his first Four were printed anno 1594, and his Fifth book first
printed, and alone, anno 1597; and that he lived to finish the
remaining Three of the proposed Eight: but whether we have the
last Three as finished by himself, is a just and material question;
concerning which I do declare, that I have been told almost forty
years past, by one that very well knew Mr. Hooker and the affairs of
his family, that, about a month after the death of Mr. Hooker, Bishop
Whitgift, then Archbishop of Canterbury, sent one of his Chaplains to
enquire of Mrs. Hooker, for the three remaining books of Polity,
writ by her husband: of which she would not, or could not, give
any account: and that about three months after that time the Bishop
procured her to be sent for to London, and then by his procurement she
was to be examined by some of her Majesty's Council, concerning the
disposal of those books: but, by way of preparation for the next
day's examination, the Bishop invited her to Lambeth, and after some
friendly questions, she confessed to him, that one Mr. Charke, and
another Minister that dwelt near Canterbury, came to her, and desired
that they might go into her husband's study, and look upon some of
his writings: and that there they two burnt and tore many of them,
assuring her, that they were writings not fit to be seen: and that she
knew nothing more concerning them. Her lodging was then in King street
in Westminster, where she was found next morning dead in her bed, and
her new husband suspected and questioned for it; but he was declared
innocent of her death.
[Sidenote: Those of Polity]
And I declare also, that Dr. John Spencer,--mentioned in the Life of
Mr. Hooker,--who was of Mr. Hooker's College, and of his time there,
and betwixt whom there was so friendly a friendship, that they
continually advised together in all their studies, and particularly
in what concerned these books of Polity--this Dr. Spencer, the Three
perfect books being lost, had delivered into his hands--I think by
Bishop Whitgift--the imperfect books, or first rough draughts of
them, to be made as perfect as they might be by him, who both knew Mr.
Hooker's handwriting, and was best acquainted with his intentions. And
a fair testimony of this may appear by an Epistle, first, and usually
printed before Mr. Hooker's Five books,--but omitted, I know not why,
in the last impression of the Eight printed together in anno 1662, in
which the Publishers seem to impose the three doubtful books, to be
the undoubted books of Mr. Hooker,--with these two letters, J.S. at
the end of the said Epistle, which was meant for this John Spencer:
in which Epistle the Reader may find these words, which may give some
authority to what I have here written of his last Three books.
[Sidenote: "J.S.," his Epistle]
"And though Mr. Hooker hastened his own death by hastening to give
life to his books, yet he held out with his eyes to behold these
Benjamins, these sons of his right hand, though to him they proved
Benonies, sons of pain and sorrow. But some evil-disposed minds,
whether of malice or covetousness, or wicked blind zeal, it is
uncertain, as soon as they were born, and their father dead, smothered
them, and by conveying the perfect copies, left unto us nothing but
the old, imperfect, mangled draughts, dismembered into pieces; no
favour, no grace, not the shadow of themselves remaining in them. Had
the father lived to behold them thus defaced, he might rightly have
named them Benonies, the sons of sorrow: but being the learned will
not suffer them to die and be buried, it is intended the world shall
see them as they are; the learned will find in them some shadows and
resemblances of their father's face. God grant, that as they were with
their brethren dedicated to the Church for messengers of peace: so,
in the strength of that little breath of life that remaineth in them,
they may prosper in their work, and, by satisfying the doubts of
such as are willing to learn, they may help to give an end to the
calamities of these our civil wars."--J.S.
[Sidenote: The Three Books]
And next the Reader may note, that this Epistle of Dr. Spencer's
was writ and first printed within four years after the death of
Mr. Hooker, in which time all diligent search had been made for
the perfect copies; and then granted not recoverable, and therefore
endeavoured to be completed out of Mr. Hooker's rough draughts, as
is expressed by the said Dr. Spencer in the said Epistle, since whose
death it is now fifty years.
