[Footnote 423: 37 Henry VIII. cap. 17.]
In the repeal of these statutes the entire ecclesiastical legislation
of Henry VIII. was swept away; and, so far as a majority in a single
parliament could affect them, the work was done absolutely and with
clean completeness.
But there remained two other acts collaterally and accidentally
affecting the See of Rome; for the repeal of which the court was no
less anxious than for the repeal of the Act of Supremacy, where the
parliament were not so complaisant.
Throughout the whole reaction under Mary there was one point on which
the laity never wavered. Attempts such as that which has been just
mentioned were made incessantly, directly or indirectly, to alter the
succession and cut off Elizabeth. They were like the fretful and
profitless chafings of waves upon a rock. The two acts on which
Elizabeth's claims were rested[424] touched, in one or other of their
clauses, the papal prerogative, and were included in the list to be
condemned. But, of these acts, "so much only" as affected the See of
Rome was repealed. The rest was studiously declared to continue in
force.
[Footnote 424: 28 Henry VIII. cap. 7; 35 Henry
VIII. cap. 1.]
Yet, with this reservation, the parliament had gone far in their
concessions, and it remained for them to secure their equivalent.
They reinstated the bishops, but, in giving back a power which had
been so much abused, they took care to protect--not, alas! the
innocent lives which were about to be sacrificed--but their own
interests. The bishops and clergy of the Province of Canterbury having
been made to state their case and their claims, in a petition to the
crown, they were then compelled formally to relinquish those claims;
and the petition and the relinquishment were embodied in the act as
the condition of the {p.183} restoration of the authority of the
church courts.[425] In continuation, the Lords and Commons desired
that, for the removal "of all occasion of contention, suspicion, and
trouble, both outwardly and inwardly, in men's conscience," the pope's
holiness, as represented by the legate, "by dispensation, toleration,
or permission, as the case required," would recognise all such
foundations of colleges, hospitals, cathedrals, churches, schools, or
bishoprics as had been established during the schism, would confirm
the validity of all ecclesiastical acts which had been performed
during the same period; and, finally, would consent that all property,
of whatever kind, taken from the church, should remain to its present
possessors--"so as all persons having sufficient conveyance of the
said lands, goods, and chattels by the common laws, or acts, or
statutes of the realm, might, without scruple of conscience, enjoy
them without impeachment or trouble, by pretence of any general
council, canon, or ecclesiastical law, and clear from all dangers of
the censures of the church." The petitions, both of clergy and
parliament, the act went on to say, had been considered by the
cardinal; and the cardinal had acquiesced. He had undertaken, in the
pope's name, that the possessors of either lands or goods should never
be molested either then or in time to come, in virtue of any papal
decree, or canon, or council; that if any attempt should be made by
any bishop or other ecclesiastic to employ the spiritual weapons of
the church to extort restitution, such act or acts were declared vain
and of none effect. The dispensation was pronounced, nor could the
legate's protests avail to prevent it from appearing in the act. He
was permitted, only in consideration of the sacrifice, to interweave
amidst the legal technicalities some portion of his own feeling. The
impious detainers of holy things, while permitted to maintain their
iniquity, were reminded of the fate of Belshazzar, and were urged to
restore {p.184} the patines, chalices, and ornaments of the altars.
The impropriators of benefices were implored, in the mercy of Christ,
to remember the souls of the people, and provide for the decent
performance of the services of the churches.[426]
[Footnote 425: "Albeit, by the laws of the Church,
the bishops and clergy were the defenders and
protectors of all ecclesiastical rights, and would
therefore in nature be bound to use their best
endeavours for the recovery of the lands and goods
lost to the Church during the late schism, they,
nevertheless, perceiving the tenures of those lands
and goods were now complicated beyond power of
extrication, and that the attempt to recover them
might promote disaffection in the realm, and cause
the overthrow of the present happy settlement of
religion, preferring public peace to private
commodity, and the salvation of souls to worldly
possessions, did consent that the present
disposition of those lands and goods should remain
undisturbed. They besought their Majesties to
intercede with the legate for his consent, and, for
themselves, they requested, in return, that the
lawful jurisdiction of the Church might be
restored."--1 and 2 Philip and Mary, cap. 8, sec.
