Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

Cheshire, besides many others to his private friends and acquaintances." This is pretty well for a man who admitted, according to Fox's testimony, that he was not fit to be a preacher through want of learning, and shews that the modern editors are not more squeamish in their adherence to truth than Fox himself. Of the many letters said to be written by Bradford, the modern editors have preserved one, which occupies two pages of their book, and is a specimen of sectarian cant of modern date, and more like one of their own coining than a composition of the sixteenth century. Bradford was executed with the following in Smithfield.

John Leafe, Martyr.

He was an apprentice to one Humphrey Gaudy, a tallow-chandler of Christ Church in London. He was only nineteen years of age, and could neither read nor write, yet he made himself so conspicuous in maintaining new doctrines, that he was several times called before the bishop, who used his best endeavours to cure him of his fanaticism, but without effect. After being condemned by the secular power, the bishop sent him his opinion in writing, together with a form of recantation, which being read to him, he was asked if he would sign it; to which he replied in the negative, and taking out a pin, he pricked his finger to make it bleed, and sprinkling the paper with his blood, he desired the messenger to take it back to the bishop, "to shew," say the modern editors, "that he had already signed it with his blood."

Margery Pulley and Wm, Minge, Martyrs.

[ocr errors]

Mrs. Pulley was a widow of the parish of Popingberry, in Kent, and the modern editors say she was the first female martyr in England." They introduce her case in these words. "Such was the fury of bigoted zeal during the reign of Mary, that even the more tender sex did not escape the resentment of the Romish persecutors. These monsters in human form, embraced every opportunity of exercising their cruelty, tyranny, and usurpation; nor could youth, age, or sex, impress on their minds the least feelings of humanity." In stating that Mrs. Margery Pulley was "the first female martyr in England," these modern editors seem to have short memories, for they have given in their edition, pages 299 and 307, an account of the martyrdom of Anne Askew, who, being condemned by archbishop Cranmer, must have precedency of Margery Pulley. The modern editors talk also very stoutly of the cruelty and tyranny of the Romish persecutors; but they very conveniently forget that Cranmer and Ridley, two Protestant apostles, attempted to justify persecution by the law of God, while Catholic divines, in Mary's reign, condemned persecution as contrary to God's word and the precepts of the Catholic church. The persecution in Mary's reign was not commenced on religious grounds, but as a measure of state policy, in consequence of the restless and seditious conduct of the new reformationists. By the account given of this martyr, she was repeatedly exhorted to repent, that she might be pardoned, but obstinately persisted in her errors. Every measure being resorted to without effect, she was taken from Rochester to Tunbridge, and there suffered in the year 1555. Note. In Fox's calendar, p. 285, we have placed a 6 for a 5.

William Minge was an apostate priest, who died in prison at Maid

stone, and is registered by Fox in his calendar as a martyr, though in his Acts and Monuments he is content to make him only a confessor.

9. Richard Hooke, Martyr.

Hooke was a craftsman burned in 1556, at Chester, as Fox writes his story, yet he has placed him in his calender under date the year preceding.

10. John Bland, Preacher, Martyr.

John Bland was parson of the parish of Adesham, in Kent, and suffered with the three following at Canterbury.

11. John Frankish, and Humphrey Middleton, Martyrs.

John Frankish was vicar of the parish of Rolvindon, in Kent, and Middleton was an artisan.

12. Nicholas Sheterden, Martyr.

[ocr errors]

Sheterden was an artisan, of whom nothing further is said by the modern editors, nor of the preceding three, but that "they all resigned themselves to their fate with Christian fortitude, fervently praying to God to receive them into his heavenly kingdom." Fox has a long account of the examinations of these four Canterbury sufferers, in which, as usual, he makes the ignorant unlettered artificer a match for two very learned divines. But, that the reader may judge how consistent these Protestant martyrs were in their articles of faith, Fox sets down seven articles, which, he says, were propounded to them, to which Frankish the minister answered somewhat doubtfully; Bland, the other minister, answered flatly and roundly; Sheterden and Middleton answered to the first and second articles affirmatively. To the third, concerning the Catholic church, after a sort they granted: to the fourth, fifth and sixth, touching the real presence, &c. they refused utterly to answer: Middleton answered moreover and confessed that he believed in his own God, saying, I believe in my living God, and no dead God," &c. So far John Fox, by which it may be seen that these unfortunate creatures, who are made martyrs, had no rule of faith, but believed just as their own fancy led them.

