk and Suffolk, was then sound such plenty of y ^e same professiō & like doctrine which we now profess. And thus much for the mumber of the names of thesepersōs.

Now touching their Articles which they did mayneteine and defend: first this is to be considered, as I find it in the registers, such society and agrement of doctrine to be amongst them, that almost in their assertions and articles there was no difference. The doctrine of the one was the doctrine of all the other, what their articles were, partly it is shown in the lease before: and partly here followeth to be declared more at large.

Although it is to be thought concerning these Articles that many of them either were falsely objected against thē, or not truly reported of the notaryes, according as the common manner is of these adversaries, where the matter is good, there to make heresy, and of a little occasion, to styre up great matter of slander, as they did before by the articles of John Wycliffe and John Hus, and others mo: So in like manner it seemeth they did in the Articles of these mē, either mistaking that which they said, or misunderstanding that which they meant, especially in these two articles concerning baptism and paying of tithes. For where as they speaking against the ceremonicall and superfluous traditions then used in baptism, as salt, oil, spittle, taper, light crisomes, exorcising of the water, with such other, accounted them as no material thing in the holy institution of Baptism, the notaryes slanderously depraving this their assertion, to make it more odious to the ears of the people, so gave out the article as though they should hold that the sacrament of Baptism used in the church by water, is but a light matter and of small effect.

Agayne, in speaking against the Christening the midwives use in private houses, against the opinion of such as think such children to be damned, which depart before they come to their Baptism, they are falsely reported as though they should say, that Christian people be sustiently baptized in the blood of Christ, and needeth no water, and that infants be sufficiently baptized, if their parents be baptized before them. Which thing is so contrary to the manifest word, that it is not to be thought any to be so ignorant of the gospel, that ever would or did affirm the same.

Moreover, they thought or said peradventure that in certain cases, tithes might be witholden from wicked priests sometime, and be conferred to better uses, to the be hoof of the poor: Therefore they are falsely slandered, as saying and affirming that no tithes were to be givē to the ministers and curates of the churches.

And likewise for matrimony, wherein they are reported to hold and affirm as though it consisted only in the mutual consent betwixt the man & woman, neding no other solemnizing in the public church and all because (as it is like) they denied it to be a Sacrament. Other articles were objected against them as these which hereafter follow.

That auricular confessiō is not to be made unto a priest but unto God only, because no priest hath any power to absolve a sinner from his sin.

Item, that no Priest hath power to make the body of Christ in the sacrament of the alter, but that after the sacramental words, there remaineth pure material bread as before.

Item that every true Christian man is a priest to God.

Item, that no man is bound under pain of damnatiō unto Lent or any other days prohibited by the Church of Rome.

Item, that the Pope is Antichrist, and his Prelates the Disciples of Antichrist, and the Pope hath no power to bind and loose upon earth.

Item, that it is lawful for every Christian to do any bodily work (sin only except) upon holy days.

Item that it is lawful for priests to have wives.

Item, that the excommunications and ecclesiastical censures given out by the Prelates are not to be regarded.

Item, it is not lawful to swear in private cases.

Item, that men ought not to go on pilgrimage.

Item that there is no honor to be givē to the Images of the crucifix, of our Lady, or any other saint.

Item, that the holy water hallowed in the church by the priest, is not holier or of more virtue then other running or well water, because the Lord blessed all waters in their first creation.

Item, that the death of Thomas Becket, was neither holy neither meritorious.

Item, that relics as dead men's bones, ought not to be worshipped or digged out of their graves, or set up in Shrynes.

Item, that prayers made in all places are acceptable unto God.

Item, that men ought not to pray to any saint but only to God.

Item that the vels and ringing in the church was ordained for no other purpose then to fill the priests purses.

Item, that it is no sin to withstand the ecclesiastical precepts.

Item, that the catholic church is only the congregation of the elect.

These were the Articles, which were generally objected against them all, wherein they did so agree in one uniform saith, that whatsoever one did hold, all the other did maintain & hold the same. By the which their consent & doctrine it appeareth that they all received it of someone instructor, who was William White: which being a scholar and folower of I. Wycliffe, resorted afterward into this country of Norfolk and there instructed these men in the light of the gospel. And now as we have declared the names and Articles of these good men, so it remaineth somewhat to speak of their troubles how they were handled, beginning first with William White.

William White Priest.

THis William White being a folower of John Wycliffe and a priest not after the common sort of priests, but rather to be reputed amongst the number of them, of whom the wise man speaketh: He was as the morning star in the midst of a cloud, &c. This man was well learned, upright & a well spoken priest. He gave over his priesthood & benefice, & took unto him a godly young woman to his wife named Joan: notwithstanding he did not therefore cease or leave frō his former office & duty, but continually labored to the glory and praise of his spouse Christ, by reading, writing & preaching. The principal points of his doctrine were these, which he was forced to recant at Canterbury.

That men should seek for the forgiveness of their sins only at the hands of God.

That the wicked living of the Pope and his holiness, is nothing else but a devilish estate and heavy yoke of Antichrist, and therefore he is an enemy unto Christ's truth.

That men ought not to worship Images or other Idolatrous payntings.

That mē ought not to worship the holy men which are dead.

That the Romish church is the fig tree which the Lord Christ hath accussed, because it hath brought forth no fruit of the true belief.

That such as wear cowls, or be anointed or shorn are the lanceknightes and soldiers of Lucifer: & that they all, because their lamps are not burning, shall be shut out, when as the Lord Christ shall come.

Upon which articles he being attached at Cant. under the Archb. Henry Chichesley in the year of our Lord 1424. there for a certain space stoutly and manly witnessed the truth which he had preached: but like as there he lost his courage and strength, so afterward he became again much more stouter and stronger in Jesus Christ and confessed his own error & offense. For after this he going into Norfolk with his said wife Joan, & there occupying himself busily in teaching & converting the people unto the true doctrine of Christ, at the last by means of y ^e kings letters sent down for that intent and purpose, he was apprehended & taken & brought before Will. bishop of Norwich, by whom he was convict & condemned of 30. articles & there was burned in Norwich, in the month of September. an. 1424.

This William White and his wife had his most abode with one Tho. Moon of Ludney. This mā was of so devout and holy life, that all y ^e people had him in great reverence, and desired him to pray for them: in so much that one Margaret Wright confessed, that if any saints were to be prayed to, she would rather pray to him then to any other. When he was come unto the stake thinking to open his mouth to speak unto the people, to exhort & confirm them in the verity, one of the bishops servants stroke him on y ^e mouth, thereby to force him to keep silence. And thus this good man receiving the crown of martyrdom, ended this mortal life to the great dolor & grief of all the good men of Norfolk. Whose said wife Joan, following her husbands footsteps according to her power, teaching and sowing abroad the same doctrine, confirmed many men in God's truth: wherefore the suffered much trouble and punishment the same year at the hands of the said bishop.

About the same time also was burned father Abraham of Colchester, and Job. Waddō priest, for the like articles.

Concerning them, which abjured, how & by whom they were examined, What depositions came in against them, and what was the order & manner of the penance enjoined them, here it might be set out at large: but for avoiding of prolixity, it shall be sufficient briefly to touch certain of the principals, whereby the better understanding may be givē to the Reader, after what manner & order all the other were entreated.

