Later Examinations of John Rogers
GORDON H. CLARK, Ph.D.
Descriptions of the tortures which the Roman Catholics inflicted
on the Protestants during and after the Reformation sometimes evoke a morbid
curiosity. Nonetheless they ought to be described for a faithful record of our martyred
fathers. But what is less spectacular though equally necessary to be reported is
the type of examination that preceded the executions. It is instructive to know
for what cause these men were burned to death. In a previous issue the first trial
of John Rogers was reported. Here follow parts of the second and third examinations.
"Being asked again by the lord chancellor what I thought
concerning the blessed sacrament — whether I believed the sacrament to be the body
and blood of our Savior Christ, who was born of the Virgin Mary and hanged on the
cross, really and substantially — I answered that even as the most part of your
doctrine in other points is false, and the defense thereof only by force and cruelty,
so in this matter I think it to be as false as the rest. For I cannot understand
the words really and substantially to signify otherwise than corporally; but corporally
Christ is only in heaven, and so Christ cannot be corporally also in your sacrament.
"And here I somewhat appealed to his charity. 'My lord,'
said I, 'you have dealt with me most cruelly, for you have put me in prison without
law, and kept me there now almost a year and a half; for I was almost half a year
in my house, where I was obedient to you and spoke with no man. And now I have been
in Newgate a full year, at great costs and charges, having a wife and ten children
to provide for, and have not received a penny from my livings, (a pastoral appointment)
which was against the law.'
"He replied that Dr. Ridley, who had given me my livings,
was a usurper, and therefore I was the unjust possessor of them.
" 'Was the King, then, a usurper', said I, 'who gave Dr.
Ridley a bishopric?'
" 'Yes', he said ; and he began to set out the wrongs that
King Edward had done to the Bishop of London.
"I asked him why he put me in prison. He said because I
preached against the Queen.
"I answered that it was not true; and I would be bound to
prove it and to stand trial of the law, that no man should be able to disprove it,
and thereupon would set my life. I preached, I confessed, a sermon on the Cross,
after the Queen came to the Tower, but there was nothing said against the Queen.
" 'But you read lectures afterwards,' said he, 'against
the commandments of the Council'.
" 'That I did not', I said; 'let it be proved and let me
die for it.'
"I might and would have added, if I had been suffered to
speak, that it had been time enough to take away men's livings and then to have
imprisoned them, after they had offended the laws. But their purpose is to keep
men in prison until they can catch them in their laws and so kill them."
After a few more words the second examination was adjourned.
The next day, Jan. 29, 1555, the sheriffs brought him back for
a third examination. The lord chancellor began:
" 'Rogers, here thou wast yesterday, and we gave thee liberty
to remember thyself last night, whether thou would come to the holy Catholic Church
again or not. Tell us now what thou hast determined. Wilt thou be repentant and
sorry? Wilt thou return again and take mercy?'
" 'My lord', said I, 'I remember well what you said yesterday.
When I yesterday desired that I might be suffered by the Scripture and authority
of the first, best, and purest Church, to defend my doctrine, not only the doctrine
of the primacy of the Pope but also of all the doctrine that I have preached, you
answered me that it might not be granted me, because I was a private person; and
that Parliament was above the authority of all private persons, and therefore its
decision might not be found faulty by me, being a private person. Yet, my lord,
I am able to show examples that one man hath come into a general council, and after
the whole had determined and agreed upon an act or article, some one man coming
in afterwards hath by the Word of God proved so clearly that the council had erred
in decreeing the said article, that he caused the whole council to change and alter
their act or article before determined. I am able to show two such examples. St.
Augustine, when he disputed with a heretic, would neither himself nor yet have the
heretic lean unto the determination of two former councils, of which one favored
him and one the heretic; but he would have the Scripture to be their judge.' "
(Rogers then gave a second example). "'By these things I
prove what I ought not to be denied to be heard against a whole parliament, bringing
the Word of God for me, is well as the authority of the old Church 400 years after
Christ, even though every man in Parliament had willingly agreed without respect
of fear or favor — which thing I doubt not Ha little of. For if Henry VIII were
alive and should call a Parliament and begin to determine a thing, then would ye
all say, Amen, yea, and it please your grace, it is meet that it be so enacted.'
"
At this point Bishop Gardiner prevented Rogers from saying more,
for the Bishop saw that he was losing the argument. Then, after he had berated Rogers
and taunted him, he proceeded to read his excommunication and his condemnation.
The condemnation contained just two articles; first, that "I affirmed the Roman
Catholic Church to be the Antichrist," and that "I denied the reality
of the sacrament." Rogers was then delivered to the sheriffs. Before being
carried away, Rogers petitioned the Bishop to see and speak with his wife and children.
The Bishop replied that the woman was not his wife, that Rogers had lived in open
sin for eighteen years, and that he would not be permitted to see her (Rogers had
been a priest).
In prison between the time of his condemnation and the execution,
he was able to write somewhat, and he expressed himself on doctrine and the evils
of the reign in a very manly way. After a long time of imprisonment among common
thieves, the sheriffs came to take him to the place of execution. Again his request
to see his wife and children was denied him. However, they did join the crowd of
people who came to witness the burning. He walked to the stake singing psalms, and
as his body was burnt to ashes, his soul ascended in a chariot of fire to that Redeemer
whom he loved even more than he loved his family, yea, even more than he loved his
own life.
Butler University.
No comments:
Post a Comment