"Foxe's Book of Martyrs"

Status
Not open for further replies.

A. believer

Contributor
Jun 27, 2003
6,196
216
63
✟22,460.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I'm doing research for a paper on the English Reformation, and one of the things I want to look at is John Foxe's "Acts and Monuments" (commonly known in its abridged version as Foxe's Book of Martyrs). I remember reading from a Catholic somewhere, I think it was here, something about some of the accounts of the executions, and I believe the claim was being made that some of these stories were complete fabricated or something. Does this ring a bell to anyone?
 

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟50,355.00
Faith
Catholic
Yes :)

It is full of misinformation, exageration and sometimes fabricaiton.

My understanding is that Foxe himself was isolated from the actual events he was describing, being out of the country and relying on the words of others, and that he was faily indiscriminate about what he accepted as true and factual as well as being fairly gulible. His work was written at a time when anti-Catholic sentiments were high, and his work incorprates much of the rhetoric and sometimes blatant lies floating around.

His work has historical significance, but not really for its accuracy in portraying events factually.



John Paul pray for us
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟50,355.00
Faith
Catholic
A. Believer




Here is some information for you to help you in your research:
Commonly called Fox’s Book of Martyrs, this book was originally published in the year 1559, and was authored by a protestant minister by the name of John Fox. The book was intended to be a compendium of "martyrdoms" inflicted on protestants by the Catholic Church. The first edition contained so many errors that a corrected edition had to be published in the year 1570, and several other editions have been published since.
The Columbia Encyclopedia informs us that Foxe’s book was "widely read, and its influence was extensive, although as history it is highly prejudiced and not altogether trustworthy." (1) Some research on the topic is more than enough to justify this statement.
Historical Unreliability

In the words of the historian Schenk "To obtain a clear view of the Marian persecutions is not at all easy: Foxe’s Book of Martyrs like a great mountain range lies between us and the facts." (2)

In his book, John Fox related that a Catholic by the name of Grimwood of Hitcham had been a great enemy of the protestant revolutionaries, and was punished "by a judgment of God," and "his bowels fell out of his body." Whereas, the protestant Anthony Wood relates that, during the reign of Elizabeth I, a certain Protestant minister related in a sermon the account of Grimwood’s death, using Fox as his authority. But, unfortunately for the parson, not only was Grimwood alive at the time when the sermon was preached, but happened to be present in the church to hear the sermon, and brought an action of defamation against the preacher. (3)


Another instance of the historical unreliability of Fox concerns the executions of Latimer and Ridley. According to Fox, Bishop Gardiner, on the day of the execution, kept dinner waiting until the news of their death should arrive, and that his guest the Duke of Norfolk (who was to dine with him) expressed great chagrin at the delay; Foxe then states that when the news arrived of the death of Latimer and Ridley, the Bishop was "transported with joy", sat down to eat, where his excellency was suddenly seized with the disury, and died in horrible torments a fortnight afterwards.

Now, this sounds all well and good. But what Fox did not tell us is that Latimer and Ridley were put to death on the 16th of October, while Gardiner opened the Parliament on the 21st of October, and that he attended in Parliament twice afterwards, and that he died on the 12th of November of the gout, and not disury, and that the Duke of Norfolk had been dead a year when this event allegedly took place! (4)

Hence we see two examples of the lack of credibility of John Fox, and his book "Acts and Monuments." But let us take a few moments and examine a couple of the "Martyrs," whose deaths were related by Fox.


This site goes on to give some examples of what Foxe has held up to be examples of martyrs, such as Latimer and Ridley, and Hooper, giving first Foxe's rendition of what happened followed by the facts which compeltely discredit his claims. He then follows with an examination of claims made in Foxe's Book of Martyrs regarding the Irish (a nation of Catholics) and how they greatly benefited under Protestant rule (at least according to Foxe's Book of Martyrs)



The Irish and protestant rule

In a later edition of Fox’s Acts and Monuments (apparently edited in the 1800's) the following statement is to be found:

"The Irish, who formerly led an unsettled and roving life, in the woods, bogs, and mountains, and lived on the depredation of their neighbors, they who, in the morning seized the prey, and at night divided the spoil, have, for many years past, become quiet and civilized. They taste the sweets of English society, and the advantages of civil government. They trade in our cities, and are employed in our manufactories. They are received also into English families; and treated with great humanity by the Protestants." (9)

It is only with great difficulty that one can believe that the reviser of Fox’s work would insert such a blatantly false statement, but so it is.

