England also received the horrid Romish Inquisition. For though the “Holy Office” was never constituted here, on precisely the same plan as it was established in the despotic countries of Spain, Portugal, and Rome, nor completely set up till the gloomy reign of Queen Mary, the victims of papal bigotry were numerous, as sacrificed on its cruel altars. Pontifical decrees and statutes were brought into England, and carried into effect by the prelates, acting under the authority of the popes. Spiritual courts were organised in many dioceses, where holy men of God were sought after and punished as heretics, by the bishops and archbishops, as inquisitors of heresy. Their antichristian spirit may be learned from the cruel proceedings of the ecclesiastics against the thirty Germans at Oxford, under Henry II., and against the Wycliffites, as noticed in Chapter V.
Volumes are required to record the sufferings of the “Lollards,” and “Gospellers,” in England, as they were called, who read the Scriptures, or the books of Wycliffe. Many of them became faithful martyrs of Christ; and though such severity was used, the cause of God continued and gained strength, especially after Luther arose as the great reformer, in 1517. The translation of the New Testament by William Tindal, in 1526, and his labours in completing the entire Bible, aided by John Frith, William Roye, John Rogers, and Miles Coverdale, greatly provoked the prelates, and all these, except Coverdale, fell sacrifices to papal enmity, as martyrs for Christ.
Popery found a worthy supporter in Henry VIII., who, “through the various stages of his reign, outstripped his predecessors in almost every act of arrogance and barbarity, making himself inquisitor-general and grand judge of heretics. When they were condemned to die, he descended to the office of sitting in judgment upon them.” He even published a book against Luther, in “defence of the seven sacraments of the Catholic church;” for which he was rewarded by the Pope with the title of “Defender of the Faith,” A.D. 1521.
Henry’s vanity being gratified by this favour of the Pope, he entered more zealously into the designs of the Inquisition, and issued a royal proclamation, in which he commands that all persons defamed or suspected of preaching or writing contrary to the Catholic church should, by the bishops, be arrested and cast into prison. He then adds, “If any person, by the law of holy church, be convicted before the bishop or his commissary, that the said bishop may keep in prison the said person so convicted, so long as it shall seem best to his discretion; and may set a fine to be paid to the king, by the person convicted, as it shall be thought convenient to the said bishop, the said fine to be levied for the king’s use. And if any person within the realm of England be convicted of the aforesaid errors and heresies, he shall be committed to the secular jurisdiction, and shall suffer execution according to the laws of this realm.”
Sanctioned thus by the king, the bishops, who appear to have been the authors of this proclamation, proceeded, by vile inquisitors, to search for victims, whom they imprisoned and grievously fined. Their scandalous exactions enriched them, as their inquisitorial power rendered them superior to any law, or screened them from accountability. The temporal lords, and the commons’ house of parliament, therefore, presented a petition to the king for relief, declaring the prelates had “gotten into their hands more than a third part of all his majesty’s realm!” They add, in their appeal to the king against these dreaded inquisitors,—
“And what do all these greedy, idle, holy thieves do with these yearly exactions which they take of the people? Truly nothing, but exempt themselves from the obedience of your grace. Nothing but translate all rule, power, lordship, authority, obedience, and dignity, from your grace to themselves. Nothing but that all your subjects should fall into disobedience and rebellion against your grace, and be under them, as they did to your noble predecessor, King John; who, because he would have punished certain traitors that conspired with the French king, to have deposed him from his crown and dignity, interdicted his land. For which matter your most noble realm hath wrongfully, alas! stood tributary, not to any temporal prince, but to a cruel, devilish bloodsucker, drunken ever since with the blood of the saints and martyrs of Christ!
“What remedy is there? Will you make laws against them? It is doubtful whether you are able. Are they not stronger in your own parliament-house than yourself? What a number of bishops, abbots, and priors, are lords of your parliament! Are not all the learned men in your realm in fee with them, to speak in your parliament for them, against your crown, dignity, and realm; a few of your own learned council only excepted? What law can be made against them that will be available? Who is he, though he be sorely grieved, that, for murder, ravishment, robbery, debt, or any other offence, dare lay it to their charge by way of action? If any one do, he is by-and-by accused of heresy; yea, they will so handle him, that except he bear a faggot for their pleasure, he must be excommunicated, and then all his actions will be quashed.”
Henry became alarmed by this bold exposure of the wicked deeds of the prelates, and he appointed a hearing with all the judges and his temporal council, which resulted in a bill, that soon passed into a law, altering the statute of Henry IV. against heretics. Though this did not remove their liability to burning, it disabled the prelates from being the sole judges in the cause of heresy.
Still the bishops, as inquisitors, continued their proceedings, as they were able to secure the sanction of the king. But we cannot here trace their operations in destroying the faithful followers of Christ; yet we must notice their laying a plan to accomplish the destruction of Archbishop Cranmer, and Katherine Parr, the queen of Henry VIII., who favoured the reformation. They proceeded first against Anne Askew, a celebrated lady of the Court, in hope of inducing her, by torture on the rack, to accuse the queen of heresy. She was imprisoned and examined by Bonner, bishop of London, and Gardiner, bishop of Winchester; and, as she denied transubstantiation, they condemned her to the flames as a heretic.
Dr. Southey relates her martyrdom as follows, referring to her examination on the rack by the inquisitors:—“Henry’s heart was naturally hard, and the age and circumstances in which he was placed had steeled it against all compassion. Some displeasure, indeed, he manifested shortly afterwards, when the lieutenant of the Tower, Sir Anthony Knevet, came to solicit pardon for having disobeyed the chancellor, by refusing to let the gaoler stretch the lady on the rack a second time, after she had endured it once without accusing any person of partaking her opinions. It was concerning the ladies of the court that she was put to the torture, in the hope of implicating the queen; and when Knevet would do no more, the Chancellor Wriothesley, and Rich, who was a creature of Bonner, racked her with their own hands, throwing off their gowns that they might perform their devilish office the better. She bore it without uttering cry or groan, though, immediately upon being loosed, she fainted. Henry readily forgave the lieutenant, and appeared ill pleased with his chancellor; but he suffered his wicked ministers to consummate their crime. A scaffold was erected in front of St. Bartholomew’s church, where Wriothesley, the duke of Norfolk, and others of the king’s council, sat with the lord mayor, to witness the execution. Three others were to suffer for the same imaginary offence; one was a tailor, another a priest, and the third a Nottinghamshire gentleman, of the Lascelles family, and of the king’s household. The execution was delayed till darkness closed, that it might appear more dreadful. Anne Askew was brought in a chair, for they had racked her until she was unable to stand, and she was held up against the stake by the chain which fastened her; but her constancy, and cheerful language of encouragement, brought her companions in martyrdom to the same invincible fortitude and triumphant hope. After a sermon had been preached, the king’s pardon was offered to her, if she would recant: refusing even to look upon it, she made answer, that she came not there to deny her Lord! The others, in like manner, refused to purchase their lives at such a price. The reeds were then set on fire—it was in the month of June—and, at that moment, a few drops of rain fell, and a thunder-clap was heard, which those in the crowd, who sympathised with the martyrs, felt as if it were God’s own voice, accepting their sacrifice, and receiving their spirits into everlasting rest.” June, 1546.