His accusers were the monks, friar Roger Frisby, a Franciscan; friar John Hincely, an Augustinian, and Thomas Blaxton, a Dominican; whom he refuted in all their accusations, showing that the eleven articles which they brought against him, and which they alleged to have extracted from his sermons, were altogether false, or, at least, mixed with much untruth.
But said monks, not content with his disavowal and explanation, opposed him so vehemently with their testimonies, that they declared to have convicted him of the articles with which they had charged him. They brought with them into the city dry fagots, according to the English custom, to burn him, and would not release him until he had promised, or, from fear of death, firmly assured them, that he would not hold, teach, or preach said articles any more, neither secretly nor openly, on pain of incurring like punishment. They moreover drew up in writing a form, which he was to repeat from memory, by way of recantation; to which they compelled him by severe threats. John Fox, Mart. Angl., ex Registro Hereford.
But afterwards the aforesaid William Swinderby did nevertheless not cease preaching his belief, so that he was apprehended, by order of King Richard II., in the fifteenth year of his reign, coinciding with the year 1392, and closely confined, by order of John, Bishop of Hereford, who had received this charge from the King.
In the meantime he was examined in the faith, and it was found that he taught several articles which militated against the Roman church; but which or what kind of articles these were, is not clearly expressed by the writers; yet it can be inferred from the confession of one Walter Brute, who, in the matter of faith, is compared to William Swinderby, by Abraham Mellinus and others: yea, they declare that Walter Brute was a champion and defender of William Swinderby’s articles, who, among others, maintained this article: “That it is not lawful for Christians to swear on any account, in any case, either by the Creator, or by his creatures.”
Concerning holy baptism, he made this confession: “He (Christ) was buried that we might all, by baptism, be buried with him into his death; and that, having died unto sin (notice, this is not the work of children), we should live unto righteousness.”
As to his views in regard to all other articles, we have found them very scriptural, salutary and good. In regard to this, see John Fox, Angl., page 440.
It is certainly true, that William Swinderby’s articles of faith thus shone forth through their radiance of divine truth, that the children of darkness (the Romanists) could not bear them, so that they finally, after a long and severe confinement, finished his trial, pronouncing sentence of death upon him, namely: that he should be executed with fire, that is, burnt alive, as a heretic, in Smithfield, London. This, it is stated, was done with him, twelve years after his first imprisonment.
FURTHER OBSERVATION REGARDING HIS DEATH.
Concerning the death of this pious man, a certain author gives the following account from John Fox: “Having received this commission and full power from the King, against William Swinderby, the bishop doubtless did his very best to procure his arrest without delay; however, he did not immediately proceed with the execution of death against him, but kept him in prison for a long time. At last, A. D. 1401, he was burnt alive in Smithfield, at London.” Second book of the Hist. of the Persecutions, fol. 505, col. 2, from John Fox, Hist. Angl., page 438, also, page 436.
Again, A. Mellinus, page 515, col. 4: “Baleus also accords with this, saying that William Swinderby, after his recantation, was strengthened in the confession of the divine truth, and was finally, A. D. 1401, burnt alive, in the sight of a great number of people, in Smithfield, at London.” Bal. Cent. 6, Script. Britt., in Append. ad Jo. 1, Horesb, page 493.