neam, that is, a strawy or stubble epistle, I see no probability in the world that either the Protestants of those days should so much delight themselves with it, or that the bishop should take the reading thereof so heinously, as to punish it by death; but rather he should be glad to have Protestants read that epistle, by which so clearly their doctrine is confuted. But these are the improbable lies and fictions of John Fox, which he frameth with great facility every where, for the feeding of his own and other men's fancies." 8. George Wishart, Martyr. This martyr was a Scotchman, and the principal leader in those seditious and murderous doctrines which paved the way to the sacrilegious and bloody Reformation in Scotland under John Knox, who was a disciple of this Wishart. The folio edition of the Martyrology contains five long pages and a half of the life and sufferings of this martyr, and the modern editors have devoted nine pages of their edition in detailing, in sickening maudlin cant, his history. We shall, however, be brief in our remarks. He was accused of sedition as well as heresy, and his arraignment and condemnation were conducted in the most solemn manner before the constituted authorities of Scotland. The accusations against Wishart are given at large by Fox, being eighteen in number, and he makes every article of accusation begin thus: "Thou false heretic, renegade, traitor, and thief, deceiver of the people, thou despisest the holy kirk, and condemnest my lord governor's authority," &c. which courteous language, we are inclined to believe, is of Foxian manufacture. To what sect he had attached himself does not appear, as he was wavering in his belief, but most contemptuous and scoffing in his manners. He was burned in the year 1546, and his death was soon followed by the assassination of cardinal Beaton, which murder was justified by the martyrologist, who blasphemously and impiously imputed the wicked and bloody act to the inspiration of the spirit of God. This single fact is sufficient to prove the diabolical disposition which actuated the evangelical reformers of the sixteenth century and their lying annalist. See more of this martyr and the murder of the cardinal in our second volume, p. 233. 9. John Kirby; 10. Roger Clark, Martyrs. Kirby was a poor labouring man of Ipswich, wholly unlearned, but perverted to Zuinglianism. Clark was a labouring man of the town of Bury St. Edmund's, and a disciple of the former. Both were condemned and burned; the one at Ipswich and the other at Bury. They suffered under King Henry, in the year 1546. 11. Richard Bayfield, Martyr. This Richard Bayfield, or Byfield, as the folio edition and modern editors name him, was a professed monk and priest of the abbey of St. Edmund's Bury, who, being chamberlain (as Fox saith) of the abbey, his office requiring him to entertain guests and pilgrims, he fell acquainted with two brickmakers of London, named Maxnell and Stacy, who sold bricks to the monastery, and they being secretly infected with new opinions by reading the books of Tindal and other sectarians of that time, 1 17 persuaded Bayfield to read such books also. Complying with this advice, he soon imbibed the novelties, on which he was cast into prison, says Fox, and "sore whipped." Being, after this, brought before the bishop of Winchester, he abjured his new opinions, and, according to Fox's testimony, made a solemn oath upon a book and the holy evangelists to do penance for the same. But, becoming afterwards acquainted with friar Barnes, before spoken of, by this friar's good counsels and instructions, he resolved to go further than the brickmakers had brought him, that is to say, to absolve himself from his oath, and become a good Protestant and apostate friar. Accordingly, he cast off his cowl, fled from his monastery, crossed over the seas to Tindall, and there took a woman by his direction. Sir Thomas Moore tells us he had two at the same time, one in Brabant, and the other in England, so little scrupulous were these evangelical reformers in practising chastity and morality. He now became a dealer in seditious and heretical books, written on the continent, but smuggled by him into England. These works consisted of various contradictory opinions maintained by Luther, Ecolampadius, Zuinglius, Melancthon, Tindall, and others. On being ap prehended, and questioned, as Fox says, "Whether he believed the works to be good and of true faith?" he answered, "that he supposed they held the same doctrine that Luther did, but varied in some points." And being asked of what sect Zuinglius was, he said, "he thought that he held with Luther in some points," &c. On which father Parsons makes these remarks:-"Thus Fox. Whereby you see the wise man's answer, saying first, that they varied in some points, and then that they agreed in some points, and yet that all held the same doctrines, and were of one religion and faith. Sir Thomas More saith, that this Bayfield being taken now a second time, offered to abjure again, and disclosed all his brethren; but when he perceived that for his relapse, he must be burned notwithstanding, he choose to die an heretic than to recant. So saith sir Thomas More, who lived in those days and knew the man; neither hath Fox any thing to reply to this grave testimony of sir Thomas More, but only that he is not to be believed in his affirmation against Bayfield, for that he was partially affected to the pope's religion.' But whether sir Thomas More or John Fox be more credible in their assertions, the one affirming it upon his own knowledge, as being present and living at the very same time, the other denying it upon