And I do profess by the faith of a Christian, that Dr. Spencer's
wife--who was my Aunt, and Sister to George Cranmer, of whom I have
spoken--told me forty years since, in these, or in words to this
purpose: "That her husband had made up, or finished Mr. Hooker's last
Three books; and that upon her husband's death-bed, or in his last
sickness, he gave them into her hand, with a charge that they should
not be seen by any man, but be by her delivered into the hands of the
then Archbishop of Canterbury, which was Dr. Abbot, or unto Dr. King,
then Bishop of London, and that she did as he enjoined her."
I do conceive, that from Dr. Spencer's, and no other copy, there have
been divers transcripts; and I know that these were to be found in
several places; as namely, in Sir Thomas Bodley's Library; in that of
Dr. Andrews, late Bishop of Winton; in the late Lord Conway's; in the
Archbishop of Canterbury's; and in the Bishop of Armagh's; and in many
others: and most of these pretended to be the Author's own hand, but
much disagreeing, being indeed altered and diminished, as men have
thought fittest to make Mr. Hooker's judgment suit with their fancies,
or give authority to their corrupt designs; and for proof of a part of
this, take these following testimonies.
[Sidenote: "Clavi Trabales"]
Dr. Barnard, sometime Chaplain to Dr. Usher, late Lord Archbishop of
Armagh, hath declared in a late book, called "Clavi Trabales," printed
by Richard Hodgkinson, anno 1661, that, in his search and examination
of the said Bishop's manuscripts, he found the Three written books
which were supposed the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth of Mr. Hooker's
books of Ecclesiastical Polity; and that in the said Three books--now
printed as Mr. Hooker's--there are so many omissions, that they amount
to many paragraphs, and which cause many incoherencies: the omissions
are set down at large in the said printed book, to which I refer
the Reader for the whole; but think fit in this place to insert this
following short part of some of the said omissions.
[Sidenote: Omissions]
First, as there could be in natural bodies no motion of any thing,
unless there were some first which moved all things, and continued
unmoveable; even so in politic societies there must be some
unpunishable, or else no man shall suffer punishment: for sith
punishments proceed always from superiors, to whom the administration
of justice belongeth; which administration must have necessarily a
fountain, that deriveth it to all others, and receiveth not from any,
because otherwise the course of justice should go infinitely in a
circle, every superior having his superior without end, which cannot
be: therefore a well-spring, it followeth, there is: a supreme head of
justice, whereunto all are subject, but itself in subjection to none.
Which kind of pre-eminency if some ought to have in a kingdom, who
but a King shall have it? Kings, therefore, or no man, can have lawful
power to judge.
If private men offend, there is the Magistrate over them, which
judgeth; if Magistrates, they have their Prince; if Princes, there is
Heaven, a tribunal, before which they shall appear; on earth they are
not accountable to any. Here, says the Doctor, it breaks off abruptly.
And I have these words also attested under the hand of Mr. Fabian
Philips, a man of note for his useful books. "I will make oath, if I
shall be required, that Dr. Sanderson, the late Bishop of Lincoln,
did a little before his death affirm to me, he had seen a manuscript
affirmed to him to be the hand-writing of Mr. Richard Hooker, in
which there was no mention made of the King or supreme governors being
accountable to the people. This I will make oath, that that good man
attested to me.
"FABIAN PHILIPS." [1]
So that there appears to be both omissions and additions in the said
last Three printed books: and this may probably be one reason why Dr.
Sanderson, the said learned Bishop,--whose writings are so highly and
justly valued,--gave a strict charge near the time of his death, or
in his last Will, "That nothing of his that was not already printed,
should be printed after his death."
[Sidenote: King Charles on Hooker]
It is well known how high a value our learned King James put upon
the books writ by Mr. Hooker; and known also that our late King
Charles--the Martyr for the Church--valued them the second of all
books, testified by his commending them to the reading of his son
Charles, that now is our gracious King: and you may suppose that this
Charles the First was not a stranger to the Three pretended books,
because, in a discourse with the Lord Say, in the time of the Long
Parliament, when the said Lord required the King to grant the truth of
his argument, because it was the judgment of Mr. Hooker,--quoting him
in one of the three written books, the King replied, "They were not
allowed to be Mr. Hooker's books: but, however, he would allow them
to be Mr. Hooker's, and consent to what his Lordship proposed to prove
out of those doubtful books, if he would but consent to the judgment
of Mr. Hooker in the other five, that were the undoubted books of Mr.
