Wife of John Rogers
Adriana Rogers petitioned Stephen Gardiner for her husband's release. 1563, p. 1037; 1570, p. 1660; 1576, p. 1416; 1583, p. 1487.
She searched in her husband's cell for his writings. 1570, p. 1663; 1576, p. 1416; 1583, p. 1492.
Accompanied by her ten children, she met John Rogers on his way to the stake. 1570, p. 1664; 1576, p. 1416; 1583, p. 1487.
(d.1556)
Bishop of Carlisle, 1537-1556 [DNB, Fasti]
Aldrich was one of the examiners of John Rogers on 28 January 1555. 1563, pp. 1026-28; 1570, pp. 1659-60; 1576, pp. 1416-77; 1583, pp. 1486-87.
[Foxe refers to him as 'Aldris', 'Aldrise' and 'Aldresse'.]
(1504 - 1564)
Master of the Ordinance; elder brother of Sir Robert Southwell. Courtier and official. (DNB)
Sir Richard Southwell was a signatory to a letter from the privy council to Bishop Bonner, dated 27 November 1554, informing him that Queen Mary was pregnant and ordering him to have prayers and Te Deums said throughout his diocese (1563, pp. 1014-15; 1570, p. 1647; 1576, p. 1405; 1583, pp. 1475-75).
[Back to Top]Southwell was one of the examiners of John Rogers on 22 January 1555. 1563, pp. 1023-26; 1570, pp. 1657-59; 1576, pp. 1414-15; 1583, pp. 1484-86.
He was present at John Rogers' execution on 4 February 1555. 1570, p. 1664; 1576, p. 1420; 1583, p. 1493.
He was one of the commissioners who interrogated Robert Ferrar on 4 February 1555. 1563, p. 1732; 1570, pp. 1722-23; 1576, p. 1471; 1583, pp. 1553-54.
Richard Southwell was one of the privy councillors who signed a letter to Bishop Bonner, dated 28 April 1555, ordering the bishop to proceed posthumously against John Tooley in ecclesiastical court. 1563, p. 1142; 1570, p. 1757; 1576, p. 1500; 1583, p. 1584.
Bradford was brought to speak to Bonner by the under-marshal of the King's Bench. Talk took place between the lord chancellor, Bonner and John Bradford on 22 January 1555, during which the bishop of Durham, Sir Richard Southwell, Sir Robert Rochester, and Secretary Bourne questioned Bradford's eucharistic doctrine. 1563, pp. 1185-88, 1570, pp. 1782-84, 1576, pp. 1522-23, 1583, pp. 1605-06.
[Back to Top]A declaration was made at Paul's Cross by William Chedsey at Bonner's commandment. He mentioned two letters, one from the queen and another from the privy council. The council letter was about procession and prayer at the agreement of peace between England and France. The signatories were: Francis Shrewsbury, Penbroke, Thomas Cheyny, William Peter, Thomas Wharton and Richard Southwell. Foxe suggests that he had seen the letter. 1563, p. 1217.
[Back to Top]He sent a letter to Bishop Bonner about William Andrew. 1563, p. 1271, 1570, p. 1878, 1576, p. 1608, 1583, pp. 1702-03.
Robert Farrer's examination took place before the bishops of Durham and Worcester, Sir Robert Rochester, Sir Richard Southwell and Gilbert Bourne. 1563, p. 1732, 1570, p. 2296, 1576, p. 1990, 1583, p. 2136.
After Wyatt's rebellion, Southwell went to see Elizabeth at Ashridge and found her to be unwell. 1563, p. 1711, 1570, p. 2288, 1576, p. 1982, 1583, p. 2091.
(1506? - 1570) (DNB)
Bishop of Westminster (1540 - 1550). Bishop of Norwich (1550 - 1554). Bishop of Ely (1554 - 1559). [Fasti; DNB]
Thomas Thirlby was one of the recipients of the proclamation from Philip and Mary authorising the persecution of protestants. 1563, p. 1561, 1570, p. 2155, 1576, p. 1862, 1583, p. 1974[incorrectly numbered 1970].
Thomas Thirlby was present at Gardiner's sermon, 30 September 1554 (1570, p. 1644; 1576, p. 1402; 1583, p. 1473).
