William Swinderby, Burnt for the Faith, in the Year 1401

In the year 1389 it happened, as old chronicles show, that one William Swinderby, a priest of the bishopric of Lincoln, was accused of certain opinions, and was brought before the bishop of Lincoln, who examined him on certain articles, in the church at Lincoln, according to the manner or order of the papal laws, in keeping with their usual ceremonies.

His accusers were the monks: friar Roger Frisby, a Franciscan; friar John Hincely, an Augustinian; and Thomas Blaxton, a Dominican. He refuted them in all their accusations, showing that the eleven articles which they brought against him, and which they claimed to have taken from his sermons, were altogether false, or at least mixed with much untruth.

But these monks, not content with his denial and explanation, opposed him so fiercely with their testimonies that they declared they had convicted him of the articles with which they had charged him. They brought dry fagots with them into the city, 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 those articles any more, neither secretly nor openly, on pain of suffering the same punishment. They also drew up a form in writing, which he was to repeat from memory as a recantation; and they compelled him to it by severe threats. John Fox, Mart. Angl., ex Registro Hereford.

But afterwards the aforesaid William Swinderby nevertheless did not stop preaching his belief, so that he was arrested, by order of King Richard the Second, in the fifteenth year of his reign, which falls in the year 1392, and was 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 went against the Roman church; but which articles these were, or of what kind, is not clearly stated 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; indeed, 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 to sin (notice, this is not the work of children), we should live to righteousness."

As to his views on all the other articles, we have found them very scriptural, wholesome and good. On this, see John Fox Angl., page 440.

It is certainly true that William Swinderby's articles of faith shone out with such radiance of divine truth that the children of darkness (the Romanists) could not bear them, so that at last, after a long and severe imprisonment, they finished his trial and pronounced 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 to 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 have him arrested without delay; however, he did not immediately proceed to put him to death, but kept him in prison for a long time. At last, in the year 1401, he was burnt alive in Smithfield, at London." Second book of the Hist. of the Persecutions, folio 505, column 2, from John Fox, Hist. Angl., page 438, also, page 436.

Again, A. Mellinus, page 515, column 4: "Baleus also agrees with this, saying that William Swinderby, after his recantation, was strengthened in the confession of the divine truth, and was finally, in the year 1401, burnt alive, in the sight of a great number of people, in Smithfield, at London." Bal. Cent. 6, Script. Britt., in Appendix ad Jo. 1, Horesb., page 493. [n501-1]

NOTE. In the year 1405, John Wenschelberg now wrote against the superstition in popery, and also against the deception practiced by the priests. Among other things he told of a Bohemian priest who had colored the host of the Sacrament (of the altar) with his own blood, and had persuaded the people that the blood had of its own accord mingled with the bread. "These are," he said, "the lying signs and false miracles of antichrist." But what happened to him because of this, at the hands of the papists, we have not found in the old writers. Compare Joh. Munst., folio 181, with Chron. van den Ondergang, page 758, column 1.