Talk:John Foxe

Notes

"Second edition The Actes and Monuments ' accuracy was immediately attacked by Catholic writers like Thomas Harding and Thomas Stapleton but most notably in the Dialogi sex, contra summi pontificatus, monasticae vitae, sanctorum, sacrarum imaginum oppugnatores, et pseudomartyres (1566)."

This is a quote from the article. Thomas Harding in that case has a link to the article Thomas Harding. This must be a mistake. The article "Thomas Harding" is about a Lollard martyr, whereas the Thomas Harding who attacked Foxe was a Catholic apologist.

I'm not absoultely sure, but there must be two diff. Thomas Hardings. I will try to find that out. Maybe someone else can help.

Sorry for my bad English, I'm not a native speaker.

According to the Oxford DNB, there are two Thomas Hardings, one of whom was the author who attacked Foxe (1516-1572), the other a Church Historian of the 17th century, with no mention of the Lollard. Hackloon 14:24, 2 October 2006 (UTC) - having checked references tho, the Lollard seems quite well documented, so this must be a case where Wikipedia is ahead of the ODNB! Will try to get round to adding all three in due course... Hackloon 14:27, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I asked my professor at university. He affirmed that the link is wrong. One Thomas Harding was a Lollard, who is also mentioned in Foxe's book whereas the other one was a Catholic apologist who attacked John Foxe but also John Jewel's book "An Apologie of the Church of England". The apologist by the way had already died before 1566. Therefore I removed the link.

Quite right to remove the link, but I think your professor is mistaken. Harding the apologist shows up as being appointed to some sort of jurisdiction over certain English monastic communities in 1570. For more details see ODNB on "Thomas Harding (1516-1572)" and "Thomas Harding" by H. de Vocht in The English Historical Review, 35 (1920) 233-44. Also of interest and relevance is the ODNB article on Jewell, which (inter alia) states that Harding's "Confutation of a booke intituled ‘An apologie of the Church of England’" was published in 1565.Hackloon 22:47, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying that. My professor by the way was not wrong. I again confused the two Thomas Hardings. I originally intended to write: The Lollard Thomas died before 1566 which made it impossible for him to attack the book in 1566.

Any Lollard martyr would not only have died before 1566 but way before that year since Lollardy was around in the early 15th century, i.e. a century and a half earlier. Deposuit (talk) 18:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Year of Birth?

Many sources say 1517. E.g John Foxe: a biography, written by Dr. Thomas Freeman, Research Officer for the John Foxe Project Team. I don't know if we have different dates because historically we are uncertain, or whether there's been a blunder that has been perpetuated - in any case, there is no citation here and I propose that the date be changed to 1517. StAnselm 12:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

The encyclopedia article from which the article was largely taken is probably mistaken. See Mozley, 12. I've corrected it.--John Foxe 18:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, to be honest, I'm still not totally sure - if it's a mistake, it's a very widespread one. I think I'll do some more research and add a little bit on the uncertainty. StAnselm 01:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Section on Accuracy.

Text refers to "unfashionable religious opinions." Wouldn't "unorthodox" or "subversive" be slightly better? I think that people were martyred for something that was more serious than just being unfashionable. William Tyndale translated "ekklesia" as "'congregation' rather than 'Church'" as his entry states. That was a direct challenge to the authority of the church and his was more than an opinion that was merely "unfashionable." "Unfashionable" seems to trivialize both the martyr's opinion and the objections to it.

"Dangerous" might even work. The doctrinal differences may seem insubstantial now but they could be very, very unhealthy then.

Just a thought. I made no change.

Richard Ong (talk) 05:45, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree. The word "unfashionable" is too arch for the context. I've reworded thus: "Foxe was, after all, describing the burning of human beings for holding religious opinions disapproved by the state church."--John Foxe (talk) 13:41, 15 July 2011 (UTC)