13. William Dighill and Derick Carver, Martyrs.

Of William Dighill the martyrologist says nothing but that he was burned in Kent. The modern editors do not notice him at all, but class John Launder with Derick Carver, though Fox has placed Launder on the following day in the calendar. Carver was a brewer of Brightelmstone or Brighton, and, if we are to believe the modern editors, quite a proficient in divinity. All the doctrines received by the whole of Christendom for fifteen hundred years were pronounced by him to be erroneous, and he called the spectators to witness that he came to the fire "to seal with his blood the gospel of Christ, because he knew that it was true." He was burned at Lewes, in Sussex.

14. John Launder, Martyr.

Launder was a husbandman of Godstone, in Surrey, and was apprehended, the modern editors assert, in the house of Carver, as they were

at prayers. In his examination, according to the same authority, he said, "that all the service, sacrifices, and ceremonies, now used in this realm of England, and in other parts of the world, where they are used after the same manner, are erroneous, contrary to Christ's institution, and the determination of Christ's Catholic church, whereof he believeth himself to be a member." This is certainly saying a great deal on his own individual authority, but any thing will go down with the infatuated fanatic who is opposed to the truth. If he believed himself to be a member of the Catholic or universal church, where was it at the time of his belief? He charges the whole Christian world, that is, the whole of the Catholics in all ages with being in error, but he advances no proof to shew that they were, nor is it probable that God would suffer the whole Christian world for so many ages to be estranged from his holy law, and confer the grace of knowing it to a few illiterate creatures, many of whom could neither read nor write.

15. Thomas Iveson, Martyr.

He was a carpenter of the parish of Godstone, in Sussex, and was burned at Chichester. He held, among other opinions, “that his sins were not washed away by baptism, but that his body only was washed thereby."

16. Nicholas Hall, Martyr, and John Aleworth, Confessor.

The first of these two was a bricklayer of Dartford, and suffered for his opinions. Of the second Fox says little or nothing, only that he died in prison, at Reading, for the gospel.

17. John Careless, Confessor.

John Careless was a weaver of Coventry, and died in the King's-bench, to which prison he had been committed for heresy, in the fourth year of queen Mary. Father Parsons says, "his opinions John Fox setteth not down, so as he might be of any sect whatsoever, for any thing we know to the contrary;" and the modern editors have given us an examination, or rather a dialogue between him and Dr. Martin and the marshal of the Bench, which confirms what father Parsons states, for such trash was never before, we think, put into print. "While he was prisoner in the King's-bench," the modern editors relate, "he was much troubled in conscience, whereupon he wrote to Mr. Philpot, then in bishop Bonner's coal-house; upon which Mr. Philpot sent him an epistle of consolation, to which Careless returned an answer," which occupies two octavo pages and a half of close print. Now if we are to believe this account, the bishop's coal-house could not be a very inconvenient prison, to allow a man to write an epistle in it, and weavers in those days, though few persons were able then to read, must have been very learned to pen the answer imputed to Careless. One passage is so very singular, that we must here quote it. "O my good Mr. Philpot, which art a principal pot* indeed, filled with most precious liquor, as it appeareth by the plenteous pouring forth of the same; O pot most happy, of the high Potter ordained to honour, which doth contain such heavenly treasure in the earthen vessel: O pot thrice happy, in whom Christ hath wrought a great miracle, altering thy nature, and turning water into wine, and that

of the best, whereout the master of the feast hath filled my cup so full, that I am become drunken in the joy of the Spirit through the same.' To the word pot the modern editors have put an asterick, and at the bottom of the page, as a note, they say, "The metaphorical language, and farfetched conceits with which this letter (as well as many other productions of that age) is filled, although unpleasing, and sometimes almost ridiculous, were then admired as ornamental to the style, and illustrative of the subject, alike of the preacher, the poet, and the historian." Might they not have added "the weaver," allowing him to have been such an adept at the quill, which we cannot help deeming more than marvellous. But the modern editors say he wrote also many other letters while in prison, and they give one to his wife, which fills a page and a half of their book. We will therefore leave the reader to decide whether the weaver of Coventry was capable of writing, or whether the letters were written by some one else, and imputed to this Protestant confessor.