First amongst them which were arrested and caused to abjure in this year afore specified. 1428. was Thom. Pye, and John Mendham of Aldborough, who being convict upon diverse of the Articles before mentioned, were enjoined penance to be done in their own parish Church, as by the bishops letter directed to the Dean of Rhodenhall, & y ^t parish priest of Aldborough, doth more at large appear, the tenor whereof here ensueth.

This (gentle Reader) was for the most part, the order of their whole penance: howbeit, some were oftentimes more cruelly handled, & after their penance they were banished out of the diocese, and other some more straightly used by longer imprisomēt, whereof we will briefly rehearse one or two for example.

John Beuerley alias Battild,

John Beuerley alias Battild a laborer was attached by the Vicar of Sowthereke, the parish priest of Waterden and a lawyer, and so delivered unto Mayster Will. Bernā the Bishops Commissary, who sent him to the Castle of Norwich there to be kept in irons: whereas afterward he being brought before the commissary, and having nothing proved against him, he took an oath, that every year afterward he should confess his sins once a yere to his curat and receive the Sacrament at Easter, as other Christians did: and for his offense was enjoined that the Friday and Saturday next after he should fast bread and water, and upon the Saturday to be whipped from the palace of Norwich, going round about by Tomelands, & by S. Michaels Church by Cottle rew, and about the market, having in his hand a wax candle of two pēce, to offer to y ^e image of the Trinity after he had done his penance. And for so much as he confessed that he had eat̄ flesh vpō Easter day and was not shriven in all lent, nor received upon Easter day, the judge enjoined him that he should fast Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday in Whitsonweke, having but one mealt a day of fish and other whitte meats, and after his penance so done, he should depart out of the diocese, & never come there anymore.

John Skilley of Flixton Miller.

John Skilley of Flixton Miller being apprehended and brought before the bishop of Norwich y ^e 14 day of March 1428. for holding & maintaining the Articles above written, was thereupon convict and forced to abjure: and after his abjuration solemnly made (which here to annoyed tediousness we omit) he had a most sharp sentence of penance pronouced against him, the effect whereof being briefly collected, was this: That forsomuch as the said Skilley was convict by his own confession, for holding and maintaining the Articles before written, and for receiving certain good and godly mē into his house, as sir Will. White priest, and John Wadden, whom they called famous, notorious, and damnable heretics, and had now abjured the same, being first absolved from the sentence of excommunication which he had incurred by means of his opinions, he was enjoined for penance 7. years imprisonment in the monastery of Langley, in the diocese of Norwich. And forsomuch as in times past, he used upon the Fridays to eat flesh, he was enjoined to fast bread & water every Friday, by the space of that 7. years to come, and that by the space of 2. years next immediately after the 7. years expired, every wednesday in the beginning of Lēt, & every Maundy thursday, he should appear before the bishop or his successor, or cōmissary for the time being, in the cathedral church of Norwich together with the other penitentiaryes, to do open penance for his offenses.

Besides these there were diverse other of y ^e same company which y ^e same year were forced to like abiuratiō & penance, And so to proceed to the next year following, which was 1429. there ensueth a great mumber in y ^e same register, which were examined and did penance in like sort to the number of 16. or 17. In the number of whom was John Baker otherwise called Usher Tunstall, who for having a book with the Pater noster, the • ue and Creed in English, and for certain other articles of fasting, confession and invocation contrary to the determination of the Romish Church after much vexation for the same, was caused to abjure and sustain such penance, as the other before him had done.

The story of Margery Backster.

ANother was Margery Backster, wife of Will. Backster Wright in Marthā, the same yere accused: against whom one Joan wife of Cliffelande was brought in by the bishop, and compelled to depose, and was made to bring in, in form following.

First, that the said Margerye Backster did inform this deponent, that she should in no case swear, saying to her in english, dame beware of the Be, for every Be will sting, and therefore take heed you swear not, neither by God, neither by our Lady, neither by none other saint: & if ye do contrary, the Be will sting your tongue and venom your soul.

Itē, this deponēt being demanded by y ^e said Margery, what she did every day at church, she answered y ^t the kneled down & said 5. Pater nosters, in worship of the crucifix, & as many Ave Mary's in worship of our Lady, whō Margery rebuked saying: you do evil to kneel or pray to such Images in y ^e churches, for God dwelleth not in such churches, neither shall come down out of heaven, & will give you no more reward for such prayer, then a candle lighted & let under the cover of the font, will give light by night to those which are in the church: saying moreover in english, lewd wrightes, of stocks hew and form such crosses and Images, and after that, lewd paynters glere thē with colors. And if you desire so much to see the true cross of Christ, I will show it you at home in your own house. Which this deponent being desirous to see, the said Margery stretching out her arms abroad, said to this deponēt this is the true cross of Christ, & this cross thou oughtest and mayst every day behold and worship in thine own house, and therefore it is but vain to run to the Church to worship dead crosses and Images.

Itē this deponent being demanded by the said Margery how she believed touching the sacrament of the altar, said that the believed the Sacrament of the altar after the consecratiō, to be the very body of Christ in form of bread. To whom Margery said: your belief is naught. For if every such Sacrament were God, & the very body of christ there should be an infinite number of God's, because that a thousand priests and more do every day make a thousand such God's, and afterward eat them, and void them out again by their hinder partes filthily stinking under y ^e hedges, whereas you may find a great many such God's, if you will seek for them. And therefore know for a certainty, that by the grace of God it shall never be my God, because it is falsely and deceitfully ordained by the priests in the church, to induce the simple people to idolatry, for it is only material bread.

Moreover the said Margery said to this deponēt, that Thomas of Canterbury, whom the people called S. Thomas, was a false traitor and damned in hell, because he injuriously endowed the churches with possessions, and raised up many heresies in the church, which seduce the simple people, and therefore if God be blessed, the said Thomas is accursed, and those false priests that say that he suffered his death patiently before the altar, do lie: For as a false cowardly traitor he was slain in the church door as he was flying away.

Moreover, this deponent saith, that the said Margery told her that the cursed Pope, Cardinals, Archbishops, and bishops, & specially the bishop of Norwich & others that support and maintain heresies and Idolatry, reigning & ruling over the people, shall shortly have the very same or worse mischief fall upon them, thē that cursed mā Thomas of Canterbury had. For they falsely and cursedly deceive the people with their false mammetries & laws, to extort money of the simple folk to sustayn their pride, riot and idleness: And know assuredly that the vengeance of God will speedily come vpō them, which have most cruelly slain the children of God, Father Abraham, & William White, a true preacher of the law of God, and John Wadden, with many other godly men: which vengeance had come upon the said Caiaphas, the Bishop of Norwich & his ministers, which are members of the devil, before this time, if the Pope had not sent over those false pardons unto these parties, which the said Caiaphas had falsely obtained to induce the people to make procession for the state of them and of the church. Which pardons brought the simple people to cursed idolatry.

