Hooper's Opinions
IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING A REFORMER’S THEOLOGICAL VIEWS — DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE SUPPLIED IN PARKER SOCIETY’S VOLUME — QUOTATIONS FROM HOOPER’S ‘‘VISITATION ARTICLES” AND ‘‘ BRIEF CONFESSION OF THE CHRISTIAN’S FAITH” — ENCOU-RAGEMENT FOR EVANGELICAL CHURCHMEN — A PATTERN FOR BISHOPS — DUTY OF RESISTING PRESENT EFFORT TO UNPROTES-TANTIZE ENGLAND — DUTY OF RESISTING RITUALISM — DUTY OF SUPPORTING SUCH AGENCIES AS THE CHURCH ASSOCIATION.
THE last point which I want to bring under the notice of my readers, is one which I feel to be of deep importance. I have supplied some information about Hooper’s life and death. I will now ask my readers to give me their attention a little longer, while I say something about Hooper’s opinions. I have show you how he lived and died, let me now show you exactly what he thought, and what he taught, and what he preached. I have set before you the man, let me now set before you his doctrine.
If I left my readers under the vague impression that Hooper was a good man and a zealous man and an earnest man, but told them nothing more, I should think I had not done my duty. I want men to understand what theological views the martyred Bishop of Gloucester held. I want men to see clearly what kind of doctrine was taught by the English Reformers. What kind of things did Hooper say, and preach, and publish, and write? What kind of religion was a Churchman’s religion three hundred years ago?
The answer to these inquiries is ee not difficult to find. The two volumes of Hooper’s writings published by the Parker Society, make the matter plain as the sun at noon-day. There men may read in unmistakeable language the theological opinions of one of the leading Bishops of the time of the Reformation. From two documents in these two volumes, I will select fair specimens.
The first document I will quote from, is entitled “Articles Concerning Christian Religion, given by the reverend father in Christ, John Hooper, Bishop of Gloucester, unto all and singular deans, parsons, prebends, vicars, curates, and other ecclesiastical ministers within the diocese of Gloucester, to be had, held, and retained of them for unity and agreement, as well for the doctrine of God’s Word, as also for the uniformity of the ceremonies agreeing with God’s Word.”
A more authoritative and weighty declaration of Hooper’s opinions, it is impossible to conceive. *
* It is worth noticing, that Ridley published many of the same Articles about the same time, for the clergy of the Diocese of London.
The First Article enjoins, “that none of the above-named clergy do teach or preach any manner of thing to be necessary for the salvation of men, other than that which is contained in the Book of God’s Holy Word, called the Old and New Testament; and that they beware to establish and confirm any manner of doctrine concerning the old superstitious and Papistical doctrines, which cannot be duly and justly approved by the authority of God’s Word.” - The Fourth Article enjoins, “that they and every one of them do diligently teach and preach that the Church of God is the congregation of the faithful, wherein the Word of God is truly preached, and the Sacraments justly administered, according to the institution of Christ, and His doctrine taught unto us by His Holy Word; and that the Church of God is not by God’s Word taken for the multitude, or company of bishops, priests, and such others; but that it is the company of all men hearing God’s Word and obeying the same, lest any man should be seduced, believing himself to be bound to any ordinary succession of bishops and priests, but only to the Word of God and the right use of the Sacraments.”
The Seventh Article enjoins, “that they and every one of them do diligently teach and preach the justification only by faith of Jesus Christ, and not by the merit of any man’s good works, albeit that good works do necessarily follow justification, which before justification are of no value or aieiins iain before God.”
In the Ninth Article, he enjoins them, ‘that the doctrine of purgatory, pardons, prayer for them that are departed out of this world, the veneration, invocation, and worshipping of saints or images, is contrary and injurious to the honour of Christ, our only Mediator and Redeemer, and also against the doctrine of the first and second commandments of God.”
In the Tenth Article, he enjoins, “that in the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, there is no transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, or any manner of corporal or local presence of Christ, in, under, or with the bread and wine, but spiritually, by faith.”