31.]
[Footnote 426: "Et licet omnes res mobiles
ecclesiarum indistincte iis qui eas tenent
relaxaverimus, eos tamen admonitos esse volumus ut
ante oculos habentes divini judicii severitatem
contra Balthazarem Regem Babylonis, qui vasa sacra
non a se sed a patre a templo ablata in profanos
usus convertit, ea propriis ecclesiis si extant vel
aliis restituant, hortantes etiam et per viscera
misericordiae Jesu Christi obtestantes eos omnes
quos haec res tangit, ut salutis suae non omnino
immemores hoc saltem efficiant, ut ex bonis
ecclesiasticis maxime iis quae ratione personatuum
et vicariatuum populi ministrorum sustentationi
fuerint specialiter destinata, seu aliis
cathedralibus et aliis quae nunc extant inferioribus
ecclesiis curam animarum exercentibus, ita
provideatur, ut eorum pastores commode et honeste
juxta eorum qualitatem et statum sustentari
possint, et curam animarum laudabiliter
exercere."--1 and 2 Philip and Mary, cap. 8, sec.
31.]
Here the act might have been expected to end. The nature of the
transaction between the parliament and the pope had been made
sufficiently clear. Yet, had nothing more been said, the surrender of
their claims by the clergy would have implied that they had parted
with something which they might have legitimately required. Under the
inspiration of the lawyers, therefore, a series of clauses were
superadded, explaining that, notwithstanding the dispensation, "The
title of all lands, possessions, and hereditaments in their majesties'
realms and dominions was grounded in the laws, statutes, and customs
of the same, and by their high jurisdiction, authority royal, and
crown imperial, _and in their courts only_, might be impleaded,
ordered, tried, and judged, and none otherwise:" and, therefore,
"whosoever, by any process obtained out of any ecclesiastical court
within the realm or without, or by pretence of any spiritual
jurisdiction or otherwise, contrary to the laws of the realm, should
inquiet or molest any person or persons, or body politic, for any of
the said lands or things above specified, should incur the danger of
Premunire, and should suffer and incur the forfeitures and pains
contained in the same."[427]
[Footnote 427: Ibid.]
Vainly the clergy had entreated for a limitation or removal of
Premunire. That spectre remained unexorcised in all its shadowy
terror; and while it survived, the penitence of England went no deeper
than the lips, however fine the words and eloquent the phrases in
which it was expressed. As some compensation, the Mortmain Act was
suspended for twenty years. Yet, as if it were in reply to Pole's
appeal, a mischievous provision {p.185} closed the act, that,
notwithstanding anything contained in it, laymen entitled to tithes
might recover them with the same readiness as before the first day of
the present parliament.[428]
[Footnote 428: 1 and 2 Philip and Mary, cap. 8,
sec. 31.]
Such was the great statute of reconciliation with Rome, with which, in
the inability to obtain a better, the legate was compelled to be
satisfied, and to reconsider his threat of going back to Italy.
This first conflict was no sooner ended than another commenced. The
Commons would not consent that Philip should be crowned; but, as the
queen said she was _enceinte_, provision had to be made for a regency,
and a bill was introduced into the Upper House which has not survived,
but which, in spirit, was unfavourable to the king.[429] Gardiner, in
the course of the debate, attempted to put in a clause affecting
Elizabeth,[430] but the success was no better than usual. The act went
down to the Commons, where, however, it was immediately cancelled.
Though the Commons would give Philip no rights as king, they were
better disposed towards him than the Lords; and they drew another bill
of their own, in which they declared the father to be the natural and
fitting guardian of the child. The experience of protectorates, they
said, had been uniformly unfortunate, and should the queen die leaving
an heir, Philip should be regent of the realm during the minority; if
obliged to be absent on the Continent, he might himself nominate his
deputy;[431] and so long as it should be his pleasure to remain in
England, his person should be under the protection of the laws of high
treason.