One wonders where to begin in the exposition of this particular citation? A good place to start would probably be at the beginning. What was it that reduced the Irish to the state of utter poverty mentioned by the reviser? The answer is to be found in the infamous Irish Persecution Laws.

These infamous laws were imposed by England (a protestant nation) upon a nation that was, at the time, 97% Catholic. To quote a protestant historian on the conditions in Ireland after the laws were imposed:

"They ( i.e. Catholics ) are not only excluded from all offices in church and state, but are interdicted from the army and the law, in all its branches. . . . Every barrister, clerk, attorney, or solicitor is obliged to take a solemn oath not to employ persons of that persuasion; no not as hackney clerks, at the miserable salary of seven shillings a week. No tradesman of that persuasion is capable of exercising his trade freely in any town corporate: so that they trade and work in their own trade native towns as aliens, paying, as such, quarter age, and other charges and impositions. . . ." (10)

Allow me to take a few moments and point out precisely what the Irish Persecution Laws entailed.

The Irish Catholic was forbidden the exercise of his religion.

He was forbidden to receive education.

He was forbidden to enter a profession.

He was forbidden to hold public office.

He was forbidden to engage in a trade or commerce. (11)

He was forbidden to live in a corporate town or within five miles thereof.

He was forbidden to own a horse of greater value than five pounds.

He was forbidden to purchase land.

He was forbidden to lease land. (12)

He was forbidden to accept a mortgage on land in security for a loan.

He was forbidden to vote.

He was forbidden to keep any arms for his protection.

He was forbidden to hold life annuity.

He was forbidden to buy land from a Protestant.

He was forbidden to receive a gift of land from a Protestant.

He was forbidden to inherit land from a Protestant.

He was forbidden to inherit anything from a Protestant.

He was forbidden to rent any land that was worth more than thirty shillings a year.

He was forbidden to reap from his land any profit exceeding a third of the rent.

He could not be guardian to a child.

He could not, when dying, leave his infant children under Catholic guardianship.

He could not attend Catholic worship.

He was compelled by the law to attend Protestant worship.

He could not himself educate his child.

He could not send his child to a Catholic teacher.

He could not employ a Catholic teacher to come to his child.

He could not send his child abroad to receive education.

The priest was banned and hunted with bloodhounds.

The school master was banned and hunted with bloodhounds.

If the Irish Catholic had an unfaithful wife, she, by going through the form of adopting the Protestant religion compelled from a papist the heaviest annuity that might be squeezed out of him – and would inherit all the property at his death.

If he had an unnatural child, that child by conforming to the Established religion, could compel from him the highest possible annuity, and inherit all his property at his death – to the total exclusion of all the children who had remained faithful to their father, and their religion.

He if he was discovered in the act of having his son educated at home, a ruinous fine and a dungeon awaited him.

If he sent his son to be educated abroad, all his property was confiscated – and the child so educated was thereby debarred form all rights and properties in the country, and debarred from inheriting anything.

He was compelled to pay double for the support of the militia. And he was compelled to make good all damages done to the state by the privateers of any Catholic power in which the state was at war. (13)
Professor Lecky (a Protestant) stated concerning the above laws "It was intended to make them poor and to keep them poor, to crush in them every germ of enterprise and degrade them into a servile race who could never hope to rise to the level of their oppressor." (14)

With such laws, and such intentions, it is no wonder that the Irish were poverty-stricken, and many were homeless. Such treatment of any individual (much less an entire nation) is hardly humane. One might dwell on the unjust persecutions which the Irish people suffered at the hand of the English protestants at great length, and one might also recount numerous cases where Irishmen were persecuted and gave their lives for the Catholic Religion (15), but I think the point is well-enough made.

As can be seen from the above, there is truly very little reason for the reviser of Fox’s Acts and Monuments to glory in as far as the protestant treatment of the Irish people is concerned.



He concludes with the following, followed by footnotes:



Conclusion

Hopefully the above has more than demonstrated to any honest individual that the book Acts and Monuments, or Fox’s Book of Martyrs, is historically unreliable, and prejudiced against Catholicism. In fact, as has been shown above, the author of Acts and Monuments has even taken his prejudice to the point where he felt constrained to lie, and invent tales, in order to further enthrall his audience.