In the Hleventh Article, he enjoins, “that they which do unworthily come to baptism or the Supper of the Lord, do not receive the virtue and true effect of the same sacraments, although they receive the natural signs and elements.”
In the Twenty-fourth Article, he enjoins, “that the Sacraments are not of any force by virtue or strength of any internal work of the same, which of superstition is called opus operatwm, but only by the virtue and means of the Holy Ghost working in the hearts of the doers and receivers by faith.”
In the Forty-jirst Article, he enjoins, “that none of you do counterfeit the Popish Mass, by blessing the
Lord’s board, washing your hands or fingers after the Gospel, or receipt of the Holy Communion,- — shifting the book from one place to another, laying down and licking the chalice after the Communion, showing the Sacrament openly before the distribution of the same, or making any elevation thereof, — ringing of the sacring bell, or setting any light on the Lord’s board.”
In the Forty-third Article, he enjoins, “Whereas in divine places some use the Lord’s board after the form of a table, and some of an altar, whereby disunion is perceived to arise among the unlearned, therefore, wishing a godly unity to be observed in all our dioceses, and for that the form of a table may move more, and turn the simple from the old superstitious opinions of the Popish Mass, and to the right use of the Lord’s Supper, we exhort you to erect and set up the Lord’s board after the form of an honest table, decently covered, in such place as shall be thought most meet, so that the minister and communicants may be seen, heard, and understood of all the people there present, and that you do take down and abolish all altars. Further, that the minister, in the use of the Communion and prayers thereof, turn his face toward the people.”
Such were the visitation articles and injunctions of a Bishop of the time of the Reformation. I turn away from them with one single remark. ‘There are dioceses at this day in England, in which it might do great good to have the injunctions of good Bishop Hooper distributed among the clergy, and urged on their attention.
The only other document that I shall quote from, is called “A Brief and Clear Confession of the Christian Faith.” It deserves special attention, because it was published in 1550, the very year in which the writer was made Bishop of Gloucester. From the “Confession of Faith,’ I now make the following selections. I make them with considerable difficulty. The whole Confession is so good that it is hard to say what to quote and what to leave behind. I only ask you to remember that the sack is as good as the sample : —
In the Ywenty-sixth Article of the Confession, Hooper says, “I do believe and confess that Christ, His condemnation is mine absolution; that His crucifying is my deliverance; His descending into hell is mine ascending into heaven; His death is my life; His blood is my cleansing, and purging, by which only I am washed, purified and cleansed from all my sins: so that I neither receive, neither believe any other purgatory, either im this world, or in the other, whereby I may be purged, but only the blood of Jesus Christ, by the which all are purged and made clean for ever.”
In the Twenty-eighth Article of the Confession
Hooper says, “I believe that the holy Supper of the Lord is not a sacrifice, but only a remembrance and commemoration of this holy sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Therefore it ought not to be worshipped as God, neither as Christ therein contained; who must be worshipped in faith only, without all corruptible elements. Likewise I believe and confess that the Popish Mass is the invention and ordinance of man, a sacrifice of Antichrist, and a forsaking of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, that is to say, of His death and passion; and that it is a stinking and infected sepulchre, which hideth and covereth the merit of the blood of Jesus Christ, — and, therefore, ought the mass to be abolished, and the holy Supper of the Lord to be restored, and set in his perfection again.”
In the Fifty-fouwrth Article of the Confession, Hooper says, “I believe that the Word of God is of a far greater authority than the Church; the which Word only doth sufficiently show, and teach us all those things that in any wise concern our salvation, both what we ought to do, and what to leave undone. The same Word of God is the true pattern and perfect rule, after the which all faithful people ought to govern and order their lives, without turning either to the right hand or to the left hand, without changing anything thereof, without putting to it, or taking from it, knowing that all the works of God are perfect, but most chiefly His Word.”