hearsay or fancy of his own, forty years after, I leave to the judgment of the discreet reader, especially if he compare the conditions of the parties to. gether, the one being a man of strict truth, the other of loose and large conscience in lying upon every occasion." We cannot close the account of this Protestant martyr without referring to the account given of him by the learned LL. D. editor of the folio edition we have mentioned, the Rev. Henry Southwell, rector of Asterby. This parson tells us, that "this Richard Byfield was cast into prison and endured some whipping, for his adherence to the doctrines of Luther: this Mr. Byfield had been for some time a monk, at Barnes, in Surrey, but was converted by reading Tindall's version of the new testament. He saw that either popery was false or the new testament was so. He had an opportunity of reading some of the ancient fathers; and from them he learned that there was a material difference between the primitive church and popery. The sufferings this man underwent for the truth were so great that it would require a volume to contain them. Sometimes he was shut up in a dungeon were he was almost suffocated by the offensive and horrid smell of filth and stagnated water. At other times he was tied up by the arms till almost all his joints were dislocated. He was whipped at a post several times, till scarce any flesh was left on his back; and all this was done to make him recant. He was then taken to Lollard's tower, in Lambeth palace, where he was chained by the neck to the wall, and once every day beaten in the most cruel manner by the bishop's servants." What the parson says here is mere assertion, and the statement of the sufferings of Byfield is in great part exaggeration and imagination. It is also contradictory to Fox himself, who admits that Byfield not only abjured his doctrines, but swore to fulfil the penance enjoined him. Here then we have Fox and the learned doctor of laws pitted against each other, and who are we to believe of the two? Neither of them are worthy of credit, for both give only their bare assertion. That the parson can lie as well as John Fox is very clear, for he tells us that Byfield was a monk at Barnes, in Surrey, and that he was converted by reading Tindall's version of the new testament: whereas Fox says he was a monk at Bury, and was first converted by two brickmakers, and, after abjuring, was re-converted by friar Barnes. As to his being converted by reading Tindall's translation of the new testament, it has been seen that this version was suppressed by an act of parliament, in consequence of the notorious corruptions of the original text by the false-hearted translator. A pretty instrument, truly, for the conversion of a monk to Protestantism. But Byfield had an opportunity of reading some of the ancient fathers; and from them he learned that there was a material difference between the primitive church and popery. It would have been well if this learned clerical doctor of laws had stated a few points in which a difference could be discovered. This would have been an act of justice to his readers; but the maligners of popery do not deal in either justice or truth. We have shewn in the two preceding volumes, and also in the pages of this, that all the ancient fathers agree with the Catholic church in every age, or rather that the Catholic church, nicknamed Popery, agrees in every age down to the present with the primitive church and the ancient fathers in all disputed points of doctrines and revealed matters of faith, and that the fathers are opposed to the modern human notions of John Fox's and the rector of Asterby's church, and all the various sects which have been spawned by her. " 12. John Clark; 13. Dunstan Chittiden; 14. William Foster; 15. Alice Potkins; 16. John Archer, Confessors. Clark was a labouring man, Archer was a weaver, Chittiden and Foster were artificers, and Potkins was the wife of one N. Potkins. These individuals are stated by Fox to have been starved to death in the castle of Canterbury, for which he has made them confessors of his church. This is a very improbable tale, for we cannot see what inducement there could be to treat these unfortunate creatures so cruelly. The statement rests only on the bare word of Fox, and there we will leave it; only observing that it has been left to these days of modern improvement to starve whole VOL. III. 29 parishes of Irish Catholics in the midst of plenty, while the bible was tended to them as the bread of life. 17. John Hooke, Martyr. All that we learn from Fox of this martyr is—“ I read that in this present year 1556, was burned one called John Hooke, a true witness of the Lord's truth at Chester." 18. John Hallingdale; 19. Wm. Sparrow; 20. Richard Gibson, Martyrs. The first of these two was an ignorant man who had imbibed the gospel frensy of the day; Sparrow was his companion, and a vender of seditious ballads, who had once recanted, but again relapsed; Gibson was a third companion, and very contemptuous in his conduct, railing against Antichrist and his ministers, and the whore of Babylon. They were all three burned in Smithfield in 1557. 