[Footnote 429: "It was suspected," says Renard,
"que le dict act se proposoit a maulvais fin, qu'il
estoit contre les traictez et capitulation de
marriage pour hereder la couronne qui venoit de
maulvais auteurs quilz plustot desiroient le mal
dudict S. roy et inquietude dudict royaulme que le
bien."--Renard to the Emperor: _Granvelle Papers_,
vol. iv. p. 347.]
[Footnote 430: Ibid. vol. iv. p. 348.]
[Footnote 431: "Et que en son absence il y pourra
nommer qui luy plaira."--Ibid. vol. iv. p. 348.]
Taking courage from the apparent disposition of the House, the friends
of the court proposed that, should the queen die childless, the crown
should devolve absolutely upon him for his life.[432] But in this they
were going too far. The suggestion was listened to coldly; and Philip,
who had really calculated on obtaining from parliament, in some form
or other, a security for his succession, despatched Ruy Gomez to
Brussels, to consult the {p.186} emperor on the course which should
be pursued.[433] On the whole, however, could the bill of the House of
Commons be carried, Renard was disposed to be contented; the queen was
confident in her hopes of an heir, and it might not be worth while to
irritate the people unnecessarily about Elizabeth.[434] The clause
empowering Philip to govern by deputy in his absence was especially
satisfactory.[435]
[Footnote 432: "Aulcuns particuliers proposaient en
ladicte chambre basse que le dict S. roy deust
demeurer roy absolut dudict royaulme mourant
ladicte dame sans hoirs sa vie durant."--Ibid. vol.
iv. p. 348.]
[Footnote 433: "Ruy Gomez est alle vers l'Empereur
pour faire entendre les difficultez qu'ilz trouvent
de faire demeurer ceste couronne a son dict filz,
au cas que la royne sa femme allast de vie a
trespaz sans enfans, et d'aultant qu'ilz ont
congneu la volunte de ceulx cy estre bien loin de
leur intention; et pour ce scavoir par quelz moyens
il semblera bon audict Empereur qu'on puisse mettre
cela en termes devant la fin de ce
parlement."--Noailles.]
[Footnote 434: "Et quant a la declaration de
bastardise l'on n'est d'opinion qu'elle se doige
entamer aux dict parlement, puisque l'apparence
d'heretier est certaine et pour l'evident et
congneue contrariete que seroit en toute le
royaulme."--Renard to the Emperor: _Granvelle
Papers_, p. 348.]
[Footnote 435: Ibid.]
But the peers, whom the Commons had refused to consult on the new form
of the measure, would not part so easily with their own opinions; they
adopted the phraseology of the Lower House, but this particular and
precious feature in it they pared away. The bill, as it eventually
passed, declared Philip regent till his child should be of age, and so
long as he continued in the realm; but, at the same time, fatally for
the objects at which he was aiming, it bound him again to observe all
the articles of the marriage treaty, "which, during the time that he
should hold the government, should remain and continue in as full
force and strength, as if they were newly inserted and rehearsed in
the present act."[436]
[Footnote 436: 1 and 2 Philip and Mary, cap. 10.]
The disposition of the House of Lords was the more dangerous, because
the bishops, of course, voted with the government, and the strength of
the opposition, therefore, implied something like unanimity in the lay
peers. The persecuting act had been carried with difficulty, and in
the reconciliation with Rome the legate had been studiously mortified.
