in the early part of 1523. No formal charges were laid against him, only that unnamed accusers said that he was ‘an heretic in sophistry, an heretic in logic, an heretic in his divinity’. Tyndale had no means of preparing for an examination that might turn into a staging post on his way to a Lollard pit. He was determined but frightened. He refused to deny his ideas and beliefs, but he never sought out martyrdom, either now or later, as some did. He may already have decided on his mission in life – he was within a few weeks of declaring it for the first time – and he wanted badly to survive to complete it. He told Foxe’s informant that he had grave doubts about the ‘privy’, or secret, accusations made against him, ‘so that he in his going thitherwards cried in his mind heartily to God, to give him strength fast to stand in the truth of his word’.
Local priests were present at the hearing, but, as in most heresy hearings, the accusers remained anonymous. None stepped forward when Tyndale demanded to face those who had given evidence against him. The chancellor ‘thretened me grevously, and revyled me,’ Tyndale recalled, ‘and rated me as though I had bene a dogge’. Tyndale insisted that he had said nothing that was not justified by the New Testament. Bell had no witness to put against him, and was forced to let him go with a severe scolding.
The incident was not to be forgotten. As the examination was taking place in Gloucester, Thomas More was working in London on a polemic against Luther. He did so on behalf of Henry VIII in reply to a tirade Luther had written suggesting, among other pleasantries, that the king was a pig who should be rolled in his own dirt. More’s Responsio ad Lutherum outdid the German in crudityand frenzy. He wrote in Latin, and his command of its colloquialisms underscored how familiar the language was to English writers, 1 and how rarely they wrote in their own vernacular. More described Luther as merda , stercus , lutum and coenum , respectively shit, dung, filth and excrement; he said he was a drunkard, a liar, an ape and an arsehole whom the Antichrist had vomited onto earth.
This was more than the work of a civil servant – More was by now a councillor attendant – eager to please his master. He was obsessed by Lutherans. His loathing had an edge that, in the context of his other characteristics, in particular his usual calm and kindliness, was abnormal. It was violent, vengeful and unbridled, an aberration that he was starting to extend from Luther himself to his followers. It was always likely that this fury would one day attach itself to William Tyndale. When it did, More would dig up the Gloucester affair, and fashion it into a weapon.
The Gloucester clergy remained the immediate danger. Tyndale said that they continued to meet in alehouses to ‘affirm my sayings are heresy’ and inventing others ‘of their own heads which I never spake’. He found them ‘a full ignorant sort’. Many were incapable even of reading their missals. The rest, he said, were only interested in two books. One was a manual of female anatomy, over which they would ‘pore night and day’ with the excuse that it was ‘all to teach the midwives’; the other was a tome that gave them tips on gathering ‘tithes, mortuaries, offerings, customs, and other pillage’.
Tyndale was scarcely exaggerating. The county was known as ‘God’s Gloucestershire’ for its supposed piety, but John Hooper, a contemporary of Tyndale at Oxford, found ‘inhospitable, nonresident, inefficient, drunken and evil-living incumbents’ in every deanery when he later became bishop. 2 Hooper carried out a survey of 311 of his clergy. Nine priests did not know that there were Ten Commandments. Thirty-three did not recall where inthe Bible the commandments were to be found, most of them plumping for the New rather than the Old Testament, and 168 could not remember what they were. Ten could not recite the
Local priests were present at the hearing, but, as in most heresy hearings, the accusers remained anonymous. None stepped forward when Tyndale demanded to face those who had given evidence against him. The chancellor ‘thretened me grevously, and revyled me,’ Tyndale recalled, ‘and rated me as though I had bene a dogge’. Tyndale insisted that he had said nothing that was not justified by the New Testament. Bell had no witness to put against him, and was forced to let him go with a severe scolding.
The incident was not to be forgotten. As the examination was taking place in Gloucester, Thomas More was working in London on a polemic against Luther. He did so on behalf of Henry VIII in reply to a tirade Luther had written suggesting, among other pleasantries, that the king was a pig who should be rolled in his own dirt. More’s Responsio ad Lutherum outdid the German in crudityand frenzy. He wrote in Latin, and his command of its colloquialisms underscored how familiar the language was to English writers, 1 and how rarely they wrote in their own vernacular. More described Luther as merda , stercus , lutum and coenum , respectively shit, dung, filth and excrement; he said he was a drunkard, a liar, an ape and an arsehole whom the Antichrist had vomited onto earth.
This was more than the work of a civil servant – More was by now a councillor attendant – eager to please his master. He was obsessed by Lutherans. His loathing had an edge that, in the context of his other characteristics, in particular his usual calm and kindliness, was abnormal. It was violent, vengeful and unbridled, an aberration that he was starting to extend from Luther himself to his followers. It was always likely that this fury would one day attach itself to William Tyndale. When it did, More would dig up the Gloucester affair, and fashion it into a weapon.
The Gloucester clergy remained the immediate danger. Tyndale said that they continued to meet in alehouses to ‘affirm my sayings are heresy’ and inventing others ‘of their own heads which I never spake’. He found them ‘a full ignorant sort’. Many were incapable even of reading their missals. The rest, he said, were only interested in two books. One was a manual of female anatomy, over which they would ‘pore night and day’ with the excuse that it was ‘all to teach the midwives’; the other was a tome that gave them tips on gathering ‘tithes, mortuaries, offerings, customs, and other pillage’.
Tyndale was scarcely exaggerating. The county was known as ‘God’s Gloucestershire’ for its supposed piety, but John Hooper, a contemporary of Tyndale at Oxford, found ‘inhospitable, nonresident, inefficient, drunken and evil-living incumbents’ in every deanery when he later became bishop. 2 Hooper carried out a survey of 311 of his clergy. Nine priests did not know that there were Ten Commandments. Thirty-three did not recall where inthe Bible the commandments were to be found, most of them plumping for the New rather than the Old Testament, and 168 could not remember what they were. Ten could not recite the
Similar Books
