Dr. Hooper was a zealous, pious, and learned man: he went out of England in the latter end of King Henry's reign, and lived at Zurich at a time when all Germany was in a flame on account of the Interim; which was a form of worship contrived to keep up the exterior face of popery, with the softenings of some other senses put upon things. Upon this arose a great and important question among the Germans, concerning the use of things indifferent. It was said, if things were indifferent in themselves they were lawful; and that it was the subject's duty to obey when command'ed.' So the old popish rites were kept up, on purpose to draw the people more easily back to popery. Out of this another question arose, whether it was lawful to obey in 'things indifferent, when it was certain they were enjoined with an ill design?' To which it was replied, that the designs of legislators were not to be enquired into. This created a vast distraction in the country: some conformed to the Interim; but the major part were firm to their principles, and were turned out of their livings for disobedience. Those who complied were for the most part Lutherans, and carried the name of Adiaphorists, from the Greek word, that signifies, things indifferent. But the rest of the reformed were for shaking off all the relics of popery, with the hazard of all that was dear to them in the world; particularly at Zurich, where Hooper was, they were zealous against any compliance with the Interim, or the use of the old rites prescribed by it.

With these principles Hooper came over to England, and applied himself to preaching and explaining the Scriptures to the people; he was in the pulpit almost every day in the week, and his sermons were so popular, that all the churches were crouded where he preached. His fame soon reached the court, where Dr. Poynet and he were appointed to preach all the Lent sermons. He was also sent to preach through

out the counties of Kent and Essex in order to reconcile the people to the reformation. At length, in the month of July 1550, he was appointed bishop of Gloucester by letters patent from the King, but declined it for two reasons,

+Hist. Ref. vol. iii. p. 199.

1. Because of the form of the oath, which he calls foul and impious. And,

2. By reason of the Saronical habits.

By the oath is meant the oath of supremacy, which was in this form, By God, by the saints, and by the Holy 'Ghost;' which Hooper thought impious, because God only ought to be appealed to in an oath, for as much as he only knows the thoughts of men. The young King being convinced of this, struck out the words with his own pen.t

But the scruple about the habits was not so easily got over. The King and council were inclined to dispense with them; but Ridley and the rest of the bishops that had worn the habits were of another mind, saying, 'the thing was in'different, and therefore the law ought to be obeyed.' This had such an influence upon the council, that all Hooper's objections were afterwards heard with great prejudice. It discovered but an ill spirit in the reformers, not to suffer Hooper to decline his bishopric, nor yet to dispense with those habits which he thought unlawful. Hooper was as much for the clergy's wearing a decent and distinct habit from the laity, as Ridley, but prayed to be excused from the old symbolizing popish garments.

1. Because they had no countenance in Scripture or primitive antiquity,

2. Because they were the inventions of antichrist, and were introduced into the church in the corruptest ages of Christianity.

3. Because they had been abused to superstition and idolatry, particularly in the pompous celebration of the mass; and therefore were not indifferent.

4. To continue the use of these garments, was, in his opinion, to symbolize with antichrist, to mislead the people, and was inconsistent with the simplicity of the Christian religion.

Cranmer was inclined to yield to these reasons; but Ridley and Goodrick insisted strongly on obedience to the laws,

§ Mr. Fuller, when he wrote his Church History, conceived that the oath bishop Hooper refused, was that of canonical obedience, but when he published his Worthies, he was convinced of his mistake, and corrected it. Neal's Review. ED. + Hist. Ref. vol. iii. p. 203.

affirming, that in matters of rites and ceremonies, custom 'was a good argument for the continuance of those that had been long used.' But this argument seemed to go too far, because it might be used for the retaining all those other rites and ceremonies of popery which had been long used in the church, but were now abolished by these reformers themselves.

Hooper, not willing to rely upon his own judgment, wrote to Bucer at Cambridge, and to Peter Martyr at Oxford, who gave their opinions against the habits, as inventions of antichrist, and wished them removed; as will appear more fully in the reign of Queen Elizabeth ;* but were of opinion, since the bishops were so resolute, that he might acquiesce in the use of them for a time till they were taken away by law and the rather, because the reformation was in its infancy, and it would give occasion of triumph to the common enemy to see the reformers at variance among themselves. The divines of Switzerland and Geneva were of the same mind, being unwilling that a clergyman of so much learning and piety, and so zealous for the reformation, as Hooper was, should be silenced; they therefore advised him to comply for the present, that he might be the more capable by his authority and influence in the church, to get them laid aside. But these reasons not satisfying Hooper's conscience, he continued to refuse for above nine months.

