This text has been selected for inclusion in the EEBO-TCP: Navigations collection, funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities. To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
JOHN FISHER was born in the Town of Beverly in this County, his father Robert Fisher was by condition a Merchant, and lived in good reputation. He was afterwards bred in Michaell-house in Cambridge, whereof he was the first Chancellor pro termino
vitae, and Bishop of Rochester. How this Fisher was caught afterwards in the net of Elizabeth Barton, (commonly called the holy Maid of Kent,) thereby made accessary to her dissembling; How stiffe he was against King Henrys Divorce and Title of Supream head of the Church; How the Pope sent him a Cardinalls Cap, and the King Cut off his head, hath been so largely related in my Ecclesiastical History; and being I hope pardoned by the Reader for my former tediousness, I will not now contract a new guilt by offen∣ding in Prolixity on the same person. The rather because his Manuscript life written 80. years since by Richard Hall of Christs-colledge in Cambridge, is lately set forth in Print under the name of Thomas B•…•…ily D. D. in which book as I doe not repine at any passages, (though Hyperbolicall) to the praise of this Prelate; so I cannot but be both angry and grieved at the many false and scandalous reflections therein, on the worthy Instru∣ments of our Reformation. This learned Bishop was beheaded in the year 1535. the Threescore and seventeenth year of his age.
Let me adde he was tryed by an Ordinary Jury, and not by his Peers, whereof seve∣rall reasons are rendred. Some thought he forgot to demand his Priviledge herein, (disturb'd with grief and fear) as Edward Duke of Somerset forgot to crave the Be∣n•…•…fit of the Clergy, or, that he neglected it as surfetting of long life, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of his Dissolution. Others, because he preferred death in a Direct Line before a Cir∣cumferential Passage thereunto, (as Certain though not so Compendious) being assured that the Lords durst not displease the King in acquitting him. But most imput•…•… it to his suspicion that if desiring to be tryed by his Peers, it would have been denyed him, as not due to a Bishop. And yet that worthy Lawyer, Judge Stamford in his Pleas of the Crown* 1.1 leaveth it doubtfull, and seemeth inclined to the Affirmative. Besides Sir Robert Brook in his Novell Cases* 1.2 affirmeth in Express Terms, that a Bishop is Peer of the Realm, and ought to be tryed by his Peers. The best is, our Charity may be Con∣fident, that our Bishops will so inoffensively behave themselves, and God we hope so secure their innocence, that there will not hereafter be need to decide this Question.
•…•…ibro tertio Fol. 153.
30. M. 10. p. 465.