Hooker."
[Sidenote: To the Reader]
In this relation concerning these Three doubtful books of Mr.
Hooker's, my purpose was to enquire, then set down what I observed and
know; which I have done, not as an engaged person, but indifferently;
and now leave my Reader to give sentence, for their legitimation, as
to himself; but so as to leave others the same liberty of believing or
disbelieving them to be Mr. Hooker's: and 'tis observable, that as
Mr. Hooker advised with Dr. Spencer, in the design and manage of
these books; so also, and chiefly with his dear pupil, George
Cranmer,--whose sister was the wife of Dr. Spencer,--of which this
following letter may be a testimony, and doth also give authority to
some things mentioned both in this Appendix and in the Life of Mr.
Hooker, and is therefore added. I.W.
[Footnote 1: A Barrister of eminence, particularly noted for his
loyalty, born at Prestbury, in Gloucestershire, in 1601. He died in
1690; and was the Author of several excellent Law Tracts, as well as
one asserting that Charles I. was a martyr for his people.]
GEORGE CRANMER'S LETTER
UNTO
MR. RICHARD HOOKER,
_February_, 1598.[1]
[Sidenote: New Church Discipline]
[Sidenote: Change in opinion]
What posterity is likely to judge of these matters concerning
Church-discipline, we may the better conjecture, if we call to mind
what our own age, within few years, upon better experience, hath
already judged concerning the same. It may be remembered, that at
first, the greatest part of the learned in the land were either
eagerly affected, or favourably inclined that way. The books then
written for the most part savoured of the disciplinary style; it
sounded every where in pulpits, and in common phrase of men's speech.
The contrary part began to fear they had taken a wrong course; many
which impugned the discipline, yet so impugned it, not as not being
the better form of government, but as not being so convenient for our
state, in regard of dangerous innovations thereby likely to grow: one
man [John Whitgift, the Archbishop] alone there was to speak
of,--whom let no suspicion of flattery deprive of his deserved
commendation,--who, in the defiance of the one part, and courage
of the other, stood in the gap and gave others respite to prepare
themselves to the defence, which, by the sudden eagerness and violence
of their adversaries, had otherwise been prevented, wherein God hath
made good unto him his own impress, _Vincit qui patitur:_ for what
contumelious indignities he hath at their hands sustained, the world
is witness; and what reward of honour above his adversaries God hath
bestowed upon him, themselves,--though nothing glad thereof,--must
needs confess. Now of late years the heat of men towards the
discipline is greatly decayed; their judgments begin to sway on the
other side; the learned have weighed it, and found it light; wise
men conceive some fear, lest it prove not only not the best kind of
government, but the very bane and destruction of all government. The
cause of this change in men's opinions may be drawn from the general
nature of error, disguised and clothed with the name of truth; which
did mightily and violently possess men at first, but afterwards, the
weakness thereof being by time discovered, it lost that reputation,
which before it had gained. As by the outside of an house the
passers-by are oftentimes deceived, till they see the conveniency of
the rooms within; so, by the very name of discipline and reformation,
men were drawn at first to cast a fancy towards it, but now they
have not contented themselves only to pass by and behold afar off the
fore-front of this reformed house; they have entered it, even at the
special request of the master-workmen and chief-builders thereof: they
have perused the rooms, the lights, the conveniences, and they find
them not answerable to that report which was made of them, nor to
that opinion which upon report they had conceived: so as now the
discipline, which at first triumphed over all, being unmasked,
beginneth to droop, and hang down her head.
[Sidenote: Causes]
[Sidenote: Gregory Martin]
The cause of change in opinion concerning the discipline is proper to
the learned, or to such as by them have been instructed. Another cause
there is more open, and more apparent to the view of all, namely,
the course of practice, which the Reformers have had with us from the
beginning. The first degree was only some small difference about the
cap and surplice; but not such as either bred division in the
Church, or tended to the ruin of the government established. This was
peaceable; the next degree more stirring. Admonitions were directed to
the Parliament in peremptory sort against our whole form of regiment.
