CHAPTER XVII. HOPER'S TRoubles. minated for Gloucester. IN the month of July John Hoper, who had lived long Hoper noabroad in Germany and in Switzerland, and conversed bishop of much with Bullinger and Gualter, the chief reformers there, but returned into England in king Edward's reign, and retained by the duke of Somerset, and a famous preacher in the city, was nominated by the king to the bishopric of Gloucester ". But by reason of certain scruples of conscience he made to the wearing of the old n After ["John Hoper was born in Somersetshire, about the close of the fifteenth century; he studied at Oxford, probably at Merton college, and subsequently embraced the monastic life. the dissolution of the monasteries, and when the act of the Six Articles was in force, he withdrew to the continent, where he was kindly received at Zurich by Bullinger. He remained abroad till the accession of Edward vi.; he returned to England in 1548, and residing in London, preached continually to large congregations, taking also an active part in the proceedings of that period. In May (15th) 1550, he was nominated to the bishopric of Gloucester, but was not consecrated till the next year, March 8, 1551. This delay was owing to his objections to an oath by the saints, and to some of the vestments formerly worn by the popish prelates, and then retained. The former point was conceded, but the dispute respecting the habits went so far, that Hoper was for a short time confined in the Fleet. This matter being at last arranged by his yielding in a great measure to what was required, he entered upon his diocese, to which that of Worcester was afterwards added, (in commendam on the deprivation of Heathe in 1552)." On the accession of queen Mary he was deprived of his bishoprics, condemned January 1555, and burned near his own cathedral in Gloucester, February 9, 1555. See biogr. notice, works of bp. Hooper, vol. i. pp. 3, 4. Park. Soc. ed. Le Neve's Fasti, pp. 101. 299. Foxe's Acts and Monuments, pp. 1502 et sqq. ed. Lond. 1583. Wordsworth's Eccl. Biogr. vol. ii. pp. 355-402. ed. Lond. 1839.] pontifical habits, as the chimere and rochet, and suchlike, and disliking the oath customarily taken, he was not consecrated till eight months after, and endured not a little trouble in the mean season. Soon after his nomination he repaired to the archbishop, desiring him in these things to dispense with him: but the archbishop, for certain reasons, refused it. Then was the archbishop solicited by great men. The earl of Warwick, afterwards the great duke of Northumberland", wrote to him a letter, dated July 23P, the bearer whereof was Hoper himself, [John Dudley, viscount Lisle, earl of Warwick, and duke of Northumberland, was one of Henry VIII.'s executors, being then lord high admiral, a governor to Edward VI. and to the kingdom, a privy councillor, lord great chamberlain, and lord protector of the north during the protector Somerset's expedition into Scotland. Upon Somerset's fall, whom he had opposed, he became one of the governors of the king's person, and absolute at court. He persuaded Edward VI. to leave the crown to the lady Jane Grey, whom his own son, lord Guilford Dudley, had married; and waited upon her with the duke of Suffolk to acquaint her that she was queen, but failing in his projects, he declared for queen Mary; being taken prisoner he was sent to the Tower, condemned, and executed as a traitor, August 22, 1553, notwithstanding he professed to be a papist to save his life. See Burnet's Hist. of Reformat. vol. ii. pp. 6, 36, 66, 276, 279, 286, 384, 455, 456, 469, 478– 480, 487, 488. pt. ii, p. 4. ed. Oxon. 1829. Strype's Eccl. Mem. vol. ii. pt. i. pp. 19, 535, 537, 585, 586; pt. ii. p. 13. vol. iii. pt. i. pp. 8, 16, 21, 33. ed. Oxon. 1822.] P["Besides this letter of the king" (for which see p. 207. n. r.), “also the earl of Warwick, (who was afterwards duke of Northumberland), adjoined his letter to the aforesaid archbishop of Canterbury, to this purpose and effect; that Mr. Hoper might not be burdened with the oath used then commonly in the consecration of bishops, which was against his conscience; as by the purport of the letter here is to be seen, as followeth :- After most hearty commendations to your grace, these may be to desire the same, that in such reasonable things, wherein this bearer, my lord elect of Gloucester, craveth to be borne withal at your hands, you would vouchsafe to shew him your grace's favour, the rather at this my instance: which thing that the rather at his instance he would not charge the bishop elect of Gloucester with an oath burdenous to his conscience. Which Which was, I suppose, the oath of canonical obedience 9. And when Hoper had sued to the king, either to discharge him of the bishopric, or that he might be dispensed with in the ceremonies used in consecration, (which