Item the said Margery said to this deponent, that every faithful man or woman is not bound to fast in Lent, or other days appointed for fasting by the church, & that every man may lawfully eat flesh and all other meats upon the said days and times: and that it were better to eat the fragments left vpō Thursday at night on y ^e fasting days, thē to go to the market to bring themselves in debt to buy fish: and that Pope Sylvester made the Lent.

Item, the said Margery said to this deponēt, that W. White was falsely condemned for an heretic, & that he was a good and holy mā, and that he willed her to follow him to the place of execution, Whereas she saw that whē he would have opened his mouth to speak unto y ^e people to instruct them, a devil one of bishop Caiaphas servants strake him on the lips, and stopped his mouth, that he could in no case declare the will of God.

Item, this deponent saith y ^t the said Margery taught her that she should not go on pilgrimage, neither to our Lady of Walsingame, nor to any other saint or place.

Also this deponent saith, that the said Margery desired her that she & Joan her maid would come secretly in the night to her chamber, & there she should hear her husband read the law of Christ unto them, which law is written in a book that her husband was wont to read to her by night, and that her husband is well learned in the Christian verity.

Also that the same Margery had talked with a woman named Ione West, and that the said woman is in a good way of salvation.

Also that the said Margery said to this deponēt: Ione, it appeareth by your countenance, that you intend to disclose this that I have said unto you: and this deponent sware that she would never disclose it, without the said Margery gave her occasion. Then said Margery unto this deponent if thou do accuse me unto the Bishop, I will do unto thee, as I did once unto a certain Frier a Carmelite of Varmouth which was the best learned Frier in all the country. Then this deponēt desired to know what she had done to the frier. Unto whom Margery answered that she had talked with the said Frier, rebuking him because he did beg, saying that it was no alms to give him any good thing, except he would leave his habit, and go to the plough, and so he should please God more, then following the life of some of those Friers. Then the Frier required of the said Margery whether she could teach him or tell him anything else. Thē the said Margery (as she affirmed to this deponent) declared to this Frier the gospels in enlish, and then the Frier departed from her. After this the same Frier accused the said Margery of heresy, and she understanding that the Frier had accused her: accused the Frier again, that he would have known her carrally, and because she would not consent unto him, the Frier had accused her of heresy. And moreover she said that her husband would have killed the Frier therefore: and so the Frier for fear held his peace, and went his way for shame.

This Margery also said that she had oftentimes been faynedly confessed to the Dean of the fields, because he should think her to be a woman of good life, and therefore he gave the said Margery oftentimes money. Then this deponent asked her whether she had confessed her sins to a priest or not. And she answered that she had never offended any priest, & therefore she would never confess her self to any priest, neither obey him because they have no power to absolve any man from their sins, for that they offend daily more grievously then other men, and therefore that men ought to confess themselves only unto God and to no priest.

Item, the said Margery said to this deponent, that the people did worship devils which fell frō heaven with Lucifer, which devils in their fall to the earth, entered into the Images which stand in the Churches, and have long lurked & dwelled in thē, so that the people worshipping those Images, commit Idolatry.

Item, she said more to this deponent that holy bread & holy water were but tri • es of no effect or force, & that the belles are to be cast out of the Church, and that they are excommunicate which first ordained them.

Moreover that she should not be burned, although she were convict of Lollardy, for that she had a charter of salvation in her body.

Also the said deponent saith, y ^t Agnes Bethem her servant being sent to the house of the said Margery the Saturday after Ashwēsday, the said Margery not being w ^t in, found a brass pot standing over the fire with a piece of baken and Otemeate sething in it, as it is said Agnes reported to this deponent.

There were also besides this deponent, diverse other (worn and examined upon the said Margery, as John Brunley and Agnes Berthē, servants to William Clistand, which altogether confirmed the former depositions.

Thus much we have thought good to note as concerning Margery Backster, which we have gathered out of the old monuments and registers. But what became of her after this her accusation, because we find no mention made in the said registers, we are not able to declare.

The same year also, were the like depositions made by one William Wright against diverse good men, as here followeth.

First, this deponent saith that William Taylor, told John Piry of Ludney, in the house of John Bungay of Beghton, in the presence of I. Bungay, Robert Brigges wright of Martham, and John Usher, that all the good men of Martham which were favorers & helpers to that good man William White are evil troubled now a days, and that the said William White, was a good & holy doctor: and that the best doctor after him was William Euerden, which wrought with the said William Taylor, of Ludney by the space of one month, and that the first Sunday of the same month, the said William Euerden did sit all day upon the table at work, saying to the said William Taylor, that he would not go to Church to show himself a Scribe or Pharisy: and the second Sunday he put on Gentle man's apparel, and went to Norwich to hearken how the Bishop and his ministers used the poor Christians there in prison.

Also the said William Wright, deposed that Willyam Taylor of Ludney was one of the sect, & went to London with Syr Hue Pye, and had conversation oftentimes with Syr William White, having often conference upon the Lollards doctrine.

Item, that Auise, wife of Thomas Moon, is of the same sect and favored them, and receiveth them often, and also the daughter of Thomas Moon is partly of the same sect, and can read English.

Item, that Richard Fletcher of Beckils, is a most perfect doctor in that sect, and can very well and perfectly expound the holy Scriptures, & hath a book of the new law in English, which was Syr Hughe Pyes first.

Itē, that Nicolas Belward, son of John Belward dwelling in the parish of Southelham, is one of the same sect, and hath a New Testament which he bought at London for 4. marks and 40. pence, and taught the said William Wright and Margery his wife, and wrought with them continually by the space of one yere, and studied diligently upon the said New Testament.

Itē, that Thomas Bremner Turner of Dychingame is perfect in that sect and law.

John Clarke the younger of Bergh, had the beddinge and apparel of William Euerden in his custody, after the return of William White from Bergh, and is of the same sect.

Item, William Bate, Taylor of Sething, and his wife and his son, which can read English very well, are of the same sect.

Item, William Skiruing of Sething, received Joan the wife of W. White into his house, being brought thither by William Euerden, after their departure from Martham.

Item, William Osborne of Sething, I. Reve glouer, and Bawdwin Cooper of Beckels are of the same sect.

Item, John Pert late servant of Thomas Moon, is of the same sect, and can read well, & did read in the presence of William White, and was the first that brought Sir Hugh Pye into the company of the Lollards, which assembled oftentimes together, at the house of the said Tho. Moon, and there conferred upon their doctrine.

Item, Syr Hugh Pye bequeathed to Alice, servant to William White, a New Testament, which they then called the book of the new law, & was in the custody of Oswald Godfrey of Colchester.

John Perker Mercer of a village by Ipswitch, is a famous Doctor of that sect. Also he said that father Abraham of Colchester is a good man.

Item, the said William Wright deposeth that it is read in the Prophesies amongst the Lollards, that the sect of Lollards shall be in a manner destroyed: Notwithstanding at the length the Lollards shall prevail and have the victory against all their enemies.

Also, he said that Tucke knoweth all of that Sect in Suffolk, Norfolk and Essex.

Besides these, there were many other • he same year troubled, whose names being before expressed in the table of Norfolk men, here for breuityes sake we omit further to untreat of, passing over to the next yere following, which was 1430. Ex Regist. Norw.