In defence of them, volumes were published in English and in Latin:
yet this was no more than writing. Devices were set on foot to erect
the practice of the discipline without authority; yet herein some
regard of modesty, some moderation was used. Behold at length it brake
forth into open outrage, first in writing by Martin;[2] in whose
kind of dealing these things may be observed: 1. That whereas Thomas
Cartwright and others his great masters, had always before set out the
discipline as a Queen, and as the daughter of God; he contrariwise, to
make her more acceptable to the people, brought her forth as a
Vice[3] upon the stage. 2. This conceit of his was grounded--as may
be supposed--upon this rare policy, that seeing the discipline was by
writing refuted, in Parliament rejected, in secret corners hunted
out and decried, it was imagined that by open railing,--which to the
vulgar is commonly most plausible,--the State Ecclesiastical might
have been drawn into such contempt and hatred, as the overthrow
thereof should have been most grateful to all men, and in a manner
desired by all the common people. 3. It may be noted--and this I know
myself to be true--how some of them, although they could not for shame
approve so lewd an action, yet were content to lay hold on it to
the advancement of their cause, by acknowledging therein the secret
judgments of God against the Bishops, and hoping that some good might
be wrought thereby for his Church; as indeed there was, though
not according to their construction. For 4thly, contrary to their
expectation, that railing spirit did not only not further, but
extremely disgrace and prejudice their cause, when it was once
perceived from how low degrees of contradiction, at first, to what
outrage of contumely and slander, they were at length proceeded; and
were also likely to proceed further.
[Sidenote: Hacket and Coppinger]
A further degree of outrage was also in fact: certain [Hacket and
Coppinger] prophets did arise, who deeming it not possible that God
should suffer that to be undone, which they did so fiercely desire to
have done, namely, that his holy saints, the favourers and fathers of
the discipline, should be enlarged and delivered from persecution;
and seeing no means of deliverance ordinary, were fain to persuade
themselves that God must needs raise some extraordinary means; and
being persuaded of none so well as of themselves, they forthwith must
needs be the instruments of this great work. Hereupon they framed
unto themselves an assured hope, that, upon their preaching out of a
peascart in Cheapside, all the multitude would have presently joined
unto them, and in amazement of mind have asked them, _Viri fratres,
quid agimus?_ whereunto it is likely they would have returned an
answer far unlike to that of St. Peter: "Such and such are men
unworthy to govern; pluck them down: such and such are the dear
children of God; let them be advanced."
Of two of these men it is meet to speak with all commiseration; yet
so, that others by their example may receive instruction, and withal
some light may appear, what stirring affections the discipline is like
to inspire, if it light upon apt and prepared minds.
[Sidenote: Bancroft's book]
Now if any man doubt of what society they were; or if the Reformers
disclaim them, pretending that by them they were condemned; let
these points be considered. 1. Whose associates were they before they
entered into this frantic passion? Whose sermons did they frequent?
Whom did they admire? 2. Even when they were entering into it, Whose
advice did they require? and when they were in, Whose approbation?
Whom advertised they of their purpose? Whose assistance by prayer did
they request? But we deal injuriously with them to lay this to their
charge; for they reproved and condemned it. How! did they disclose
it to the Magistrate, that it might be suppressed? or were they not
rather content to stand aloof off, and see the end of it, as being
loath to quench that spirit? No doubt these mad practitioners were of
their society, with whom before, and in the practice of their madness,
they had most affinity. Hereof read Dr. Bancroft's book.[4]
[Sidenote: Brownists and Barrowists]
A third inducement may be to dislike of the discipline, if we consider
not only how far the Reformers themselves have proceeded, but what
others upon their foundations have built. Here come the Brownists[5]
in the first rank, their lineal descendants, who have seized upon a
number of strange opinions; whereof, although their ancestors, the
Reformers, were never actually possessed, yet, by right and interest
from them derived, the Brownists and Barrowists[6] have taken
possession of them: for if the positions of the Reformers be true, I
cannot see how the main and general conclusions of Brownism should be
false; for upon these two points, as I conceive, they stand.