John Fox was more than willing to believe just about anything that came down the pike concerning atrocities committed by the Catholic Faith. To quote from Funk and Wagnall’s Encyclopedia:


"The work (Fox’s Book of Martyrs) is uncritical, and indicates that, at best, Fox believed every atrocity story he heard." (16)


As a matter of fact, not only was John Fox a very gullible individual, but he himself was "safely abroad, writing his propaganda in Strasbourg, Frankfurt and Basle, during the [Mary Tudor's] persecution." (17)


http://www.geocities.com/militantis/actsandmonuments.html




Hope this gives you some food for thought and a starting place.





John Paul pray for us
 
Upvote 0

Michelina

.
Site Supporter
Nov 6, 2003
13,640
663
✟19,733.00
Faith
Catholic
When Foxe treats of his own times his work is of greater value as it contains many documents and is but largely based on the reports of eyewitnesses; but he sometimes dishonesty mutilates his documents and is quite untrustworthy in his treatment of evidence. He was criticized in his own day by Catholics such as Harpsfield and Father Parsons and by practically all serious eccesiastical historians.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02681a.htm
 
Upvote 0

A. believer

Contributor
Jun 27, 2003
6,196
216
63
✟22,460.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Michelina said:
When Foxe treats of his own times his work is of greater value as it contains many documents and is but largely based on the reports of eyewitnesses; but he sometimes dishonesty mutilates his documents and is quite untrustworthy in his treatment of evidence. He was criticized in his own day by Catholics such as Harpsfield and Father Parsons and by practically all serious eccesiastical historians.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02681a.htm

Yes, I already got this opinion from the Catholic Encyclopedia, but without specific examples, I couldn't substantiate it. The stuff that tlf posted is what I was remembering. That's what I wanted to look into, but thanks for responding.
 
Upvote 0

A. believer

Contributor
Jun 27, 2003
6,196
216
63
✟22,460.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
thereselittleflower said:
A. Believer








Here is some information for you to help you in your research:
Commonly called Fox’s Book of Martyrs, this book was originally published in the year 1559, and was authored by a protestant minister by the name of John Fox. The book was intended to be a compendium of "martyrdoms" inflicted on protestants by the Catholic Church. The first edition contained so many errors that a corrected edition had to be published in the year 1570, and several other editions have been published since.


The Columbia Encyclopedia informs us that Foxe’s book was "widely read, and its influence was extensive, although as history it is highly prejudiced and not altogether trustworthy." (1) Some research on the topic is more than enough to justify this statement.
Historical Unreliability

In the words of the historian Schenk "To obtain a clear view of the Marian persecutions is not at all easy: Foxe’s Book of Martyrs like a great mountain range lies between us and the facts." (2)

In his book, John Fox related that a Catholic by the name of Grimwood of Hitcham had been a great enemy of the protestant revolutionaries, and was punished "by a judgment of God," and "his bowels fell out of his body." Whereas, the protestant Anthony Wood relates that, during the reign of Elizabeth I, a certain Protestant minister related in a sermon the account of Grimwood’s death, using Fox as his authority. But, unfortunately for the parson, not only was Grimwood alive at the time when the sermon was preached, but happened to be present in the church to hear the sermon, and brought an action of defamation against the preacher. (3)


Another instance of the historical unreliability of Fox concerns the executions of Latimer and Ridley. According to Fox, Bishop Gardiner, on the day of the execution, kept dinner waiting until the news of their death should arrive, and that his guest the Duke of Norfolk (who was to dine with him) expressed great chagrin at the delay; Foxe then states that when the news arrived of the death of Latimer and Ridley, the Bishop was "transported with joy", sat down to eat, where his excellency was suddenly seized with the disury, and died in horrible torments a fortnight afterwards.

Now, this sounds all well and good. But what Fox did not tell us is that Latimer and Ridley were put to death on the 16th of October, while Gardiner opened the Parliament on the 21st of October, and that he attended in Parliament twice afterwards, and that he died on the 12th of November of the gout, and not disury, and that the Duke of Norfolk had been dead a year when this event allegedly took place! (4)

Hence we see two examples of the lack of credibility of John Fox, and his book "Acts and Monuments." But let us take a few moments and examine a couple of the "Martyrs," whose deaths were related by Fox.