John Burrell servant to Thomas Moon of Ludney, in the Dioces of Norwich, was apprehended and arrested for heresy, the 9. day of December, in this year of our Lord 1430. and examined by Mayster William Bernam the Bishops commissary, upon the articles before mentioned, and diverse others hereafter following, objected against him.

In primis, that the Catholic Church is the soul of every good Christian man.

Item, that no man is bound to fast the Lent or other fasting days appointed by the Church, for they were not appointed by God, but ordained by the priests: and that every man may eat flesh or fish upon the same days indifferently, according to his own will, & every friday is a free day to eat both flesh and fish indifferently.

Item, that pilgrimage ought not to be made but only unto the poor.

Item, that it is not lawful to swear, but in case of life and death.

Item, that Masses and prayers for the dead, are but vain, for the souls of the dead are either in heavē or hell: and there is none other place of purgatory but this world. Upō the which Articles he being convict, was forced to obiure and suffered like penance as the other before had done.

THomas Moon of Ludney, was apprehended and attached for suspicion of heresy, against whom were objected by the Bishop, the articles before written, but specially this article, that he had familiarity & communication with diverse heretics, and had received, comforted, supported, and maintained diverse of them, as sir William White, syr Hugh Pye, Thomas Pert, and William Calais Priests, with many other more: upon the which articles, he being convict before the bishop, was forced to abjure, and received the like penance, in like manner as before.

In like manner Robert Brigges of Martham was brought before the Bishop the 17. day of February, in the year aforesaid, for holding and affirming the foresaid articles, but especially these hereafter following.

That the sacrament of confirmation ministered by the Bishop, did avail nothing to salvation.

That it was no sin to withstand the ordinances of the Church of Rome.

That holy bread and holy water were but trifles, and that the bread and the water were the worse for the conturacions & characters which the priests made over them.

Upon which Articles he being convict, was forced to abjure, and received penance in manner and form as the other had done before him.

The like also (albeit somewhat more sharp) happened unto John Finch of Colchester, the 20. day of September, who albeit he was of the diocese of London, being suspecte of heresy, was attached in Ipswich in the diocese of Norwich, & brought before the bishop there, before whom he being convict of the like articles: as all the other before him, was enjoined penance, three displings in solemn procession about the Cathedral Church of Norwich, three several Sondayes, & three displinges about the market place of Norwich three principal market days, his head, neck and feet being bare, & his body covered only with a short shirt or vesture, having in his hands a taper of wax of a pound weight, which the next Sunday after his penance, he should offer to the Trinity: and that for the space of 3. years after, every Ashwednesday & Maundy Thursday he should appear in the Cathedral Church of Norwich, before the Bishop or his Vicegerent, to do open penance amongst the other penitentiaries, for his offenses.

There were besides these men which we have here rehearsed, diverse and many other, who, both for the concordaunce of the matter, and also for that their Articles & punishments were all one, we have thought good at this time to pass over, especially forsomuch as their names be before recited in the Catalogue.

ABout the same time, even the same year. 1430. shortly after the solemn Coronation of Kyng Henry the sixth a certain man named Richard Houeden a wool winder, and Citizen of Londō, received also the crown of

Nicholas Canon of Eye.

NOw to proceed in our story of Norfolk and Suffolk in following the order of years, we find that in y ^e yere of our Lord. 1431. One Nich. Canon of Eye was brought before the Bishop of Norwich for suspicion of heresy, with certain witnesses sworn to depose against him touching his manners and conuersatiō, which witnesses appointing one William Christopher to speak in the name of them all, he deposed in manner and form following.

First that on Easter day when all the parishners went about the church of Eye solemnly in processiō as y ^e manner was, the said Nicholas Canon as it were mocking & deciding the other parishioners, went about the Church the contrary way, and met the procession.

This article he confessed and affirmed that he thought he did well in so doing.

Item, the said Nicholas asked of master John Colman of Eye, this question. Master Colman, what think you of the Sacrament of the altar? To whom the said Colman answered: Nicholas, I think that the Sacrament of the alter is very God and very man, the very flesh and very blood of our Lord Jesus Christ under form of bread and wine. Unto whom Nicholas in decision said: Truly if the Sacrament of the alter be very God & very man, and the very body & blood of our Lord Jesus Christ: then may very God and very man be put in a small room: as when it is in the priests mouth, that receiveth it at mas. And why may not we simple men, as well eat flesh upon Fridays and all other prohibited days, as the priest to eat the flesh and the blood of our Lord every day indifferently: The which article, the said Nicholas denied that he spake unto Master Colman, but unto a Monk of Hockesney, And furthermore, he thought he had spoken well in that behalf.

Item that on Corpus Christi day at the elevation of high mass, when all the parishioners & other strangers kneeled down holding up their hands, and doing reverence unto the sacrament, the said Nicholas went behind a pillar of the church, and turning his face from the high altar, mocked them that did reverence unto the sacrament.

This article he also acknowledging, affirmed that he believed himself to do well in so doing.

Item, when his mother would have the said Nicholas to lift up his right hand, and to cross himself frō y ^e crafts and assaults of the devil, forsomuch as he deferred the doing thereof, his mother took up his right hand & crossed him saying: In nomine patris filij, & spiritus sacti. Amen. Which so ended, the said Nicholas immediately deciding his mothers blessing, took up his right hand of his own accord, and blessed him otherwise, as his adversaries report of him. This Article the said Nicholas acknowledged to be true.

Item, that upon Alhallowen day in the time of elevation of high mass, when as many of the parishioners of E • e lighted many torches and carried thē up to the high alter kneeling down there in reverence and honor of the Sacrament, the said Nicholas carrying a torche, went up hard to the high alter, and standing behind the priests back saying mass, at the time of the elevation he stood upright vpō his feet, turning his back to the priest, and his face toward the people, and would do no reverence unto y ^e sacrament. This article he acknowledged, affirming that he thought he had done well in y ^t behalf. All which Articles the Bishops cōmissary caused to be copied out word for word, & to be sent unto M. William Worsted, Prior of the cathedral church of Norwich, and to other doctors of divinity of the order of begging Friers, that they might deliberate upon them, and show their minds between that and Thursday next following. Upon which Thursdaye being the last of November, the year aforesaid, the said Nicholas was again examined before M. Barnam and diverse other vpō two other articles which he had confessed unto I. Exetor notary, & Tho. Bernsten bacheler of divinity and others. Whereof the first Article was this: that the said Nicholas Canon being of perfect mind and remembrance, confessed that he doubled whether in the Sacrament of the altar, were the very body of Christ or no. This article he confessed before the Commissary to be true.

Item, that he being of perfect mind and remembrance, believed that a man ought not to confess his sins to a Priest. This Article he also confessed that he doubted upon.

Now remaineth to declare what these doctors aforesaid concluded upon the articles: whose answer unto the same was this.

First of all as touching the first article, they said that the article in the same terms as it was propounded, is not simply an heresy but an error.

Item, as touching the second article, the doctors agree as in the first.

Item, as touching the third Article, they affirm that it is an heresy.

Unto the fourth Article they answered as unto the first and second.

Item, the doctors affirm the 5. article to be an heresy.