In the Siaty-fourth Article of the Confession, Hooper says, “I believe that in the holy Sacrament the signs, or badges, are not changed in any point, but the same do remain wholly in their nature; that is to say, the bread is not changed and transubstantiated (as the fond papists, and false doctors do teach, deceiving the poor people), into the body of Jesus Christ, neither is the wine transubstantiated into His blood; but the bread remaineth still bread, and the wine remaineth still wine, every one in his proper and first nature.”
In the Sixty-fifth Article of the Confession, Hooper says, “I believe that all this Sacrament consisteth in the use thereof; so that without the right use the bread and wine in nothing differ from other common bread and wine, that is commonly used : — and, therefore, I do not believe that the body of Christ can be contained, hid, or inclosed in the bread, under the bread, or with the bread ; — neither the blood in the wine, under the wine, or with the wine. But I believe and confess the very body of Christ to be in heaven, on the right hand of the Father (as before we have said), and that always and as often as we use this bread and wine according to the ordinance and institution of Christ, we do verily and indeed receive His body and blood.”
In the Sixty-sixth Article of the Confession, Hooper says, “I believe that this receiving is not done carnally or bodily, but spiritually, through a true and lively faith ; — that is to say, the body and blood of Christ are not given to the mouth and belly, for the nourishing of the body, but unto our faith, for the nourishing of the spirit and inward man unto eternal life. And for that cause we have no need that Christ should come from heaven to us, but that we should ascend unto Him, lifting up our hearts through a lively faith on high, unto the right hand of the Father, where Christ sitteth, from whence we wait for our redemption; and we must not seek for Christ in these bodily elements.”
I drop my quotations here. I have given enough to make it clear what kind of opinions Hooper held, and what his theological views were. I know not what my readers may think of these quotations. But I will tell you what impression they leave on my mind.
On the one hand, I am deeply thankful to find that Protestant and Evangelical Churchmen are not men of new fangled and modern opinions, but Churchmen of the stamp of the Reformation, Churchmen whose views were held by an eminent Churchman three hundred years ago. Let us take courage. Let us not be moved by the sneers, and taunts, and hard words of High Churchmen, so called. Let them call us “Puritans, Dissenters, Calvinists,” or what they please. We may boldly reply that ours are the old paths, and that we are the true representatives of the Church of England. If Evangelical Churchmen are-wrong, then Hooper was wrong too. If Hooper was. right, then we are right. But as for a material difference between our views and those of the martyred Bishop of Gloucester, I defy any one to show that there is any at all.
On the other hand, I deeply regret that English Bishops in modern times do not speak out more frequently in the style and manner of Bishop Hooper. I know their many difficulties, and feel for. them. But I heartily wish they would understand what good they might do to the Church, and. to their own order, if they would take a leaf out of Hooper’s book, and give as certain a sound as he did. ;. We are astounded at the Rome-like charge of one Prelate. We are disgusted with the judicious silence 6f another. We are sick to death of the well-balanced statements of others. We are tired of being told, with masterly cleverness and fascinating rhetoric, that all parties are a little to blame, and all are a little to be praised; that every body is a little bit right, and every body a little bit wrong! In a word, we are wearied at finding that the bulk of modern English Bishops are honorary members of all schools of opinion.. Oh,-for a few more Bishop Hoopers on our Bench!. Qh, for a little more plain speaking and downright, .Protestantism!
I know well enough that the English Bishops are Bishops of an eminently tolerant and comprehensive Church. They cannot command perfect unity, convert clergymen, or compel assent to their views, any. more than parents can convert their children or clergymen their parishioners. But one thing I always will say: they might speak out more boldly than they generally do, and say out more plainly what they think is truth. If they were only more bold and outspoken, I believe they would be astonished at the good it would do. Nothing, I firmly believe, would so thoroughly rally the middle classes, gather the apathetic lower orders into the Establishment, and strengthen the whole body of the Church, as a little more plain speaking, like that of Bishop Hooper.
My task is done. I have brought together as concisely as possible the times, life, death, and opinions of one of our greatest. English Reformers. But I cannot leave off without, offering a few practical suggestions to all into whose hands this paper may fall. I address them to each reader personally and directly, and I entreat him to ponder well what I say.