On the succession and the coronation the court had been wholly
baffled; and in the Regency Bill they had obtained but half of what
they had desired. At the least Mary had hoped to secure for the king
the free disposal of the army and the finances, and she had not been
able so much as to ask for it. Compelled to rest contented with such
advantages as had been secured, the court would not risk the results
of further controversy by prolonging the session; and on the 16th of
January, at four o'clock in the afternoon, the {p.187} king and
queen came to the House of Lords almost unattended, and with an
evident expression of dissatisfaction dissolved the parliament.[437]
[Footnote 437: "Ilz sont pour cejourdhuy bien
esloignez de ce qu'ilz pensoient faire il y a six
sepmaines en ce parlement, ou ilz faisoient compte
que ne pouvant couronner ce roy ou luy faire
succeder ce royaulme, a tout le moings de luy en
faire tumber l'administration, avecques tel pouvoir
sur les forces et finances qu'il en eust pen
disposer a sa volunte. Toutefois la chose a prins
telle issue que pour ce coup il fault qu'il se
contente a beaucoup moings qu'il ne s'attendoit.
"Ce qui a tellement despleu a cedict roy et royne,
que le 16 de ce mois ilz allerent par eau tous
deulx clorre et terminer ledict parlement, sur les
quatre heures du soir, assez petitement
accompaignez et sans aulcune ceremonie, monstrans
et faisans congnoistre a ung chascun avoir quelque
grand mescontentement contre l'assemble
d'icelluy."--Noailles to the Constable:
_Ambassades_, vol. iv. p. 153.]
I have been particular in relating the proceedings of this parliament,
because it marks the point where the flood tide of reaction ceased to
ascend, and the ebb recommenced. From the beginning of the Reformation
in 1529, two distinct movements had gone on side by side--the
alteration of doctrines, and the emancipation of the laity from papal
and ecclesiastical domination. With the first, the contemporaries of
Henry VIII., the country gentlemen and the peers, who were the heads
of families at the period of Mary's accession, had never sympathised;
and the tyranny of the Protestants while they were in power had
converted a disapproval which time would have overcome, into active
and determined indignation. The papacy was a mixed question; the
Pilgrims of Grace in 1536, and the Cornish rebels in 1549, had
demanded the restoration of the spiritual primacy to the See of St.
Peter, and Henry himself, until Pole and Paul III. called on Europe to
unite in a crusade against him, had not determined wholly against some
degree of concession. In the pope, as a sovereign who claimed
reverence and tribute, who interfered with the laws of the land, and
maintained at Rome a supreme court of appeal--who pretended a right to
depose kings and absolve subjects from their allegiance--who held a
weapon in excommunication as terrible to the laity as Premunire was
terrible to ecclesiastics--in the pope under this aspect, only a few
insignificant fanatics entertained any kind of interest.
But experience had proved that to a nation cut off from the centre of
Catholic union, the maintenance of orthodoxy was impossible: the
supremacy of the pope, therefore, came back as a tolerated feature in
the return to the Catholic faith, and the ecclesiastical courts were
reinstated in authority to check unlicensed {p.188} extravagance of
opinion. Their restored power, however, was over opinion only;
wherever the pretensions of the church would come in collision with
the political constitution, wherever they menaced the independence of
the temporal magistrate or the tenure of property, there the progress
of restoration was checked by the rock, and could eat no further into
the soil. The pope and the clergy recovered their titular rank, and in
one direction unhappily they recovered the reality of power. But the
temporal spoils of the struggle remained with the laity, and if the
clergy lifted a hand to retake them, their weapons would be instantly
wrenched from their grasp.
If the genuine friends of human freedom had acquiesced without
resistance in this conclusion, if the nobility had contented
themselves with securing their worldly and political interests, and
had made no effort to restrain or modify the exercise of the authority
which they were giving back, they might be accused of having accepted
a dishonourable compromise. But they did what they could. They worked
with such legal means as were in their power, and for two parliaments
they succeeded in keeping persecution at bay; they failed in the
third, but failed only after a struggle. The Protestants themselves
had created, by their own misconduct, the difficulty of defending
them; and armed unconstitutional resistance was an expedient to be
resorted to, only when it had been seen how the clergy would conduct
themselves. English statesmen may be pardoned if they did not
anticipate the passions to which the guardians of orthodoxy were about
to abandon themselves. Parliament had maintained the independence of
the English courts of law. It had maintained the Premunire. It had
forbidden the succession to be tampered with. If this was not
everything, it was something--something which in the end would be the
undoing of all the rest.