This site goes on to give some examples of what Foxe has held up to be examples of martyrs, such as Latimer and Ridley, and Hooper, giving first Foxe's rendition of what happened followed by the facts which compeltely discredit his claims. He then follows with an examination of claims made in Foxe's Book of Martyrs regarding the Irish (a nation of Catholics) and how they greatly benefited under Protestant rule (at least according to Foxe's Book of Martyrs)





The Irish and protestant rule

In a later edition of Fox’s Acts and Monuments (apparently edited in the 1800's) the following statement is to be found:

"The Irish, who formerly led an unsettled and roving life, in the woods, bogs, and mountains, and lived on the depredation of their neighbors, they who, in the morning seized the prey, and at night divided the spoil, have, for many years past, become quiet and civilized. They taste the sweets of English society, and the advantages of civil government. They trade in our cities, and are employed in our manufactories. They are received also into English families; and treated with great humanity by the Protestants." (9)

It is only with great difficulty that one can believe that the reviser of Fox’s work would insert such a blatantly false statement, but so it is.

One wonders where to begin in the exposition of this particular citation? A good place to start would probably be at the beginning. What was it that reduced the Irish to the state of utter poverty mentioned by the reviser? The answer is to be found in the infamous Irish Persecution Laws.

These infamous laws were imposed by England (a protestant nation) upon a nation that was, at the time, 97% Catholic. To quote a protestant historian on the conditions in Ireland after the laws were imposed:

"They ( i.e. Catholics ) are not only excluded from all offices in church and state, but are interdicted from the army and the law, in all its branches. . . . Every barrister, clerk, attorney, or solicitor is obliged to take a solemn oath not to employ persons of that persuasion; no not as hackney clerks, at the miserable salary of seven shillings a week. No tradesman of that persuasion is capable of exercising his trade freely in any town corporate: so that they trade and work in their own trade native towns as aliens, paying, as such, quarter age, and other charges and impositions. . . ." (10)

Allow me to take a few moments and point out precisely what the Irish Persecution Laws entailed.



The Irish Catholic was forbidden the exercise of his religion.



He was forbidden to receive education.

He was forbidden to enter a profession.

He was forbidden to hold public office.

He was forbidden to engage in a trade or commerce. (11)

He was forbidden to live in a corporate town or within five miles thereof.

He was forbidden to own a horse of greater value than five pounds.

He was forbidden to purchase land.

He was forbidden to lease land. (12)

He was forbidden to accept a mortgage on land in security for a loan.

He was forbidden to vote.

He was forbidden to keep any arms for his protection.

He was forbidden to hold life annuity.

He was forbidden to buy land from a Protestant.

He was forbidden to receive a gift of land from a Protestant.

He was forbidden to inherit land from a Protestant.

He was forbidden to inherit anything from a Protestant.

He was forbidden to rent any land that was worth more than thirty shillings a year.

He was forbidden to reap from his land any profit exceeding a third of the rent.

He could not be guardian to a child.

He could not, when dying, leave his infant children under Catholic guardianship.

He could not attend Catholic worship.

He was compelled by the law to attend Protestant worship.

He could not himself educate his child.

He could not send his child to a Catholic teacher.

He could not employ a Catholic teacher to come to his child.

He could not send his child abroad to receive education.

The priest was banned and hunted with bloodhounds.

The school master was banned and hunted with bloodhounds.

If the Irish Catholic had an unfaithful wife, she, by going through the form of adopting the Protestant religion compelled from a papist the heaviest annuity that might be squeezed out of him – and would inherit all the property at his death.

If he had an unnatural child, that child by conforming to the Established religion, could compel from him the highest possible annuity, and inherit all his property at his death – to the total exclusion of all the children who had remained faithful to their father, and their religion.

He if he was discovered in the act of having his son educated at home, a ruinous fine and a dungeon awaited him.

If he sent his son to be educated abroad, all his property was confiscated – and the child so educated was thereby debarred form all rights and properties in the country, and debarred from inheriting anything.