[Sidenote: Their two points]
1. That, because we have no Church, they are to sever themselves from
us. 2. That without Civil authority they are to erect a Church of
their own. And if the former of these be true, the latter, I suppose,
will follow: for if above all things men be to regard their salvation;
and if out of the Church there be no salvation; it followeth, that,
if we have no Church, we have no means of salvation; and therefore
separation from us in that respect is both lawful and necessary; as
also, that men, so separated from the false and counterfeit Church,
are to associate themselves unto some Church; not to ours; to the
Popish much less; therefore to one of their own making. Now the ground
of all these inferences being this, That in our Church there is no
means of salvation, is out of the Reformers' principles most clearly
to be proved. For wheresoever any matter of faith unto salvation
necessary is denied, there can be no means of salvation; but in the
Church of England, the discipline, by them accounted a matter of
faith, and necessary to salvation, is not only denied, but impugned,
and the professors thereof oppressed. _Ergo_.
Again,--but this reason perhaps is weak,--every true Church of Christ
acknowledgeth the whole Gospel of Christ: the discipline, in their
opinion, is a part of the Gospel, and yet by our Church resisted.
_Ergo_.
[Sidenote: Essential discipline]
Again, the discipline is essentially united to the Church: by which
term essentially, they must mean either an essential part, or an
essential property. Both which ways it must needs be, that where that
essential discipline is not, neither is there any Church. If therefore
between them and the Brownists there should be appointed a solemn
disputation, whereof with us they have been oftentimes so earnest
challengers; it doth not yet appear what other answer they could
possibly frame to these and the like arguments, wherewith they may be
pressed, but fairly to deny the conclusion,--for all the premises
are their own,--or rather ingeniously to reverse their own principles
before laid, whereon so foul absurdities have been so firmly built.
What further proofs you can bring out of their high words, magnifying
the discipline, I leave to your better remembrance: but, above all
points, I am desirous this one should be strongly enforced against
them, because it wringeth them most of all, and is of all others--for
aught I see--the most unanswerable. You may notwithstanding say, that
you would be heartily glad these their positions might be salved, as
the Brownists might not appear to have issued out of their loins: but
until that be done, they must give us leave to think that they have
cast the seed whereout these tares are grown.
[Sidenote: "Godless politics"]
Another sort of men there are, which have been content to run on with
the Reformers for a time, and to make them poor instruments of their
own designs. These are a sort of godless politics, who, perceiving
the plot of discipline to consist of these two parts, the overthrow
of Episcopal, and erection of Presbyterial authority; and that this
latter can take no place till the former be removed; are content to
join with them in the destructive part of discipline, bearing them in
hand, that in the other also they shall find them as ready. But when
time shall come, it may be they would be as loath to be yoked with
that kind of regiment, as now they are willing to be released from
this. These men's ends in all their actions is distraction; their
pretence and colour, reformation. Those things which under this
colour they have effected to their own good, are, 1. By maintaining a
contrary faction, they have kept the Clergy always in awe, and
thereby made them more pliable, and willing to buy their peace. 2. By
maintaining an opinion of equality among ministers, they have made way
to their own purposes for devouring Cathedral Churches, and Bishops'
livings. 3. By exclaiming against abuses in the Church, they have
carried their own corrupt dealing in the Civil State more covertly.
For such is the nature of the multitude, that they are not able to
apprehend many things at once; so as being possessed with a dislike or
liking of any one thing, many other in the mean time may escape them
without being perceived. 4. They have sought to disgrace the Clergy,
in entertaining a conceit in men's minds, and confirming it by
continual practice, That men of learning, and especially of the
Clergy, which are employed in the chiefest kind of learning, are not
to be admitted to matters of State; contrary to the practice of all
well-governed commonwealths, and of our own till these late years.
[Sidenote: Atheists]
[Sidenote: Causes of Atheism]