The court and the bishops, however, were for the present absolute in
their own province. The persecuting acts were once more upon the
Statute Book; and when the realities of the debates in parliament had
disappeared, the cardinal and the queen could again give the rein to
their imagination. They had called up a phantom out of its grave, and
they persuaded themselves that they were witnessing the resurrection
of the spirit of truth, that heresy was about to vanish from off the
English soil, like an exhalation of the morning, at the brightness of
the papal return. The chancellor and the clergy were springing at the
leash like hounds with the game in view, fanaticism and revenge
{p.189} lashing them forward. If the temporal schemes of the court
were thwarted, it was, perhaps, because Heaven desired that exclusive
attention should be given first to the salvation of souls.
For all past political offences, therefore, there was now an amnesty,
and such prisoners as remained unexecuted for Wyatt's conspiracy were
released from the Tower on the 18th of January. On the 25th a hundred
and sixty priests walked in procession through the London streets,
chanting litanies, with eight bishops walking after them, and Bonner
carrying the host. On the 28th the cardinal issued his first general
instructions. The bishops were directed to call together their clergy
in every diocese in England, and to inform them of the benevolent love
of the Holy Father, and of the arrival of the legate with powers to
absolve them from their guilt. They were to relate the acts of the
late parliament, with the reconciliation and absolution of the Lords
and Commons; and they were to give general notice that authority had
been restored to the ecclesiastical courts, to proceed against the
enemies of the faith, and punish them according to law.
A day was then to be fixed on which the clergy should appear with
their confessions, and be received into the church. In the assignment
of their several penances, a distinction was to be made between those
who had taught heresy and those who had merely lapsed into it.
When the clergy had been reconciled, they were again in turn to exhort
the laity in all churches and cathedrals, to accept the grace which
was offered to them; and that they might understand that they were not
at liberty to refuse the invitation, a time was assigned to them
within which their submissions must be all completed. A book was to be
kept in every diocese, where the names of those who were received were
to be entered. A visitation was to be held throughout the country at
the end of the spring, and all who had not complied before Easter day,
or who, after compliance, "had returned to their vomit", would be
proceeded against with the utmost severity of the law.[438]
[Footnote 438: Instructions of Cardinal Pole to the
Bishops: Burnet's _Collectanea_.]
The introduction of the Register was the Inquisition under another
name. There was no limit, except in the humanity or the prudence of
the bishops, to the tyranny which they would be enabled to exercise.
The cardinal professed to desire that, before heretics were punished
with death, mild means should {p.190} first be tried with them;[439]
the meaning which he attached to the words was illustrated in an
instant example.
[Footnote 439: The opinion of Pole, on the
propriety of putting men to death for
nonconformity, was strictly orthodox. He regarded
heretics, he said, as rebellious children, with
whom persuasion and mild correction should first be
tried. "Nec tamen, negarim fieri posse," he
continued, "ut alicujus opiniones tam perniciosae
existant, ipseque jam corruptus tam sit ad
corrumpendos alios promptus ac sedulus ut non
dubitarim dicere eum e vita tolli oportere et
tanquam putridum membrum e corpore exsecari. Neque
id tamen priusquam ejus sanandi causa omnis leviter
medendi tentata sit ratio."--Pole to the Cardinal
of Augsburg: _Epist._ Reg. Pol. vol. iv.]
The instructions were the signal for the bishops to commence business.
On the day of their appearance, Gardiner, Bonner, Tunstal, and three
other prelates, formed a court in St. Mary Overy's Church, in
Southwark; and Hooper, and Rogers, a canon of St. Paul's, were brought
up before them.