He was compelled to pay double for the support of the militia. And he was compelled to make good all damages done to the state by the privateers of any Catholic power in which the state was at war. (13)


Professor Lecky (a Protestant) stated concerning the above laws "It was intended to make them poor and to keep them poor, to crush in them every germ of enterprise and degrade them into a servile race who could never hope to rise to the level of their oppressor." (14)



With such laws, and such intentions, it is no wonder that the Irish were poverty-stricken, and many were homeless. Such treatment of any individual (much less an entire nation) is hardly humane. One might dwell on the unjust persecutions which the Irish people suffered at the hand of the English protestants at great length, and one might also recount numerous cases where Irishmen were persecuted and gave their lives for the Catholic Religion (15), but I think the point is well-enough made.

As can be seen from the above, there is truly very little reason for the reviser of Fox’s Acts and Monuments to glory in as far as the protestant treatment of the Irish people is concerned.





He concludes with the following, followed by footnotes:





Conclusion

Hopefully the above has more than demonstrated to any honest individual that the book Acts and Monuments, or Fox’s Book of Martyrs, is historically unreliable, and prejudiced against Catholicism. In fact, as has been shown above, the author of Acts and Monuments has even taken his prejudice to the point where he felt constrained to lie, and invent tales, in order to further enthrall his audience.


John Fox was more than willing to believe just about anything that came down the pike concerning atrocities committed by the Catholic Faith. To quote from Funk and Wagnall’s Encyclopedia:




"The work (Fox’s Book of Martyrs) is uncritical, and indicates that, at best, Fox believed every atrocity story he heard." (16)




As a matter of fact, not only was John Fox a very gullible individual, but he himself was "safely abroad, writing his propaganda in Strasbourg, Frankfurt and Basle, during the [Mary Tudor's] persecution." (17)




http://www.geocities.com/militantis/actsandmonuments.html






Hope this gives you some food for thought and a starting place.







John Paul pray for us

This is what I was remembering. Thanks. What site is this from? Oh, nevermind. I see you linked the site.
 
Upvote 0

Skripper

Legend
Jul 22, 2003
9,472
544
63
Michigan
Visit site
✟30,691.00
Faith
Catholic
Ree,

I think the reason you aren't finding past threads is because the CF software program isn't what is used to be. I think the threads may have been deleted, but not because of content. We used to be able to do a "search" that went back a good distance, in both time and quantity. But I think Erwin made some changes in the software, changing that. I think it was to free up some data space or something. Anyways, now you can only go back a relatively short period of time, for any search, on any topic.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Wolseley

Beaucoup-Diên-Cai-Dāu
Feb 5, 2002
21,131
5,623
63
By the shores of Gitchee-Goomee
✟276,838.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I did a post way back when, with references, in which I refuted Foxe. I can access the forums all the way back to 1999, but the search capabilities we have now leave a great deal to be desired.

I'll look for it, but I can't make any guarantees. Real life means that I probably don't have time to sift through 300 pages of my own posts to find a specific post made several years ago. :)
 
Upvote 0

phonequeen

Active Member
Feb 14, 2005
178
26
midwest
✟448.00
Faith
Catholic
wow what a disappointment. I read the Foxes Book of Martyrs a couple years ago and thought it was an awesome book. I assumed it was accurate. I really got alot out of that book. There are such good descriptions of the martyrdom of many saints in it. It really strengthened my faith at the time.
 
Upvote 0

A. believer

Contributor
Jun 27, 2003
6,196
216
63
✟22,460.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Wolseley said:
I did a post way back when, with references, in which I refuted Foxe. I can access the forums all the way back to 1999, but the search capabilities we have now leave a great deal to be desired.

I'll look for it, but I can't make any guarantees. Real life means that I probably don't have time to sift through 300 pages of my own posts to find a specific post made several years ago. :)

Oh come on, Wolseley, what better way do you have to spend your time than helping out your favorite CF contributor? ;)
 
Upvote 0

A. believer

Contributor
Jun 27, 2003
6,196
216
63
✟22,460.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
phonequeen said:
wow what a disappointment. I read the Foxes Book of Martyrs a couple years ago and thought it was an awesome book. I assumed it was accurate. I really got alot out of that book. There are such good descriptions of the martyrdom of many saints in it. It really strengthened my faith at the time.