He was one of the examiners of John Rogers on 22 January 1555. 1563, pp. 1023-26; 1570, pp. 1657-59; 1576, pp. 1414-15; 1583, pp. 1484-86.
He was one of the commissioners who condemned John Bradford, Laurence Saunders and Rowland Taylor to death (1570, p. 1699; 1576, p. 1450; 1583, pp. 1523-24).
He was sent as an ambassador to the pope on 19 February 1555. Foxe speculates that this embassy concerned the restoration of monastic lands. 1570, p. 1729; 1576, p. 1477; 1583, p. 1559.
A letter regarding Green's treason was sent to Bonner by the privy council on 11 November 1555 but not delivered until 17 November. It was signed by Winchester, Penbroke, Thomas Ely, William Haward, John Bourne, Thomas Wharton. 1563, p. 1460, 1570, p. 2023, 1576, p. 1744, 1583, p. 1852.
Thirlby and Bonner came to Cranmer with a new commission on 14 February 1556. 1563, pp. 1489-92; 1570, pp. 2058-59, 1576, pp. 1775-76, 1583, pp. 1881-82.
Thirlby examined and condemned John Hullier. 1563, p. 1515, 1570, p. 2086, 1576, p. 1800, 1583, p. 1906.
John Hullier was examined and sent to Cambridge Castle by Thirlby. 1570, p. 2196, 1576, p. 1895, 1583, p. 2004.
Thirlby was imprisoned in the Tower after the death of Mary. 1570, p. 2301, 1576, p. 1993, 1583, p. 2101.
All of the material on Rogers's early life up to his imprisonment in Newgate was already printed in the Rerum (pp. 266-67). The Rerum also contains Rogers's account of his examinations (pp. 268-79). All of this material would be reprinted in every edition of the Acts and Monuments.
In the first edition of the Acts and Monuments, Foxe added the sentence condemning Rogers, taken from official records as well as Rogers's relation of what he would have saidat his examination if it had been permitted. There was also an additional account of Bonner refusing to allow Rogers to visit his wife before he was executed and a 'prophecy' that Rogers made to John Day. (Foxe reports that Day was the source for this). And, in the appendix to the first edition, Foxe printed an anecdote, which he must have heard while the 1563 edition was being printed, of Rogers's opposition, in Edward VI's reign, to clerical vestments.
[Back to Top]In the second edition of the Acts and Monuments, Foxe deleted most of Rogers's account of what he would have written, only producing a short extract from it. He also replaced his earlier account of Rogers's execution with a more detailed one, which was probably obtained from a member of Rogers's family, possibly the martyr's son Daniel. Foxe also added an account of Daniel Rogers discovering his father's writings; this was very probably obtained from the same source. And Foxe moved the anecdote of Rogers's opposition to vestments from the appendix and integrated it into his account of Rogers.
[Back to Top]In the third edition of the Acts and Monuments, Foxe simply reprinted the account of Rogers from the second edition without alteration. In the fourth edition, Foxe reprintedthe account from the second edition, also adding Roger's account of what he would have said at his examination, which had not been printed since the first edition.
[Back to Top]MarginaliaFebruary 4.
As with the sections that precede it, this one is strong on narrative, and many of the glosses reflect this (e.g., 'M. Rogers Chaplayne to the Marchaunt aduenturers at Antwerpe'; 'M. Rogers brought to the Gospell by M. W. Tindale, & M. Couerdale'; 'M. Rogers goeth to Wittenberge'; 'M. Rogers returneth from Saxonie into England in K. Edwards tyme'). In a departure from the usual practices in the 1563 edition, the names of speakers are placed in the margin during the portions of the text concerned with Rogers' examinations. The later editions insert the names into the text, reflecting their need to make space available for other forms of comment. The 1563 layout here is further evidence that Foxe had not yet fully worked out a set of conventions governing his annotations at this stage: 1563 was more experimental and irregular than later editions (but see the beginning of Book X for evidence which points another way).
