Richard Hunne (d. 1514)I was told that my Chinese-language (and spipitual) teacher - Richard Hunn (1949-2006) - was named after an ancestor of his - "Richard Hunne" (d. 1514) - a rich merchant who could read and write both Latin and English (and translate one language into the other). This “other” Richard Hunne was murdered in Lollards' Tower (hanged in his cell by Churchmen) prior to his trial for “Heresy” in 1514 CE. Richard Hunne stated the Bible should be in translated into and read in the English-language and that under English Law - the Pope possessed no judicial power in England - a point of law that turns-out to be correct. This conflict all stemmed from petty clashes between Hunne and the Catholic Church and their Ecclesiastical (or "Canon") Law. Benefit of Clergy basically meant that no one could prevail against the Church in Court as all priests and monks (including their Servants) were exempt from the consequence of all Secular Law.
Indeed, Hunne's dead body was exhumed, tied to a post, and burned at the stake - after the Church tried his dead corpse and found it "Guilty" under “Canon Law” (supported by Secular Law). Coincidently, I have visited Lollards' Tower (situated is St Paul's Cathedral - London) twice in the early 2000s - and climbed the meandering and spiralling (narrow) stair-case from the ground-floor to the roof. This was an arduous task - with many of my group having to sit and rest around half-way up! I was told that Lollards' Tower was the Ecclesiastical equivalent to the Tower of London - which serviced the victims of Secular Law in England. The Church Courts could not pass the Death Penalty (as such a sentence defied the teaching of Jesus Christ) - so all “Heresy” decisions were passed from the Ecclesiastic Courts (where the condemned individual was "Excommunicated") to the Secular Courts - where this sentence was converted (in the Name of the King) into a "Death Sentence" - usually burned at the stake!
As expected, Wikipedia expresses the usual anti-intellectual and deficient grasp of history that exercises poor judgement regarding the personage of "Richard Hunne" (whose name is also spelt "Hune" and "Hunn" - depending upon written source). What follows below - is extracted from the (2017) audio-book entitled “Heretics and Believers: A History of the English Reformation” by Peter Marshall - which I am listening to on Audible (this data is taken from Chapter 6). Today, Richard Hunne is considered a Protestant Martyr.
Papal Bull May - 1514 - All Clergymen Entitled to Due Enrichment and Exempt from Secular Law
Richard Hunne - Heretic
February 1511 - the wife of Richard Hunne gave birth to a baby-boy (Stephen). His wife probably died soon after delivery (Midwives possessed the legal power to immediately Baptise babies after birth). The baby was sent to be cared for by a Wet Nurse in the Parish of St Mary Matfelon - White Chapel (London). Five weeks later the baby-boy died. Two tragedies close together - but a common experience for the early 16th century. Rector of the Parish (Thomas Dryfield) demanded the cloth the child had been Christened in as a "Mortuary" Tax (or "Gift") the incumbent priest was entitled to - upon the death of a parishioner. This was technically a recompense for forgotten tithes. "Mortuary" Taxes could be paid by giving the best (or second best) animal (or item of clothing) to the Church as payment. In the case of a baby - the Christening Gown was accepted. This disgusting Church tax was resented by the general public - particularly as the Church threatened Excommunication and the withholding of the Rights of Burial and Worship, etc, if such payment was refused.
Richard Hunne attempted to use Secular Law against the Church - stating that he would not pay on the grounds that the child possessed no property (owning the appropriate amount of land and property was the only qualification for paying tax) - and was therefore "exempt" from payment of any Church taxes. Richard Hunne also stated that Thomas Dryfield was not the incumbent priest within the Borough which the baby was born - or within which Richard Hunne (and his family) resided. It was odd that Thomas Dryfield insisted upon the paying of this tax (even though he probably was entitled to it) as it was the custom of the day for priests to waive this right - and to bury babies (and young children) in their baptismal clothes as a sign of purity.
Simultaneously, Richard Hunne became involved in another dispute with the Rector of St Michael Cornhill - over damaged caused by a fire in the tenement of a friend for whom Hunne stood surety. As the English Parliament was considering curtailing Church fiscal (and property) entitlement - the stand of Richard Hunne was viewed as dangerous and inspiring for those who opposed the Papal-control of England, its country, and its King. Secular Law could not be viewed as "superior" to Ecclesiastical Law - as such a development would disempower and impoverish the Church. Whereas Hunne was using logic and reason (effectively making sound legal arguments against Church power) - the Church was falling back upon tradition and convention. The Church did not carry-out any physical labour or produce anything tangible for the development of material society - and yet its members demanded that the laity give their money and property when asked and/or demanded.
As a consequence, Thomas Dryfield, taking the view that Richard Hunne was deliberately acting to deprive the Church of donations and bequests, started proceedings against Hunne during April 1512, in the Archbishop’s Court of Audience. During May 1512, William Warham (the Archbishop of Canterbury’s) Chancellor – Cuthbert Tunstall – predictably found in Dryfield’s favour. Richard Hunne, however, stated that Papal Law had no legal authority in England and that he was not required to follow any of its dictates. In-short, Richard Hunne’s principled stand ensured that his son kept his Christening-Burial cloth. On December 27th, 1512, Richard Hunne attended Vespers at St Mary Matfelon (White Chapel) when Dryfield’s Chaplain – Henry Marshall – refused to commence the Service whilst Hunne was in attendance. The Chaplain stated, “You are a curse, and you are cursed – leave this Church!” Henry Marshall claimed that Richard Hunne – as an “Excommunicate” – was not permitted to attend Church - or benefit from any blessings or purifications associated with the society of Jesus Christ. The problem was that Richard Hunne had NOT yet been “Excommunicated” from the Church! Richard Hunne responded by bringing a Court case for “Defamation of Character” against Henry Marshall in a Secular Court. Marshall’s false words (lying) had damaged his business and interfered in the secular world – therefore contradicting the divine rule of King Henry VIII. Richard Hunne also launched a Court case against Thomas Dryfield and several other Churchmen – accusing these individuals of corruption and treason. This shifted the issue from a local to a national level – with Richard Hunne asking the question as to whether the Catholic Church was acting in a manner which compromised the King of England’s rule?