Item, as touching the 6. Article, the doctors conclude that if the said Nicholas being of perfect mind and remembrance, did doubt whether the sacrament of the altar were the very perfect body of Christ or no, then that Article is simply an heresy.

Wherupon the said Commissary declared & pronounced the said Nicholas Canon vpō the determinatiō of the foresaid doctors, to be an heretic: and thereupon forced the said Nicholas to abjure all the said Articles. That done, he enjoined the said Nicholas penance for his offenses, three displinges about the cloister of the Cathedral Church of Norwich, before a solemn procession, bare headed & barefoot, carrying a Taper of half a pound in his hand, going after the manner aforesaid, like a mere penitētiary: y ^e which his penance, the judge commanded should be respited until the coming of the Bishop into his diocese, and that in the mean time he should be kept in prison, to the end that he should not infect the flock with his venune and poison of errors and heresies.

Thus have we briefly discoursed unto you, the great troubles and afflictions, which happened in Norfolk and Suffolk by the space of those 4. years before mentioned, having drawn out briefly for every yere, certain notable examples, sufficient for the declaration of all the rest, for so much as their opinions being nothing different, their penance and punishment did also nothing differ, otherwise then by those particular examples may be plainly seen.

Thomas Bagley Priest.

ANd now to proceed as we have begun, w ^t our former stories generally, we find in Fabians Chronicles that in the same yere of our Lord. 1431. Thomas Bagley a priest Vicar of Monenden beside Malden, being a valiant disciple and adherent of wickliffe, was condemned by the Bishops of heresy at London about the midst of Lent, was disgraded and burned in Smithfield.

Paul Craw a Bohemian.

THe same year also was Paul Crawe a Bohemian taken at S. Andrew's by the Bishop Henry, and delivered over to the secular power to be burnt, for holding contrary opinions unto y ^e Church of Rome touching the sacrament of y ^e Lord's supper, the worshipping of Sainets. auricular confession, with other of Wicklesses opinions.

The story of Thomas Rhedon, a French man, and a Carmelite Frier, burnt in Italy for the profession of Christ.

WE have declared before, how this cruel storm of persecution which first began with us in England, after it had long raged here against many good and godly men, it brake out & passed into Boheme, and after within a short time, the fire of this persecution increasing by little and little, invaded Scotland, and from thence now with greater force and violence, this furious devouring flame hath entered Italy, and suffereth not any part of the world to be free from the murder and slaughter of most good & godly men. It happened about this time, that one Thomas Rhedon, a Frier of that sect, which taketh his name of the mount Carmelus, by chance came with the Venetiā Ausbassadours into Italy. This mā, although he was of that fort and sect, which instead of Christians, are called Carmelites, yet was he of a far other religion, & understood the word of God, judging that God ought not to be worshipped, neither in that mount, nor at Jerusalem only, but in spirit & truth. This man being a true Carmelite, • fauoring with his whole heart that new sweet must of Jesus Christ, with earnest study & desire seeking after a Christiā integrity of life, prepared himself first to go into •• lie, trusting y ^t he should find there, or else in no place, son by whole good life and living he might be editied and instructed. For where ought more abundance of verme & good living to be, then in that place, which is counted to be the forte and fountain of all religion? And how could it otherwise be, but that whereas so great holiness is professed whereupon all men's cies are bent, as upon a stage, vnderas S. Peters seat is, and is thought to be the ruler & governor of all the Church, all things should flourish and abesid worthy of so great expectatiō in that place? This holy man having these things before his eyes, and considering the same with himself, forsook his own country & City, & went unto Rome, conceiving a firm & sure hope that by the example of so many notable and worthy me, he should greatly profile in godliness & learning: but the success of the matter did utterly frustrate his hope, for all things were clean contrary. Whatsoever he saw, was nothing else but mere dissimulatiō and hypocrisy. Instead of gold, he found nothing but coals: and for to say y ^e truth, he found nothing else there but gold and silver. Instead of heavenly gifts, there reigned amongst them the pomp and pride of the world. In place of godliness, riot. Instead of learning and study, douthfulnes and superstition. Tyrannie and hautinesse of mind had possessed the place of Apostolic simplicity: that now there remained no more any place or liberty for a man to learn that which he knew not, or to teach that which he perfectly understood.

Finally, all things were turned artic versie, all things happened unto him contrary to his expectation wheresoever he went. But nothing so much offended this good mas mind, as the intolerable ambition, and pompous pride in them, whom example of humility should especially commend and praise to the whole world. And albeit that he saw here nothing, which did accord & agree with the rule of the Apostles: yet these things did so much pass all measure and patience, that he could by no means resraine his long in so great abuse and corruption of the Church, seeing such ambitions pride in their buildings, apparel, in their places, in their dainty fare, in their great trains of servants, in their horsse and armor, & finally in all things pertaining unto them. Which things, how much they did vary from the prescript rule of the Gospel, so much y ^e more was this good mā forced to speak. Albeit he did well understand how little he should prevail by speaking: for if admonition would profit anything at all, the books of Wicklesse and diverse other were not wanting. The famous testimonies of John Hus, & of Dierome of Prague, and their blood shed for the same, was yet present before their eyes: at whose most effectual exhortations, they were so little correct and amended, that they seemed twice more cruel than they were before. Yet all this could not fear this good man, but that in so necessary and wholesome an office, he would spend his life if need should be. So by this means, he which came to be a scholar unto others, was now forced to be their teacher. And he which determined to follow other men's lives and manners, had now contratrywise set before them his life to be marked and followed. For he lived so amongst them, that his life might be a rule unto them all, and so taught, as he might also be their schoolemaister. For even as Paul had foreshowed unto such as desired to live godly in Christ, that they should suffer persecution: such like reward happened unto this mā. He gave unto them the fruit of godliness, which they should follow: they again set upon his head the diademe of Martirdome. He showeth them the way to salvation, and they for the benefit of life rewarded him death: and whereas no rewards had been worthy for his great labors and travails, they with most extreme ignomin • e persecuted him even unto the fire. For when as by continual preaching he had gotten great enuic and hatred, the rulers began to consist together, by what means they might circumvent this man's life. Here they had reconcle to their accustomed remedies: for it is a peculiar and continual custom amongst the prelates of the Church, that if any man did displease them, or that his talk be not according to their mind, or by any means hurtful, or a hindrance to their lucre and gain, by and by they frame out Articles of some heresy, which they charge him withal. And like as every living thing hath his peculiar and proper weapon to defend himself from harm, as nature hath armed the Bore with his tuskes, the Hedgebogge with his prickles, the Lyon is feared for his claws, the Dog for his biting, the Bull fighteth with his horns, neither doth the A • e lack his houes to strike withal: even so this is the only armor of the Bishops, to strangle a man with heresy, if he once go about to mutter against their will and ambition: which thing may be easily perceived and seen in this most holy man, beside a great number of other. Who, when as now he began to wax grievous unto them, and could no longer be suffered: what did they? straightways flee unto their old policies, and as they had done with Hus, and Hicrome of Prague, even so went they about to practice against this man. They overwhelm him with suspicion, they seek to entangle him with questions, they examine him in judgment, they compile Articles against him, and lay heresy unto his charge, they condemn him as an heretic, and being so condemned, they destroy and kill him. This was their godliness: this was the peaceable order of those Carmelites. Whose religion was to wear no sword nor shield, notwithstanding they did bear in their hearts, malice, rancor, vengeace, poison, craft and deceit, sharper then any sword. With how great care and policy is it provided by law, that none of these Clergy men should fight with sword in the streets? When as in judgment and accusations (where as it is not lawful for a man to oppress his brother) there is no murderer which hath more ready vengeance, or that both more vily esteem his brothers soul then they. They shed no blood themselves, they strike not, nor kill, but they deliver them over unto others to be slain. What difference is there I pray you, but that they are the authors, and the other are but the ministers of the cruel fact? they kill no man as murderers do. How then? Although not after the same sort, yet they do it by another mean.