[Back to Top]Several changes after 1563 show Foxe sharpening his attacks on the papists in later years. For example, the gloss 'The catholike church' is replaced by the polemically more powerful 'No head of the Catholicke Church, but Christ' from 1570; other examples are 'The papistes ar loth to abide trial' and 'A fayre pretense to excuse your ignorance'; 'Catholike what yt signifieth' and 'The Popes church proued not to be Catholicke'; 'Mariage of priestes' and 'Lawfulnes of priestes mariage'. These examples suggest that Foxe's more comprehensive and careful annotating from 1570 onwards in part grew out of a desire to make the most of the opportunities it afforded for making polemic points. One example shows an interesting shift in tone after 1563: the more vindictive and demotic 'Here my Lorde lacked but an onion to make the teares com oute' comment of 1563 became 'These murderers pretend a sorrow of hart and yet they will not cease from murdering', which makes the same point, but more directly. Thus, Foxe after 1563 seems to have allowed more space for attacking the opposition, but did so in a more careful manner.
[Back to Top]His attacks are often (following Rogers) procedural ('Steph Gardiner refused to haue the truth to be tryed by learning'; 'Gardiner wil compel to that, which he cānot teach to be true'; 'M. Rogers could not be heard to speake'; 'Confused talke without order'; 'M. Rogers imprisoned against all law and right'; 'M. Rogers punished before any law was broken'), and they also point out the cruelty ('The Pope a destroyer of maryage and maynteyner of whoredome'; 'M. Rogers could not be suffered of Boner to speake to his wife before his burning'), ignorance ('A fayre pretense to excuse your ignorance') and vice ('The Bishop of Winchester iudgeth M. Rogers, by his owne disease') of the persecutors, while also joining Rogers in capitalising on the past opinions and allegiances of the persecutors ('The Bishops contrary to theyr former doinges and wrytinges'; 'The Byshops neyther will stand by theyr assertion, nor yet will suffer other men so to doe'). The last of these glosses neatly combines an attack on the hypocrisy of the bishops who will not hold to their old opinion with criticism of their cruelty for persecuting Rogers for doing precisely that.
[Back to Top]Providing contrast to the failings of the papists, the glosses emphasise Rogers' pious concern for his family ('M. Rogers carefull prayer for his wife and children'), his generosity ('Prouision by M. Rogers for the prisoners') and his steadfastness ('M. Rogers refuseth his pardon'). Two pairs of glosses contrast protestant virtue and papist vice ('M. Gosnold laboured for M. Rogers' and 'Great mercy of Winchest. no lesse then the Foxe hath to the chickenes, or the Wolfe to suck the bloud of Lambes'; 'The godly spirite of M. Rogers' and 'Marke here the spirite of this prelate'). A series of glosses concerned with Rogers' prophecies appears at the end of the section: 'M. Rogers seemeth to prophesie here of England, and that truely' notes that Rogers 'seemeth' to predict the defeat of the papists, and this gloss is followed by others predicting the return of the exiles and the gospel, and concerning Rogers' attitude to the ministry and 'Priestes cappes'. The 'seemeth' perhaps functions as a device to remind the attentive reader that the threat of antichrist is never entirely subdued. This is especially significant given the glosses which follow on the provision of preachers and caps: these glosses would have been read in the shadow of the fear of antichrist. In line with established practice, 1583 has 'read afore' where 1570 and 1576 give accurate references.
[Back to Top]On the identification of John Rogers as Thomas Matthew, see Mozley (1953), pp. 131 and 136-41.
I.e., German
On this period of Rogers's life, see Mozley (1953), pp. 131-34.
"Dutch" here means German, being derived from Deutsch, the German word for German. The Latin edition (Bas. 1559, p. 266) here says: Profectus illico Vuittebergam adeo in Germanica discendâ linguâ celeres fecit progressus," &c.
In which ministery, he diligently and faithfully serued many yeares, vntill such tyme as it pleased God by þe faithfull trauell of his chosen and deare seruant king Edward the sixt, vtterly to banish all Popery forth of England, & to receuie in true Religion, settyng Gods Gospell at liberty. He then beyng orderly called, hauyng both a conscience and a ready good will to helpe forward the worke of the Lord in his natiue country, MarginaliaM. Rogers returneth from Saxonie into England in K. Edwards tyme.left such honest and certaine conditions as he had in Saxony, and came into England to preach the Gospel, without certaintie of any condition. In which office, after he had a space diligently and faithfully trauailed, Nicholas Ridley then bishop of London, gaue him a MarginaliaM. Rogers reader and Prebendary in Paules.Prebende in the Cathedrall Church of Paules, and the Deane and the Chapter chose hym to be the Reader of the Diuinitie lesson there,
Curiously, Foxe has not mentioned that Rogers was the vicar of St Sepulchre, a wealthy and important London living.