21. Alexander Gouch; 22. Alice Driver, Martyrs. Of the latter of these two martyrs not only Fox, but the modern editors seem so very proud, that they have given two of her examinations at considerable length. The editor of the folio edition is not so profuse in his admiration of these Protestant heroes, who, not being man and wife, for Alice was the partner of another, yet appears to have consorted together, having been apprehended in a hayloft, do not stand before the public eye in the most enviable light. Gouch was a coverlet weaver of Woodbridge, and Alice was the wife of a husbandman, named Driver, who lived at Grosborough in Suffolk. Gouch was about 36 years old, and Alice was 30. There is no mention made about her husband, but it is said that Gouch used to visit her to be instructed in the new gos. pel. Father Parsons says, from " the suspicious taking of them together in a hayloft, a man may easily guess how light a gospelling sister she was; yet doth Fox make such account of her, and of her rare learning in the scriptures, as of no one sister more in all his history, setting down ́two large disputations which she had with Dr. Spencer, chancellor to the bishop of Norwich, and other doctors that assisted him, all which she brought to be dumb and mute, by her wise oppositions, answers, and alleging of scriptures, if you will believe Fox, who playeth also the notorious reynard, and fraudulent companion in this, as in many other things; and so I think you will say also, when you have heard the conferences, whereof here I shall set down part in his own words, and thereby you may make a guess of all the rest. "But yet before we enter to relate her disputations, you must note, that at the aforesaid assize of Bury, where (says Fox) she did boldly stand to confess Christ crucified, defying the pope with all his papistical trash,' she likened queen Mary, then reigning, to Jezabel, for which her ears were cut off immediately (says he) by commandment of sir Clement Higham, chief judge, and she joyfully yielded to the punishment, thinking herself happy that she was accounted worthy to suffer any thing for the name of Christ,' &c. So as now, having lost her ears for the liberty of her tongue, she came to dispute with the said doctors at Ipswich, without her ears, in the form following: ·- First (says Fox) she coming into the place where she should be examined with a smiling countenance, doctor Spencer, the chancellor, said, Why, woman, dost thou laugh us to scorn? Alice. Whether I do or no, I might well enough, to see what fools ye be. "Chancellor. Why are ye brought before me? and why are ye laid in prison ? "Alice. You know it better than I. "Chancellor. No, by my troth, woman, I know not why. "Alice. Then have ye done me much wrong, thus to imprison me, and know no cause why. "Chancellor. Woman, woman, what sayest thou to the blessed sacrament of the altar? "At those words (says Fox) she held her peace, and then a great chuff-headed priest standing by asked her, Why she answered not the chancellor? "Alice. Why, priest (quoth she), I came not to talk with thee, but with thy master: if thou wilt that I talk with thee, command thy master to hold his peace. And with that (says Fox) the priest put his nose in his cap and said no more. Chancellor. Answer to that I demand of you. Alice. I never read or heard of any such sacrament in the scriptures. "Chancellor. Why, what scriptures have you read, I pray you? "Alice. I have, I thank God, read God's book. "Chancellor. Why, what manner of book is that you call God's book? "Alice. It is the old and new testament. What call you it? "Chancellor. That is God's book, indeed. “Alice. And that same book have I read throughout, but yet never could find any such sacrament there; notwithstanding, I will grant you a sacrament called the Lord's supper. And seeing I have granted you a sacrament, shew me what a sacranient is. "Chancellor. It is a sign. And then one doctor Gascoynej standing by, said, It was a sign of a holy thing. Alice. You have said the truth, sir. It is a sign, indeed, I must needs grant it; and therefore, seeing it is a sign, it cannot be the thing signified also. Gascoyne. Then stood up doctor Gascoyne, and made an oration with many fair words, little to the purpose, and in the end thereof asked her if she did not believe the omnipotency of God, and that he was able to perform what he promised? "Alice. Yea, truly. But I pray you, did he ever promise that he would make the bread his body in the sacrament? "Gascoyne. What say you to "Take, eat, this is my body"? Are they not his words? "Alice. Yes; I cannot deny them. But I pray you, was it not bread that he gave them? Gascoyne. No; it was his body. "Alice. Then was it his body that they did eat overnight? 66 6 Gascoyne. Yea, it was his body. "Alice. What body was it then that was crucified the next day? "Gascoyne. It was Christ's body also. Alice. How could that be, when his disciples had eaten him up over night, except he had two bodies, as by your argument he had; one they did eat overnight, and the other was crucified the next day. Be ye not ashamed to teach the people that Christ had two bodies?" Gascoyne. With that Gascoyne held his peace, and made her no answer (says' Fox), for as it seemed he was ashamed of his doings. Then the chancellor lifted up his head from the cushion, and commanded the gaoler to carry her away. Alice. Now when ye be not able to resist the truth, ye command me to pri son. Well, the Lord in the end shall judge our cause, I wis, I wis, this jeer will not go for good payment then, &c.' 66 6 Thus far Fox (continues, Parsons). And this was the end of the first disputation, wherein Alice, the spinster, set up (as you see) and blanked both doctor Spencer, the chancellor, and doctor Gascoyne, his assistant, as also the chuff-headed priest with his nose in his his cap, by her learned answers, framed out of Fox's own brain. For no man of wisdom will imagine (I ween) that Alice Driver, though she were never so prac tised and forward in heresy, and bold through the pride thereof, could. make such a conference of herself with such learned men as the afore |