This homely tragedy was enacted at Oudenarde, the birth place of Duchess Margaret.  She was the daughter of the puissant Charles the Fifth, but her mother was only the daughter of a citizen of Oudenarde; of a “quidam” like the nameless weaver who had thus been burned by her express order.  It was not to be supposed, however, that the circumstance could operate in so great a malefactor’s favor.  Moreover, at the same moment, she sent orders that a like punishment should be inflicted upon another person then in a Flemish prison, for the crime of anabaptism.

The privy council, assisted by thirteen knights of the Fleece, had been hard at work, and the result of their wisdom was at last revealed in a “moderation” consisting of fifty-three articles.

What now was the substance of those fifty-three articles, so painfully elaborated by Viglius, so handsomely drawn up into shape by Councillor d’Assonleville?  Simply to substitute the halter for the fagot.  After elimination of all verbiage, this fact was the only residuum.  It was most distinctly laid down that all forms of religion except the Roman Catholic were forbidden; that no public or secret conventicles were to be allowed; that all heretical writings were to be suppressed; that all curious inquiries into the Scriptures were to be prohibited.  Persons who infringed these regulations were divided into two classes—­the misleaders and the misled.  There was an affectation of granting mercy to persons in the second category, while death was denounced upon those composing the first.  It was merely an affectation; for the rambling statute was so open in all its clauses, that the Juggernaut car of persecution could be driven through the whole of them, whenever such a course should seem expedient.  Every man or woman in the Netherlands might be placed in the list of the misleaders, at the discretion of the officials.  The pretended mercy to the misguided was a mere delusion.

The superintendents, preachers, teachers, ministers, sermon-makers, deacons, and other officers, were to be executed with the halter, with confiscation of their whole property.  So much was very plain.  Other heretics, however, who would abjure their heresy before the bishop, might be pardoned for the first offence, but if obstinate, were to be banished.  This seemed an indication of mercy, at least to the repentant criminals.  But who were these “other” heretics?  All persons who discussed religious matters were to be put to death.  All persons, not having studied theology at a “renowned university,” who searched and expounded the Scriptures, were to be put to death.  All persons in whose houses any act of the perverse religion should be committed, were to be put to death.  All persons who harbored or protected ministers and teachers of any sect, were to be put to death.  All the criminals thus carefully enumerated were to be executed, whether repentant or not.  If, however, they abjured their errors, they were to be beheaded instead of being strangled.  Thus it was obvious that almost any heretic might be brought to the halter at a moment’s notice.