Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 19.djvu/66

Fisher instincts would appear, indeed, sometimes to have prevailed over his better judgment. To the notable scheme of church reform brought forward in the House of Commons in 1529 he offered strenuous resistance, and his language was such that it was construed into a disrespectful reflection on that assembly, and the speaker was directed to make it a matter of formal complaint to the king. Fisher was summoned into the royal presence, and was fain to have recourse to a somewhat evasive explanation, which seems scarcely in harmony with his habitual moral courage and conscientiousness. The statutes which he drew up about this time, to be the codes of Christ's College and St. John's College, are also characterised by a kind of timorous mistrust, and, while embodying a wise innovation on the existing scheme of study, exhibit a pusillanimous anxiety to guard against all subsequent innovations whatever. In the revised statutes which he gave to St. John's College in 1524 and 1530 this tendency is especially apparent : but it is to be observed that some of the new provisions in the latter code were taken from that given by Wolsey to Cardinal College (afterwards Christ Church), Oxford. In 1528 the high estimation in which his services were held by St. John's College was shown by the enactment of a statute for the annual celebration of his exequies. The unflinching firmness with which he opposed the doctrine of the royal supremacy did honour to his consistency. When convocation was called upon to give its assent, he asserted that the acceptance of such a principle would cause the clergy of England 'to be hissed out of the society of God's holy catholic church' (, p. 110) ; and his opposition so far prevailed that the form in which the assent of convocation was ultimately recorded was modified by the memorable saving clause, 'quantum per legem Dei licet' (11 Feb. 1531). His opposition to the royal divorce was not less honourable and consistent, and he stood alone among the bishops of the realm in his refusal to recognise the validity of the measure. As Queen Catherine's confessor he naturally became her chief confidant. Brewer goes so far as to say that he was 'the only adviser on whose sincerity and honesty she could rely.' From the evidence of the State Papers it would seem, however, that Wolsey, in his desire to further Henry's wishes, did succeed for a time in alienating Fisher from the queen, by skilfully instilling into the bishop's mind a complete misapprehension as to the king's real design in inquiring into the validity of his marriage. But he could not succeed in inducing Fisher to regard the papal dispensation for Catherine's marriage as invalid, and in 1528 the latter was appointed one of her counsellors. On 28 June 1529 he appeared in the legate's court and made his memorable declaration that 'to avoid the damnation of his soul,' and 'to show himself not unfaithful to the king,' he had come before their lordships 'to assert and demonstrate with cogent reasons that this marriage of the king and queen could not be dissolved by any power, divine or human' (, Reign of Henry VIII, ii. 346). Henry betrayed how deeply he was offended by drawing up a reply (in the form of a speech) in which he attacked both Fisher's character and motives with great acrimony and violence. The copy sent to Fisher is preserved in the Record Office, and contains brief comments in his own handwriting on the royal assertions and misrepresentations. In the following year, one Richard Rouse having poisoned a vessel of yeast which was placed in the bishop's kitchen 'in Lambith Marsh,' several members of the episcopal household died in consequence. By Sanders (De Schismate, p. 72) this event was represented as an attempt on the bishop's life by Anne Boleyn, dictated by resentment at his opposition to the divorce. The weaker side of Fisher's character was shown in the credence and countenance which he gave to the impostures of the Nun of Kent [see ] ; while the manner in which the professedly inspired maid denounced the projected marriage of Henry and Anne Boleyn brought the bishop himself under the suspicion of collusion. This suspicion was deepened by the fact that the nun, when interrogated before the Star-chamber, named him as one of her confederates. He was summoned to appear before parliament to answer the charges preferred against him. On 28 Jan. 1533-4 he wrote to Cromwell describing himself as in a pitiable state of health, and begging to be excused from appearing as commanded. In another letter, written three days later, he speaks as though wearied out by Cromwell's importunity and frequent missives. Cromwell in replying broadly denounces his excuses as 'mere craft and cunning,' and advises him to throw himself on the royal mercy. Chapuys, the imperial ambassador, writing 25 March to Charles V, says that Fisher, whom he characterises as 'the paragon of Christian prelates both for learning and holiness,' has been condemned to 'confiscation of body and goods,' and attributes it to the support which he had given to the cause of Catherine. Fisher was sentenced, along with Adyson, his chaplain, to be