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, 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 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, 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 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, being 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.

Dr. Barnard, some time 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 there found the three written books, which were the supposed sixth, seventh, and eighth, of Mr. Hooker's books of Ecclesiastical Polity ; and that in the said three books (now printed as Mt. Hooker's) there are so many omissions, that they amount to many paragraphs; and which cause many incoherences; the omissions are by him 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 them.

66

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 the 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."

So that there appear 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, which was not already printed, should be printed after his death."

It is well known how high a value our learned King James put upon the books writ by Mr. Hooker, as 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 pretended three books, because, in a discourse with the Lord Say, 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."

In this relation concerning these three doubtful books of Mr. Hooker's, my purpose was to inquire, 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

it is 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.

GEORGE CRANMER'S

LETTER

UNTO

MR. RICHARD HOOKER.

FEBRUARY 1598.

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 like to grow; one man alone a 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 dea John Whitgift, the archbishop.

cayed, 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 is mightily and violently to possess men at first, but afterwards, the weakness thereof being by time discovered, to lose that reputation which before it had gained. As by the outside of a 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 in, even at the special request of master workmen and chief builders thereof they have perused the rooms, the lights, the conveniences; 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 this 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 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, in whose kind of dealing these things may be observed: first, that whereas T. C. 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 upon the stage. 2. This conceit of his was grounded (as may be supposed) upon this rare polity, 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 manner desired of 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, 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, 4. Contrary to their expectation that railing spirit did not only not farther, but extremely disgrace and prejudice the 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 farther to proceed.

A farther degree of outrage was in fact; certain prophets a 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 pease-cart, 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 likely to inspire if it light upon apt and prepared minds.

Now if any man doubt of what society they were, or if the reformers disclaim them, pretending that by them theywere condemned, let these points be considered. 1. Whose associates they were 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 prayers 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

a Hacket and Coppinger.