After the Queene was come to the Tower of Londō,
Mary came up to London and arrived at the Tower, August 3d, 1553; see suprà, p. 388. - ED.
dayes, exhortyng the people constantly to remayne in the same, and to beware of all pestilent Popery, Idolatry, and superstition.
This ... Sermon was preached by Rogers, on Sunday, August 6th; see suprà, p. 390. - ED.
This proclamation is given {earlier in the text}, dated August 18th; but {elsewhere in the text} it is said to have been issued August 21st. See Machyn's Diary, p. 42. - ED.
It seems from Haynes's State Papers of Lord Burghley, p. 170 (quoted by Wordsworth, Eccl. Biogr. ii. p. 304), that Rogers was confined before the proclamation; for the minute of the Privy Council in Haynes says, - "August 16th, John Rogers, alias Matthewe, a seditiouse preacher, ordered by the lords of the counsaill to kepe himself as prisoner at his howse at Powles, without conference of any personne, other than such as are daylie with him in householde, until suche time as he hath contrarie commaundment."
[Back to Top]Thus he remayned in hys owne house as prisoner a long tyme,
Rogers was transferred to Newgate on 27 January 1554.
The Latin edition, p. 267, adds here that his dwelling was very near the bishop of London's; and that the proverb was realized, xxx. According to Foxe, suprà, 393, he was confined to his house August 16th, 1553. - ED.
In the Rerum, Foxe explains that Rogers's house was near to Bonner'sLondon palace (Rerum, p. 267).
Rogers was committed to Newgate, Saturday, Jan. 27th, 1554, as Foxe states {earlier in the text}. So that he was more than a year in prison: the Latin edition, p. 267, says, "menses complures." - ED.
There is a copy of this Process against Rogers ... in the Emmanuel MSS. 2.2.16, No. 7, which supports Foxe; his first Edition calls this "The Confession and Answer, &c.," and so does the Emm. MS.
Stephen Gardiner. - ED.
I.e., the Privy Council.
BL, Lansdowne 389, fos. 187v-199r is a complete copy of Roger's examinations (including the answers he has not allowed to give). For a printed copy of this document, together with a detailed, albeit hypercritical, comparison of the manuscript with Foxe's version of it, see Chester, pp. 293-337, cf. Chester's overall assessment of Foxe's editing on pp. 151-54, 158 and 208-10. ECL 261, fos. 20r-44r is a partial copy of this material.
[Back to Top]See Harleian MSS, Number 421, art. 20. - ED.
MarginaliaExamination & aunswere of M. Iohn Rogers.FIrst the L. Chancellour said vnto me thus. Sir, ye haue heard of the state of the realme in which it staudeth now.
Rogers. No my Lord, I haue bene kept in close prison, and except there haue bene some generall thyng sayd at the table whē I was at dinner or supper, I haue heard nothing, and there haue I heard nothing whereupon any speciall thing might be grounded.
L. Chan. Then sayd the L. Chancellor: Generall thynges, generall things, mockingly? Ye haue heard of my L. Cardinals commyng, and that the Parliament hath receyued his blessing, not one resisting vnto it, but one man which did speake against it. Such an vnitie, and such a myracle hath not bene seene. And all they, of which there are eyght score in one house,
I.e., the House of Commons.
{Cattley/Pratt alters 'sayd' to 'save' in the text.} It stands "said one" in all the editions of Foxe; but in the "Errata" to the edition of 1563 we are told that "said" is an error for "save." Who this noble-minded individual was, we learn from the following passage of Strype: "Nov. 28th (1554), the Parliament by an instrument declared their sorrow for their apostasy, and prayed the king and queen to intercede with the cardinal to obtain his absolution; and they all kneeled down and received it. Yet one, Sir Ralph Bagnal, refused to consent to this submission, and said, 'He was sworn to the contrary to King Henry VIII, which was a worthy prince, and laboured 25 years before he could abolish him: and to say I will agree to it, I will not.' And many more were of the same mind, but none had the confidence to speak but he." (Strype's Memor. iii. p. 204.)
[Back to Top]