Rogers had been distinguished in the first bright days of
Protestantism. He had been a fellow-labourer with Tyndal and
Coverdale, at Antwerp, in the translation of the Bible. Afterwards,
taking a German wife, he lived for a time at Wittenberg, not unknown,
we may be sure, to Martin Luther. On the accession of Edward, he
returned to England, and worked among the London clergy till the end
of the reign; and on Mary's accession he was one of the preachers at
Paul's Cross who had dared to speak against the reaction. He had been
rebuked by the council, and his friends had urged him to fly; but,
like Cranmer, he thought that duty required him to stay at his post,
and, in due time, without, however, having given fresh provocation, he
was shut up in Newgate by Bonner.
Hooper, when the unfortunate garment controversy was brought to an
end, had shown by his conduct in his diocese that in one instance at
least doctrinal fanaticism was compatible with the loftiest
excellence. While the great world was scrambling for the church
property, Hooper was found petitioning the council for leave to
augment impoverished livings out of his own income.[440] In the hall
of his palace at Gloucester a profuse hospitality was offered daily to
those who were most in need of it. The poor of the city were invited
by relays to solid meat dinners, and the bishop with the courtesy of a
gentleman dined with them, and treated them with the same respect as
if they had been the highest in the land. He was one of the first
persons arrested after Mary's accession, and the cross of persecution
at once happily made his peace with Ridley. In an affectionate
interchange of letters, the two confessors exhorted each other
{p.191} to constancy in the end which both foresaw, determining "if
they could not overthrow, at least, to shake those high altitudes" of
spiritual tyranny.[441] The Fleet prison had now been Hooper's house
for eighteen months. At first, on payment of heavy fees to the warden,
he had lived in some degree of comfort; but as soon as his deprivation
was declared, Gardiner ordered that he should be confined in one of
the common prisoners' wards; where "with a wicked man and a wicked
woman" for his companions, with a bed of straw and a rotten
counterpane, the prison sink on one side of his cell and Fleet ditch
on the other, he waited till it would please parliament to permit the
dignitaries of the Church to murder him.[442]
[Footnote 440: _Privy Council Register_, Edward VI.
_MS._]
[Footnote 441: Correspondence between Hooper and
Ridley: Foxe, vol. vi.]
[Footnote 442: Account of Hooper's Imprisonment, by
himself: Foxe, vol. vi.]
These were the two persons with whom the Marian persecution opened. On
their appearance in the court, they were required briefly to make
their submission. They attempted to argue; but they were told that
when parliament had determined a thing, private men were not to call
it in question, and they were allowed twenty-four hours to make up
their minds. As they were leaving the church Hooper was heard to say,
"Come, brother Rogers, must we two take this matter first in hand and
fry these faggots?" "Yea, sir, with God's grace," Rogers answered.
"Doubt not," Hooper said, "but God will give us strength."
They were remanded to prison. The next morning they were brought again
before the court. "The queen's mercy" was offered them, if they would
recant; they refused, and they were sentenced to die. Rogers asked to
be allowed to take leave of his wife and children. Gardiner, with a
savage taunt, rejected the request. The day of execution was left
uncertain. They were sent to Newgate to wait the queen's pleasure. On
the 30th, Taylor of Hadley, Laurence Sandars, rector of All Hallows,
and the illustrious Bradford, were passed through the same forms with
the same results. Another, a notorious preacher, called Cardmaker,
flinched, and made his submission.
Rogers was to "break the ice," as Bradford described it.[443] On the
morning of the 4th of February the wife of the keeper of Newgate came
to his bedside. He was sleeping soundly, and she woke him with
difficulty to let him know that he was wanted. The Bishop of London
was waiting, she said, to degrade him from the priesthood, and he was
then to go out and die. Rubbing {p.192} his eyes, and collecting
himself, he hurried on his clothes. "If it be thus." he said, "I need
not tie my points." Hooper had been sent for also for the ceremony of
degradation. The vestments used in the mass were thrown over them, and
were then one by one removed. They were pronounced deposed from the
priestly office, incapable of offering further sacrifice--except,
indeed, the only acceptable sacrifice which man can ever offer, the
sacrifice of himself. Again Rogers entreated permission to see his
wife, and again he was refused.