The Articles which they falsely gathered against this man, are affirmed by some to be these.

That the Church lacketh reformation, and that it shall be punished and reformed.

That Infidels, Jews, Turks, and Moors shall be conue • ted unto Christ in the later days.

That abominations are used at Rome.

That the unjust excommunication of the Pope, is not to be feared: and those which do not observe the same, do not sin or offend.

But yet there lacked a minister for these articles: albeit he could not long be wanting at Rome, where all things are to be sold, even men's souls. For this office and ministry, there was no man thought more meet, then William of Rowne, Cardinal of Saicet Martines in the Mount, Uicechancelour of the Court of Rome. Eugenius at that time was Pope, who had a little before succeeded Pope Martin above mentioned. Before the which Eugenius, this godly Rhedonensis the Frenchman, was brought, and from thence sent unto prison. And again after his imprisonment, and diverse and sundry greeueus torments, he was brought before the Judges. The Wolf S • ate in judgment: the Lamb was accused. Why? because he had troubled the spring. But here need not many malice of these mighty potentates, had offended enough, and was easily convict and condemned to be burned: but in such sort, as first of all he should be deprived of all such degrees as he had taken to Priesthode: For it is counted an unlawful thing, that a Priest should be punished with profane punishment, when as notwithstanding it is lawful enough for Priests to put any lay man to death, be he never so giltles.

How religiously and earnestly do they foresee, that the majesty of Priestly dignity should not in any case be hurt? But how little care have they, that their consciences be not hurt with false judgments, and oppressing the giltles? Wherefore, before that he should come unto punishment, this good man must be disgraded. The order and manner of this Popish degrading is partly before touched in the story of William Taylor, fol. 517.

After that it had pleased the Bishops to disgrade this man frō the degrees wherewith before they had consecrated him, and thought not that sufficient, by and by after they deprived him of his life also, & burned him four years after that he came to Rome. In the year of our Lord. 1436.

And thus through the cruelty of these most tyrannous Prelates, this blessed Martyr died. Albeit it is not to be thought that he died, but made a loss of this body, for a greater gain of salvation, before the just judgment of God: Neither is it to be doubted, but that he liveth eternally under the alter, with them whose blood the Lord will revenge, peradventure too soon sor some of them, whom the earth hath here so long holden unpunished.

As this Thomas abovesaid suffered at Rome: so were diverse other in other places about Germany executed near about the same time, after the burning of John Hus: as Henry Grunfelder, Priest of Ratispone, an. 1420. also Henry Radtgeber Priest, in the same City, an. 1423. John Draendorfe of noble birth, and a Priest, was burned at Wormes. an. 1424. Peter Thoraw, at Spyre, an. 1426. Math. Hager, also suffered at Berline in Germany, not long after. Ex Balei Centur. sept.

After the death of Pope Martin, who reigned fourteen years, succeeded Eugenius, the fourth of that name, about the year of our Lord 1431. Of whom Antoninus thus writeth, that he was much given to wars, as may well declare his conflicts and fighting with the Romaines: also the battles between the Venetians and the Florentians.

This Pope began first to celebrate the Council of Basel, which Council Martin his predecessor had before intended, according to the institution of the Council of Constance. Notwithstanding the said Eugenius perceiving afterward this Council of Basel not to favor him and his doings, and fearing some detriment to come to him by the same, afterward labored by all subtle practice to dissolve and interrupt the said Council, and from Basel to translate it first to Ferraria, then to Florentia, more near to his own sea of Rome. Concerning the which Council of Basel, forsomuch as we have begun here to make mention, it shall be no great digression out of the way, to discourse something thereof (the Lord so permitting) more at large, so much as for the most principal matters thereof shall seem sufficient or necessary to be known.

Here followeth the order and manner of the Council of Basel, touching the principal matters concluded therein, briefly collected and abridged here in this present book: The rest whereof we have referred unto our former edition, wherein the full discourse of the whole disputation is to be seen more at large, for such as have list and leisure to see more thereof.

IN the 39. session of the Council of Constance (as is before mentioned, page. 594.) it was decreed and provided concerning the order and tunes of such general Councils as should hereafter follow: The first that should next ensue, to be kept the fifth year after the said Council of Constance: the second to be holden the seventh year after that, and so orderly all other to follow successively from ten year to ten year. Wherefore, according to this decree, followed a general Council, five years after the Council of Constance, celebrate and holden at Sene, under Pope Martin, an. 1424. but it soon broke up. After the which Council, the term of seven years being expired, another Council was holden at Basel, in the yere of our Lord 1431. The which Council is noted to have been the most troublesome, and to have endured longer then any other Council beforetime celebrate and holden in the Church. This Council continued almost the space of seauenteene years: wherein it was concluded, as before in the Council of Constance, that the general Councils were above the Pope, and both of these two Councils did attribute the chief authority in decreeing and determining unto the general Council: which is the cause that the contrary part doth derogate so much from the authority of this present Council.

When as Pope Martin the first had appointed Julian, Cardinal and Deacon of S. Angel, his Legate, to celebrate and hold a general Council at Basel for the reformation of the Church, and rooting out of heresies, within short space after Pope Martin died, in whose seat Eugenius the fourth succeeded, who confirmed unto the said Cardinal Julian, the same authority which his predecessor before had given him. Unto this Council of Basel being begun, came the Emperor Sigismund, who during his life time, with his presence and authority, did protect and defend the said Synod. After the Emperors death, Pope Eugenius altering his former mind & purpose, would transport the Council unto Bononie, and thereby hindered the success of the Council of Basel. And first he held a contrary Council at Ferraria, and afterward at Florence: For after the death of the Emperor Sigismund, there was no Princes or noble men, that had any care or regard of the Council. Eugenius the Pope pretended causes, as touching the Greeks, which should come unto the Council, and the uniting of their Church unto the West Church, the which Greeks would in no wise pass the Alps: Also as touching his own incommodity, that he could not come unto Basel being so long a journey, and that all his men might have easy access unto Bononia, and that amongst the Germans (which in their own country are so intractable) nothing can be attempted for their reformation: whereupon he cited Cardinal Julian and the fathers of the Council unto Bononia, under great penalty. under great penalty. They again cited the Pope, that either he should come himself unto the Council, or send Ambassadors under the like penalty. For this cause the Ambassadors of Albert King of the Romaines, and of the other Princes of Germany, assembled together first at Norenberge, and when as they could determine nothing there, they assembled again at Frankford, to appease the dissention between the Council and the Pope: for it was thought, that the Electors of the Empire might best assemble and meet in that place. In the mean time, the Emperors Ambassadors, and the Ambassadors of the Electors, went unto Basel, and having conference with the Ambassadors of the other Princes which were there, they did earnestly exhort the fathers of the Council, that they would embrace and receive the unity, which they would offer. The request of the Princes was, that the fathers would transport the Council, and go unto another place: the which only thing Pope Eugenius seemed always to seek and desire, that thereby he might either divide the fathers of y ^e Council, or take away their liberty.