There's a good deal of dispute over the quality of the work, but judging by what I've read from a variety of sources (most of them secular) there seems to be little question that neither Foxe's accounts nor the criticism leveled against them by Catholic defenders are entirely trustworthy.

The article therese cited is a good example. The author writes,
Hopefully the above has more than demonstrated to any honest individual that the book Acts and Monuments, or Fox’s Book of Martyrs, is historically unreliable, and prejudiced against Catholicism. In fact, as has been shown above, the author of Acts and Monuments has even taken his prejudice to the point where he felt constrained to lie, and invent tales, in order to further enthrall his audience.
The first statement appears to be, indeed, accurate. Foxe definitely did come down on the Protestant side of the Reformation, and his book did contain some historical inaccuracies (although judging by the secular sources I've been reading, there's no evidence that these inaccuracies were in any way intentional.) The second statement, though, seems utterly unwarranted, and certainly the author's own biases are glaring. He talks about Foxe being "safely abroad, writing his propaganda in Strasbourg, Frankfurt and Basle, during the [Mary Tudor's] persecution," but what he fails to mention is that Foxe was exiled from England at the time by Queen Mary.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Michelina

.
Site Supporter
Nov 6, 2003
13,640
663
✟19,733.00
Faith
Catholic
Shame on me... who is Foxe anyway?... ah forget it... I'm probably better off not knowing...
Actually, you are better off. It would confuse you to see the few truths in a complex web of fabrications, twisted facts and absurd exaggerations. It's much better to study reliable, competent historians. Foxe's work is discredited by his vicious anti-Catholicism. He lacks credibility.

Foxe's work was used, far and wide, to promote anti-Catholicism, to demonize Catholics, and to create a mysthological history that substitutes for the much-needed historical basis for Protestantism. If I were a Protestant, I would denounce it for what it is. But there are actually folks who still promote this fiction. :scratch:
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟50,355.00
Faith
Catholic
A. believer said:
therese,

Do you know anything about the author of this site or about Richard Clarke, the author of the article? Or anything about the "historian Schenk" he cites?

Here is the footnote in the article.


2. W. Schenk, Reginald Pole, Cardinal of England (New York, Longmans, 1950), p. 149.


His full name is Dr Wilhelm Schenk

His biography of Reginald Pole is one of two recognized by Encyclopedia Britanica.


You will have to do more research on your own though. :)



John Paul pray for us
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟50,355.00
Faith
Catholic
phonequeen said:
wow what a disappointment. I read the Foxes Book of Martyrs a couple years ago and thought it was an awesome book. I assumed it was accurate. I really got alot out of that book. There are such good descriptions of the martyrdom of many saints in it. It really strengthened my faith at the time.
Yet I would be willing to bet it also imbedded false, anti-Catholic thoughts and ideas in your mind about the Catholic Church, as well as false, pro-Protestant ideas about the Protestant movement and leaders that really skews how one preceives history.

So rather than giving one a true sense of history, it gives one a very skewed view of history that is full of anti-Catholic polemics and rhetoric, falsehoods, etc . . . .

The ideas such a work instills in one's mind can be very difficult to dislodge.


In my opinion, it is one of those books that has very little value as relates to historical validity and has no business being read as, or presented as, a legitimate rendition of Church history. It can do much damage, and little real good.


I would recommend a good book on the lives of the saints instead. :)



John Paul pray for us
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

A. believer

Contributor
Jun 27, 2003
6,196
216
63
✟22,460.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
thereselittleflower said:
Here is the footnote in the article.


2. W. Schenk, Reginald Pole, Cardinal of England (New York, Longmans, 1950), p. 149.


His full name is Dr Wilhelm Schenk

His biography of Reginald Pole is one of two recognized by Encyclopedia Britanica.

Thanks, therese.

You will have to do more research on your own though. :)

Yes, I am, thanks. Here's a good essay for anyone interested. John Foxe as Historian

People who subscribe to modernist notions of "objective history" vs. "subjective history" and who place the various Catholic histories they're familiar with in the first category and Protestant histories in the second, will probably get little out of this essay except confirmation in their own mind that John Foxe was a weasley revisionist. But people who are more serious about understanding "the history of history," so to speak, and who understand the problem with the epistemological notions of "objective history" and "objective historian," will probably find this essay quite interesting, even if they have no particular interest in John Foxe, himself.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.