he knew the archbishop could not do, no more than to dispense with the laws of the land, whereby he should run into a præmunire), the king wrote a letter to Cranmer, dated August 5', therein freeing him of all partly I have taken in hand by the king's majesty's own motion. The matter is weighed by his highness, none other, but that your grace may facily condescend unto. The principal cause is, that you would not charge this said bearer with an oath burdenous to his conscience. And so for lack of time I commit your grace to the tuition of Almighty God. From Westminster, the 23rd of July, 1550. Your grace's most assured I. WARWICK." Foxe's Acts and Monuments, p. 1504. ed. Lond. 1583.] ["Strype and (once) Burnet [vol. ii. p. 318.] supposed that this referred to the oath of canonical obedience. But Burnet in his third volume [p. 389.] informs us on the authority of Micronius, minister of the German church in London, that it referred to the oath of supremacy, which com menced, by God, by the saints, and by the holy gospels'; this he thought impious, as no creature ought to be appealed to, God only knowing the thoughts of men ; and the king in council was so convinced of the propriety of the objection, that he erased the words with his own pen.”—Id. vol. vi. pp. 777, 8. ed. Lond. 1843-48. See also Wordsworth's Eccl. Biogr. vol. ii. p. 363. ed. Lond. 1839.] ["For this cause he made supplication to the king's majesty, most humbly desiring his highness, either to discharge him of the bishopric, or else to dispense with him for such ceremonial orders; whose petition the king granted immediately, writing his letter to the archbishop after this tenor :"The king's letters or grant for the dispensation of John Hoper elected bishop of Gloucester, written to the archbishop of Canterbury, and other bishops *. Right reverend father, and right * These letters of dispensation are in the Ridley register, fol. 282, from whence the corrections that are noted, are taken. manner of dangers, penalties, and forfeitures that he might incur by omitting those rites; but yet, (by any thing that appears in the letter), without any urging or 212 persuasion used to the archbishop to omit the said rites, leaving that to his own discretion. But the archbishop thought the king's bare letters were not sufficient to secure him against established laws. He and When this would not do, then endeavour was used to fer about satisfy Hoper's conscience. And Ridley, bishop now of the habits. trusty, and well beloved, we greet have thought good, by the advice aforesaid, to dispense and discharge you of all manner of dangers, penalties and forfeitures, you shall run, and be in any manner of way, by omitting any of the same. And these our letters shall be your sufficient warrant and discharge there-for. Given under our signet, at our ED. SOMERSET. W. NORTH. W. PAGET. AN. WINGFIELD. N. WOOTTON." Foxe's Acts and Monuments, p. 1504. ed. Lond. 1583. vol. vi. p. 640, 777. ed. Lond. 184348. See also Wordsworth's Eccl. Biogr. vol. ii. p. 361, 2. Heylin's Hist. of Reformat. p. 91. ed. Lond. 1674. Wilkins' Concilia, vol. iv. p. 65.] * ["Subjects, which are in his said charge." Foxe.] London, was thought, for his great learning, to be a fit person to confer with him. There were long arguings between them, and at last it came to some heats. And Hoper still remained resolved not to comply, holding it, if not unlawful, yet highly inexpedient, to use those very vestments that the papal bishops used. The council upon this sent for Hoper, and, because they would in no wise. the stirring up of controversies between men of one profession, willed him to cease the occasion hereof. Hoper humbly besought them, that, for declaration of his doings, he might put in writing such arguments as moved him to be of the opinion he held. Which was granted him. These arguments it seems were communicated to Ridley to answer ". And October the 6th, the council being MS. of the then at Richmond, the archbishop present, they wrote Book. to the bishop of London, commanding him to be at court on Sunday next, and to bring with him what he should for answer think convenients. ["Bishop Ridley's answer to Hooper's objections to the Romish habits of the prelates, quoted by archbishop Whitgift in his controversy with Cartwright, was long supposed to be lost; but it has lately been discovered among the large and valuable collection of MSS. belonging to sir Thomas Phillips." See abp. Cranmer's works, vol. ii. p. 428. n. 2.] ["6. Oct. 1550.-A letter to the bishop of London, that where there had been some difference between him, and the elect bishop of Gloucester, upon certain ceremonies belonging to the making of a bishop, wherein their lordships' desire is, because they would in nowise the stirring CRANMER, VOL. II. up of controversies betwixt men P Council |