Due to the embarrassing nature of these Court cases against the Church, the hearings were continuously adjourned so that no legally-binding decision was arrived at. This mirrored the Christening Cloth controversy – as the Church Court also refused to rule or pass judgement. Richard Hunne’s actions appear to indicate that he was attempting to make certain political points – either as an outraged individual – or working for forces unknown who were acting from behind the scenes.
Personal property should lay outside of Church jurisdiction – just as no foreign authority structure should exist in England that runs parallel to that of the King. These seem to be the points Richard Hunne was making at a time when it was very dangerous to oppose the Church or become directly involved with the King. Therefore, Richard Hunne was a radical ahead of his time and something of a visionary and a Revolutionary. He possessed the courage – as a good Englishman – to stand his ground and fight his corner in the face of Ecclesiastical tyranny. What is interesting is that he retained his Christian faith – whilst opposing what he considered to be a worldly corruption of religion.
Thomas More, writing at the time, stated that he possessed inside knowledge of this event and claimed Richard Hunne was attempting to secure fame and fortune by winning a Court case against the Church in a Secular Court (Hunne’s Case – as it where). Part of the motivation for this was the fact that the Church suspected Richard Hunne of “Heresy” – and Hunne attempted to slow-down this process (and muddy the ecclesiastical waters) by waging a fighting retreat. If the Catholic Church was corrupt – how could its law apply in England? If he could prove the Catholic Church to be corrupt to a great extent – then it could not apply any binding judgement against him or inflict any substantial (or damaging) sentence. In other words, the Court case was a self-defence mechanism activated by an emboldened Richard Hunne. Nevertheless, on October 14th, 1514, Richard Hunne was arrested on charges for “Heresy” by order of Richard Fitzjames - the Bishop of London. Richard Hunne was housed as a prisoner in the Lollards’ Tower – the Episcopal Prison situated on the Southside of the Entrance of St Paul’s Cathedral. On December 2nd, 1514, Hunne was brought before Fitzjames and formally charged with various offences – which included speaking-up for a Heresy suspect, attacking tithes, denouncing priests and bishops, attacking scribes and Pharisees for crucifying Christ, and possessing “English” language translations of the Bible! He also possessed unauthorised versions of the Gospels, Epistles and the Apocalypse! On December 4th, 1514, Richard Hunne was found dead – hanging from his belt – which was attached to an iron-staple high up in the wall of his cell in Lollards’ Tower.
The Church Authorities stated that Richard Hunne had committed “Suicide” – so that now he was Guilty of a second “Sin” against the Church. The Church then continued with its “Heresy” trial against Richard Hunne. Being “Dead” did not exempt an individual from charges of “Heresy”. A sermon was preached against Richard Hunne on December 10th, 1514, at Paul’s Cross, with his “Heresy” trial proceeding the next day (December 11th, 1514) attended by various key ecclesiastical personages. On December 16th, 1514 (following a five-day trial) Richard Hunne was formally declared a “Heretic” – and on December 20th, 1514, the matter having been confirmed in the Secular Courts – Richard Hunne’s already buried-body was exhumed, tied to a stake, and publicly burned. Meanwhile, while the Church was allowed to move through its machinations (and prior to his burial, exhumation and burning), the Secular Authorities decided that the death of Richard Hunne (whilst in Church custody) was “Suspicious” and therefore warranted a Secular investigation. To this end, a Jury of his Peers was selected (as part of the Coroner’s Inquest) and dispatched to Lollards’ Tower to observe the dead body of Richard Hunne. The Jury observed the state of the body, iron-pin high-up on the wall, the belt that killed him, and the girdle and the stool he had apparently jumped from. All this evidence convinced the Jurors Richard Hunne had been murdered.
Indeed, it was decided that William Horsey (Chancellor of Richard Fitzjames), John Spalding (Bell-Ringer of St Paul’s) and Charles Joseph (The Bishop’s former Summoner) – were all responsible for the murder of Richard Hunne. Charles Joseph made a clumsy attempt to flee – but was captured and during interrogation admitted the plot and gave the names of those involved. All were duly indicted in King’s Bench and imprisoned. Everyone was away, however, that if convicted, William Horsey could claim “Benefit of Clergy” – stating that Secular Law possessed NO jurisdiction over him. During May 1515, King Henry VIII ordered Parliament to enact a law demanding that the land and property of Richard Hunne – confiscated by the Church – be returned to his family. The problem was that the Catholic Church retained too much power in England and that the Secular Law was not yet strong enough to counter this influence.
The Secular Court case against the murderers of Hunne was continuously adjourned so that NO decision was ever reached (with the accused being quietly pardoned and released) – whilst Parliament’s order for the Church to return the Hunne land and property was never obeyed by the Church. Such a situation represented a totalitarian Canon’s Law controlled by a foreign power (which exempted all clerics from Secular Law) – locked in a deadly competition with the local power of an absolute monarchy – which would eventually end with the destruction of the Catholic Church in England just twenty-years later (through the Dissolution of the Monasteries) and the abolition of the resultant Church of England around one-hundred years after that (During the English Civil Wars)! Such was the dialectic times that Richard Hunne existed!