[Footnote 443: Bradford to Cranmer, Ridley, and
Latimer: Foxe.]
The two friends were then parted. Hooper was to suffer at Gloucester,
and returned to his cell; Rogers was committed to the sheriff, and led
out to Smithfield. The Catholics had affected to sneer at the faith of
their rivals. There was a general conviction among them, which was
shared probably by Pole and Gardiner, that the Protestants would all
flinch at the last; that they had no "doctrine that would abide the
fire." When Rogers appeared, therefore, the exultation of the people
in his constancy overpowered the horror of his fate, and he was
received with rounds of cheers. His family, whom he was forbidden to
part with in private, were waiting on the way to see him--his wife
with nine little ones at her side and a tenth upon her breast--and
they, too, welcomed him with hysterical cries of joy, as if he were on
his way to a festival.[444] Sir Robert Rochester was in attendance at
the stake to report his behaviour. At the last moment he was offered
pardon if he would give way, but in vain. The fire was lighted. The
suffering seemed to be nothing. He bathed his hands in the flame as
"if it was cold water," raised his eyes to heaven, and died.
[Footnote 444: "Cejourdhuy a este faicte la
confirmation de l'alliance entre le Pape et ce
Royaulme par ung sacrifice publique et solempnel
d'ung docteur predicant nomme Rogerus, lequel a
este brule tout vif pour estre Lutherien; mais il
est mort persistant en son opinion, a quoy la plus
grand part de ce peuple a prins tel plaisir qu'ilz
n'ont eu craincte de luy faire plusieurs
acclamations pour comforter son courage; et mesmes
ses enfans y ont assistes le consolantes de telle
facon qu'il sembloit qu'on le menast aux
nopces."--Noailles to Montmorency: _Ambassades_,
vol. iv.]
The same night a party of the royal guard took charge of Hooper, the
order of whose execution was arranged by a mandate from the crown. As
"an obstinate, false, and detestable heretic," he was to be burned in
the city "which he had infected with his pernicious doctrines;" and
"forasmuch as being a vainglorious person, and delighting in his
tongue," he "might persuade the people into agreement with him, had he
liberty to use it," care was to be taken that he should not speak
either at {p.193} the stake or on his way to it.[445] He was carried
down on horseback by easy stages; and on the forenoon of Thursday, the
7th, he dined at Cirencester, "at a woman's house who had always hated
the truth, and spoken all evil she could of him." This woman had
shared in the opinion that Protestants had no serious convictions, and
had often expressed her belief that Hooper, particularly, would fail
if brought to the trial. She found that both in him and in his creed
there was more than she had supposed; and "perceiving the cause of his
coming, she lamented his case with tears, and showed him all the
friendship she could."
[Footnote 445: Mandate for the execution of Hooper:
Burnet's _Collectanea_.]
At five in the evening he arrived at Gloucester. The road, for a mile
outside the town, was lined with people, and the mayor was in
attendance, with an escort, to prevent a rescue. But the feeling was
rather of awe and expectation, and those who loved Hooper best knew
that the highest service which he could render to his faith was to die
for it.
A day's interval of preparation was allowed him, with a private room.
He was in the custody of the sheriff; "and there was this difference
observed between the keepers of the bishops' prisons and the keepers
of the crown prisons, that the bishops' keepers were ever cruel; the
keepers of the crown prisons showed, for the most part, such favour as
they might."[446] After a sound night's rest, Hooper rose early, and
passed the morning in solitary prayer. In the course of the day, young
Sir Anthony Kingston, one of the commissioners appointed to
superintend the execution, expressed a wish to see him. Kingston was
an old acquaintance, Hooper having been the means of bringing him out
of evil ways. He entered the room unannounced. Hooper was on his
knees, and, looking round at the intruder, did not at first know him.
Kingston told him his name, and then, bursting into tears, said:--
[Footnote 446: Foxe.]
"Oh, consider; life is sweet and death is bitter; therefore, seeing
life may be had, desire to live, for life hereafter may do good."