Notwithstanding this sacred Synod thought good neither to deny the princes request, nor to grant that, which Pope Eugenius required. During this doubt, the Emperors Ambassadors, the Bishops of Patauia and Augusta (being much required and stirred thereunto) appointed a noble and valiant Baron called Conrad Weinsperge, by the Kings commandment, to be Protector and defender of the Council, and the fathers. Whereby as the enemies perceived the Emperors mind to be alienate from the Pope, so the Fathers of the Council understood his good will towards them: forsomuch as he would not have sent them a protector, if he had not judged it a lawful Council: neither again would he have judged it a Council in Basel, if he had given credit to Pope Eugenius. But by means of a great pestilence which began to grow, the assembly that should have been holden at Frankford, was transported unto Mainz. The Ambassadors of the princes also thought good to go thither, if they might find any means of unity, whereby they might unite and knit the Pope again unto the Council.

The assembly was very famous, for there were present the Archbishops of Mainz, Colen & Treuers, Electors of the sacred Empire, and all the Ambassadors of the other Electors. Notwithstanding, the Archbishop of Colen was the chief favorer of y ^e Council in this assembly, who with all his labor and diligence went about to bring the matter unto a good ende. Rabanus the Archbishop of Treuers shown himself somewhat more rough. The sacred Synod also thought good to send thither their Ambassadors, and appointed out the Patriarke of Aquileia, the Bishop of Uicene, and the Bishop of Argen divines, John Segouius, and Thomas de Corcellis, with diverse others. Ther was no mā there present which would name himself the Ambassador of Eugenius: Albeit there were many of his favorers and friends come thither, both frō the Council, and also out of Florence, the which, albeit they had sworn to the contrary, yet favored they more Eugenius then the Council. But the chief Hercules of all the Eugenians, was Nicholas Cusanus, a man singularly well learned, and of great experience. After diverse cōsultations had, the Electors of the Empire, and the Ambassadors of the other Princes of Germany, thought good to give out commandment throughout their whole nation and country, that the Decrees of the Council of Basel should be received and observed.

Whilest these things were thus debated at Mainz, there sprang a certain very doubtful question amongst the Divines, which remained at Basel, whether Eugenius might be called an heretic, which had so rebelliously contemned the commandments of the Church. Hereupon they gathered thenselves together, disputing long amongst themselves, some affirming, and othersome holding the negative part. Upon this their disputation, there arose three several opinions, some affirming that he was an heretic, othersome, not only an Heretic, but also a relapse. The third sort would neither grant him to be an heretic nor a relapse. Amongst these divines, the chief and principal both in learning and authority, was the Bishop of Ebriun, Ambassador of the king of Castell, and a certain Scottish Abbot: which, as two most valiant Champions, subdued all their enemies, so that all the rest did either consent unto their arguments, or gave place unto thē, and so their determinatiō took place, and Eugenius was pronounced both an heretic and relapse. Eight conclusions were there determined and allowed amongst the Divines, which they called verities: the copy whereof they did diuulgate throughout all Christendom.

When the Ambassadors of the Council were returned from Mainz, and that certain report was made of the allowing of their decrees, the fathers of y ^e Coūcel thought good to discuss the conclusions of the divines more at large. Whereupon, by the commandment of the deputies, all the Masters and Doctors & Clergy, were called together, with all the residue of the Prelates, into the Chapterhouse of the great Church, there openly to dispute and discuss Eugenius heresy. The which thing sore grieved the Bishop of Millaine, fearing least this disputation would work the deprivation of Eugenius, the which, as he said, he had always letted for fear of schism: Wherefore he ceased not by all manner of ways to labor, to stop & trouble the matter, exhorting thē that were absent by his letters, and encouraging those that were present by his words, to the defense of Eugenius. But at the last, there was a great assembly in the Chapter house, some coming thither to dispute, and other some to hear. This disputation continued six days, both forenoon and afternoon, amongst whō Cardinal Lodouicus Archbishop Arelatensis, was appointed as Judge and Arbiter of the whole disputatiō: who beside many other notable virtues, was both valiant & constant. Nicolas Amici, which was also a Proctor of the faith, a famous mā amongst the Divines of Paris demanded of every man what their opinion was. John Deinlefist, public Notary, wrote every mans sentence and judgment. The conclusions of the Divines, which were the ground and foundation of their disputation, were these here following.

• 1. It is a verity of the Catholic faith, that the sacred general Council, hath power over the Pope, or any other Prelate.
• 2. The Pope cannot by his own authority, either dissolve transport or proroge, the general Council being law fully congregate, without the whole consent of the Council: and this is of like verity.
• 3. He which doth obstinately resist these verities, is to be counted an heretic.
• 4. Pope Eugenius the fourth hath resisted these verities, when as at the first, by the fullness of his Apostolic power, he attempted to dissolve or to transport the Council of Basel.
• 5. Eugenius being admonished by the sacred Council, did recant the errors repugnaunt to these verities.
• 6. The dissolution or translation of the Council attempted the second time by Eugenius, is against the foresaid verities, and containeth an inexcusable error touching the faith.
• 7. Eugenius in going about to dissolve and transport the Council again, is fallen into his before revoked errors.
• 8. Eugenius being warned by the Synod, that he should revoke the dissolution or translation the second time attempted: after that his contumacy was declared, persevering in his rebellion and erecting a Council at Ferraria, shown himself thereby obstinate.