18. Julius Palmer, John Huyn or Gwin, and Thomas Askaine, Martyrs.

Julius Palmer, if we may credit the modern editors, was the son of a reputable merchant, and was born at Coventry. His parents, it seems, were Catholics, and educated their son in the same faith. Father Parsons says of him, that he was expelled from Magdalen college, Oxford, for libelling the president. If we are to believe the modern editors, this young man was twice expelled, but the tale they give is very suspicious. They say he was expelled in king Edward's time, because he refused to conform to the new doctrines, being then a sincere Papist; and on the accession of queen Mary, when the visitors went to Magdalen college to displace such as refused to be of the Popish religion, Mr. Palmer contrived to get himself reinstated in the college, by the interest of his friends, though during his expulsion he began to entertain doubts of the truth of several Romish doctrines. To explain this conduct, the modern editors write," His sincere attachment to the principles he professed (though opposite in nature at different periods) was the cause of his expulsion in the days of king Edward VI. and of his troubles in the reign of queen Mary; for, had he been a dissembler, he might have retained his fellowship under the reign of the former, and escaped death under that of the latter." But the modern editors seem to have forgot, that, in their account of his reinstatement in the preceding paragraphs, they asserted that he had doubts as to the truth of the Catholic faith, yet solicited his reinstatement on the principle of being a Catholic. Now there could be no sincerity in this conduct, and he was evidently a dissembler on their own shewing. Besides, they state that during the time he held his fellowship in the Catholic reign of Mary, he was studying Protestantism, and became a zealous asserter of the cause, which does not manifest any great degree of sincerity. Nor did he think of leaving the college, they further tell us, until he apprehended expulsion, and then he resigned to avoid the disgrace and preserve his conscience inviolate. Precious sincerity this!-Observe, the account of father Parsons says nothing about his expulsion in the reign of Edward, but notes his heing expelled in queen Mary's time for libelling the president of the college, which is much more likely to be true, as he was only twenty-four years

of age when he suffered, and therefore was too young, we may suppose, to keep a school at Oxford, after being expelled in Edward's reign, as the modern editors' story goes. On leaving Oxford he went to Reading, where he commenced schoolmaster, which he found not to answer, and be applied to his mother for support. His conduct, however, was so displeasing to his parent, that she drove him out of the house, with her curse upon his head, saying, "Thou shalt have Christ's curse and mine, withersoever thou goest."

[graphic]

Fox here makes this note in the margin of his book,

"Mothers may

give their own curse, but God's curse they cannot give, much less the pope." The modern editors make Julius say, "O mother, your own curse you may give me, which God knoweth I never deserved; but God's curse you cannot give me, for he hath already blessed me.' ." Well done, young man; this is no little presumption on your part to know what God hath done. The modern editors admit that Palmer's mother accused him with being banished the college for heresy; which they say he denied, and said he resigned his fellowship. "His mother then," they continue, " vehemently declared, that he believed not as his fathers and forefathers had done, but according to the NEW doctrine publicly taught and set forth in the days of king Edward VI. which was damnable heresy. In answer to this he confessed that he believed the doctrine publicly set forth in the reign of king Edward VI. He also affirmed it to be truth, and that instead of being new, it was as old as Christ and his apostles." Well said, again, young man; but where had this old doctrine newly taught been secured since the days of Christ and his apostles, as no one ever heard or read of it before the days of Edward? Can any one continue longer blind to the shifts and quibbles of those who advocate error and reject truth? The modern editors then go on with a detail of the proceedings against Mr. Palmer which carry evident symptoms of fiction, and are unnecessary to detail. He suffered with As

« AnteriorContinua »