The governing prelates being provoked with his stiffness, resolved not to suffer such a precedent of disobedience to the ecclesiastical laws to go unpunished. Hooper must be a bishop, and must be consecrated in the manner others had been, and wear the habits the law appointed; and to force him to comply he was served with an order of council, first to silence him, and then to confine him to his house. The doctor thought this usage very severe: to miss his promotion was no disappointment, but to be persecuted about clothes, by men of the same faith with himself, and to lose his liberty because he would not be a bishop, and in the fashion, this (says Mr. Collier) was possibly more than he well understood. After some time Hooper was committed to the custody of

*Collyer's Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 297.

Cranmer, who, not being able to bring him to conformity, complained to the council, who thereupon ordered him into the Fleet, where he continued some months, to the reproach of the reformers. At length he laid his case before the earl of Warwick, who by the King's own motion wrote to the archbishop to dispense with the habits at his consecration: but Cranmer alledged the danger of a præmunire; upon which a letter was sent from the King and council to the archbishop, and other bishops to be concerned in the consecration, warranting them to dispense with the garments, and discharging them of all manner of dangers, penalties and forfeitures they might incur any manner of way by omitting the same but though this letter was dated August the 5th, yet such was the reluctance of Cranmer and Ridley, that Hooper was not consecrated till March following; in which time says bishop Burnet,† the matter was in some sort compromised; Hooper consenting to be robed in his habits at bis consecration, when he preached before the King, or in his cathedral, or in any public place, but to be dispensed with at other times. Accordingly, being appointed to preach before the King, he came forth (says Mr. Fox) like a new player on the stage: his upper garment was a long scarlet chymere down to the foot, and under that a white linen rochet that covered all his shoulders, and a four square cap upon his head; but he took it patiently for the public profit of the church. After this, Hooper retired to his diocese, and preached sometimes two or three times a day, to crowds of people that hungered for the word of life: he was impartial and zealous in the faithful discharge of every branch of his episcopal character, even beyond his strength, and was himself a pattern of what he taught to others.

In the King's letter to the archbishop, Hooper is said to be a divine of great knowledge, deep judgment, and long study † Hist. Ref. vol. ii. p. 166.

66

§ Mr. Neal, in his review, adds from Mr. Fox, that "Bishop Hooper was constrained to appear once in public attired after the manner of "other bishops, which unless he had done, some think there was a con"trivance to take away his life; for his servant told me, (says Mr.Fox) "that the duke of Suffolk sent such word to Hooper, who was not him"self ignorant of what was doing." ED.

+ Fuller's Abel Redivivus, p. 173.

both in the scriptures and prophane learning; as also, a person of good discretion, ready utterance, and of an honest life but all these qualifications must be buried in silence and a prison, at a time when there was a famine of the word, rather than the above-mentioned uniformity in dress be dispensed with.

Most of the reforming clergy were with Hooper in this Controversy; several that had submitted to the habits in the late reign laid them aside in this, as the bishops Latimer and Coverdale, Dr. Taylor, Philpot, Bradford, and others, who laid down their lives for the protestant faith.* In some ordinations Cranmer and Ridley dispensed with the habits; for Mr. Thomas Sampson, parson of Bread-street, London, afterwards one of the heads of the Puritans, and successively dean of Chichester and Christchurch, in a letter to secretary Cecil, writes, that at his ordination by Cranmer and Ridley, he excepted against the apparel, and was nevertheless permitted and admitted.' If they had not done so on some occasions, there would not have been clergymen to support the reformation. Bishop Burnet says, they saw their error, and designed to procure an act to abolish the popish garments; but whether this were so or not, it is certain that in the next reign they repented their conduct; for when Ridley was in prison he wrote a letter to Hooper, in which he calls him his dear brother and fellow elder in Christ;' and desires a mutual forgiveness and reconciliation. And when he and Cranmer came to be degraded, they smiled at the ridiculous attire with which they were clothed, and declared they had long since laid aside all regard to that pageantry.§ This behavior of the bishops towards the King's natural-born subjects was the more extraordinary, because a latitude was allowed to foreign protestants to worship GoD after the manner of their country, without any regard to popish vestments: for this year a church of German refugees was established at St. Austin's in London, and erect

*Pierce's Vind. p. 31, 32, 33. Strype's Life of Cranmer, p. 192. Bishop Maddox maintained, that the habits put on those reformers were the popish habits, which was the ground of their dislike. Neal in his Review, controverts the truth, and exposes the futility of this distinction. Ed.

Mr.