These were the conclusions which were read in y ^e Chapter house before the fathers of y ^e Council. Upon the which, when they were desired to speak their minds, they all, in a manner, confirmed & allowed them. Notwithstāding Panormitane Archbishop, disputed much against them. Like wise did the Bishop of Burgen the king of Arrogons Almoner. Yet did they not gaynsay the 3. first conclusions, but only those wherein pope Eugenius was touched. This Panormitane as he was subtle, so did he subtelly dispute against the last conclusions, endeavoring himself to declare that Eugenius was not relapsed, & had great contention with the Bishop of Argens, John Segouius, & Francis de Fuxe, Deuines. He divided the Articles of the faith into three sortes: straightly: as in the Creed: largely, as in the declarations made by y ^e Church, most largely of all, as in those things which rise of the premisses, affirming that Eugenius did by no means violate his faith in his first dissolution that he made, because it is not contained in the Creed, neither yet in the determinations of the Church, that the Pope cannot dissolve the Councils: & that it seemeth not unto him to rise of y ^e determination before made, but rather of the decrees of the Council of Constance: And further, that this, as a case omitted, is reserved for y ^e Pope to be discussed, for so much as in the chapter beginning Frequēs, it appeareth that the place where the Council should be kept, ought to be chosen by the Pope, the Council allowing the same, and nothing is thereof at all spoken. And if peradventure Eugenius had offended in the first dissolution, notwithstanding he ought to be hold̄ excused, because he did it by the Council of the Cardinals, representing the Church of Rome: whose authority he said to be such, that the judgment thereof should be preferred before all y ^e world. Neither had there been any sacred Council found to have proceeded against Eugenius as an heretic, & that is an evident sign, that the Council hath not thought him to have swerved from the faith, neither to have any occasion, that he should be called heretic for his errors revoked, & that he himself hath read the whole text, that the Pope did not revoke the dissolutiō as contrary unto the faith, but as breding offense: Also that y ^e last dissolutiō hath no such cause in it: for so much as likewise he had done it by y ^e counsel of the Cardinals, and for the uniting of the Greeks, that he might not be compelled in a criminal cause, to aūswear by his procuratour, whē as he being letted by sickness, could not come personally. So, for as much as in the first dissolutiō Eugenius hath fall̄ into no error of faith, he cannot be persuaded that he cā be called a relapse, for so much as he neither in the first, neither yet in the seconde dissolution did violate his faith.

This Oration of Panormitane was more praised then allowed of all men. Notwitstanding this effect it wrought, that afterward this word relapse was taken out of the conclusions, & instead thereof this word prolapse put in. Neither durst Panormitane himself, altogether excuse Eugenius of heresy, but defended more the first dissolution, then the second: yet departed he not without answer: for John Segouius an expert Divine, rising up, answered him reueretly as was comely for such a Prelate. He said he granted that which Panormitane had spoken touching the division of the Articles of the faith into three points, for because it made for his purpose. For if those things are to be holden for Articles of faith, said he, which may be gathered of the determinations of the Church, it were manifest that the conclusions whereupon we now contend, redound and come of the determinations of the Church: that is to say, of the Council of Constance: for, if therein the Pope be made subject unto the general Council, who is it that will say that the Pope hath power over y ^e Council which is above him? or that Eugenius ought to remain Pope, because he could not dissolve the Council which is above him, without the consent thereof? The which Article undoubtedly, he hath violate and broken. And if any mā will say that in the first dissolution this Article was not violate, because there was no declaration made thereof, let him which so thinketh, thus understand: that the Bishop of Rome ought not only to know the plain and manifest, but also the secret and hidden things of the faith, for he being the vicar of Christ, and the head of all other, ought to instruct and teach all men. But if so be he will not, then he shall be convicted for being head, because he continued long in y ^e dissolutiō after the declaratiō of y ^e council, neither did consent unto y ^e determination of y ^e church, & therefore, if peradventure he did not err in y ^e faith, as it manifestly appeareth by y ^e saying of Clement oftentimes alleged by Panormitan, wherein it is said, y ^e he which liveth rebelliously & neglecteth to do good, is rather a menber of the devil thē of Christ, and rather an infidel then a true beleuer: so that Eugenius by disobeieng y ^e Church, may worthily be called an infidel. Neither is it true that y ^e Pope hath not offended in the faith: For so much, as well in that answer which beginneth Cogitanti, as also in the answer which beginneth Sperant, made unto the Popes Ambassadors, these words are manifest: this Article concerneth faith, and we had rather die then through cowardliness to give place. By the which saying it is evident, the Synod to have sufficiently admonished y ^e Pope that he did against the faith, and therefore it seemed that afterward when as Eugenius revoked the dissolution, he also revoked the error of faith contained in the same. There are also diverse offenses sprōg and risen through the error of faith: for some say that the Pope is under the Council, othersome deny it, and this diversity of doctrine bringeth offense. Also it is expressly against the authority of the Council, that the Pope did revoke the assertions made in their name.

And albeit in such reuocations, y ^e style & order of judgments is not observed, notwithstanding it doth suffice in such case, when as the Council doth proceed against the Pope: in which case only the truth is to be observed, neither is the Council subject unto any positive law, that it ought to observe any terms or judicial orders. Also he said that he utterly contemned that singular gloss which did prefer y ^e Pope before all the world, so that it might well be called singular, which decreed so foolish and fond things and unworthy to be followed of any man: and that he did much marvel of Panormitane, and other Doctors of those days, which whilst they went about to extol y ^e authority of the glosses, do abase y ^e same by adding a singularity thereto: for that gloss is singular which is alone. But who would not more esteem a gloss constantly writ̄ and agreeable in all places, then that which in any one place teacheth anything which may seem to be an error: and that as touching the verity & truth. S. Jerome a grave and ancient Doctor is contrary to this gloss, who doubteth nothing at all, but that the world, as touching authority, is above the City it self, that is to say, Rome.

Segonius, could fearsely finish this his Oration without interruption: for Panormitane oftentimes enterrupting him, went about to confute now this, and now that reason. Wherupon the Bishop of Argen rising up, a man not only eloquent, but also of a stout courage, troubled Panormitane in his reasons and arguments, and put him from his purpose: yet they proceeded so far, that they passed the manner of disputation, and did not abstain from opprobrious taunts.

When the Bishop of Argen chanced to say that the Bishop of Rome ought to be the minister of the Church, Panormitane could not suffer that: in so much that he so forgot himself that day, and his knowledge (which otherwise was great) did so fail him, that he was not ashamed to say and affirm, that the Pope was Lord over the Church. Whom Segouius answered: Mark (saith he) O Panormitane, what thou sayest: for this is the most honorable title of the Bishop of Rome, wherein he calleth himself the servant of the servants of God. Which is gathered upon this point, when as Christ said unto his disciples, when they demanded of him which of them was the greatest, you know he answered them: The Princes of the people have rule and dominion over them, but amongst you it is not so, &c. Wherein he doth utterly prohibit Lordship and dominion. And Peter which was the first vicar of Christ, saith, feed the flock of Christ which is committed unto you, providing for them not by compulsion, but willingly. And immediately alter he said, not as Lord's over the Clergy. For it Christ y ^e son of God, came not to be ministered unto, but to minister & to serve, how then can his vicar have any dominion, or be called Lord, as you Panormitane will affirm: forsomuch as the disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his Lord. And the Lord himself saith: be ye not called masters, for so much as your only master is Christ, and he which is the greatest among you, shall be your servant. Panormitane being somewhat disquieted with this answer, the council brake up and departed.

The next day, there was a general congregation, and they returned all again unto the chapter house after dinner, whereas the Archbishop of Lions, the Kings Orator being required to speak his mind, after he had by diverse and sundry reasons proved Eugenius to be an heretic, he bitterly complained, detesting the negligence and ignauie, of those that had proffered such a man unto the papacy, and so moved all their harts which were present, that they altogether with him did bewail the calamities of the universal Church.

Then the Bishop of Burgen, the Ambassador of Spain, divided the conclusions into two parts, some he called general, & othersome personal, disputing very excellently as touching the three first conclusions, affirming y ^e he did in no point doubt of them, but only that the additiō which made mention of y ^e faith, seemed to be doubtful unto him. But upon this point, he stayed much, to prove that the Council was above y