(1) For one thing, I charge you to resist manfully the efforts now being made:to: unprotestantize England, and to bring her once more, into subjection to Popery. Let us not go back to ignorance, superstition, priestcraft, and immorality. Our. forefathers tried Popery long ago, and threw it off with disgust and indignation,
Let us not put the clock back, and return to Egypt. Let us have no peace with Rome, till Rome abjures her errors and is at peace with Christ.
Read your Bible, and be armed with Scriptural arguments. A Bible-reading laity is a nation’s surest defence against error. I have no fear for English Protestantism, if the laity will only do their duty.
Read history, and see what Rome did in days gone by. Jtead how she trampled on your country’s liberties, plundered your forefather’s pockets, and kept the whole nation ignorant and immoral. Read Fox, and Strype, and Burnet, and Soames, and Blunt. And do not forget that Rome never changes. It is her boast and glory that she is always the same. Only give her power in England, and she will soon put out the eyes of our country, and make her like Samson, a degraded slave.
Read facts standing out on the face of the globe. What has made Italy what she is? Popery — What has made Mexico and the South American States what they are? Popery. — What has made Spain and Portugal what they are? Popery. — What has made Ireland what she is? Popery. — What makes Scotland, the United States, and our own beloved England, the powerful, prosperous countries that they are at present, and I pray God they may long continue? I answer in one word, Protestantism, — a free Bible and a Protestant ministry, and the principles of the Reformation. Think twice before you give ear to the specious arguments of liberalism falsely so called. Think twice before you help to bring back the reign of Popery.
(2) For another thing, I charge you to beware of Ftitualism, and to do all you can to resist it. Ritualism is the high road to Rome, and the triumph of Ritualism will be the restoration of Popery.
Resist it in little things. Resist strange dresses, processions, banners, incense, candles on the Communion table, turnings to the East, crosses at the East, and extravagant church decorations. Resist them manfully. They seem trifles; but they frequently lead to a great deal of mischief, and they often end in downright Popery.
Resist it in great things. Oppose with might and main the attempt to re-introduce the Popish mass and auricular confession in our parishes. Send your boy to no school where auricular confession is ever tolerated. Allow no clergyman to draw your wife and daughter to private confession. Oppose sternly but firmly the attempt to change the Lord’s Supper at your parish churches into the Romish sacrifice of the altar. Draw back from the Communion in such churches, and go elsewhere. The laity have a great deal of power in this matter, even without going to law. The clergy cannot do without the laity, any more than officers in a regiment can do without privates. If the English laity, all over England, would rise in their might, and say, “We will not have the mass and auricular confession,” Ritualism would wither away in a very short time.
Resist it for Christ’s sake. His priestly and mediatorial offices are injured and dishonoured by Ritualism. They are offices He has never deputed to any order of ordained men.
Resist it for the Church of England’s sake. If Ritualism triumphs, the days of the Church are numbered. The laity will leave her, and she will die for want of Churchmen.
Resist it for the clergy’s sake. The worst and ceruellest thing that can be done to us, is to lift us out of our proper places, and make us lords over your con-. sciences, and mediators between yourselves and God.
Resist it-for the laity’s sake. The most degrading position in which laymen can be put is that of being cringing slaves at the foot of a brother sinner.
Resist it, not least, for your children’s sake. Do what in you lies to provide, that, when you are dead and gone, they shall not be left to the tender mercies of Popery. As ever you would meet your boys and girls in heaven, take care that the Church of England in your day is maintained a Protestant Church, and preserves her Articles and the principles of the Reformation wholly uninjured and undefiled.
(3) In the last place, I charge you not to shrink from supporting the efforts made to resist Ritualism by such agencies as the Church Association. That society may be weak and young at present; but it is eminently a move in the right direction. It may not be perfect and faultless in all it does; but at any rate it aims at doing the right thing, and it deserves support. Support it by your influence, your money, and your prayers.
Let all who love pure Evangelical religion stand together in these days of division, and not allow crotchets and scruples to keep them asunder. Let the friend of Liturgical Revision drop his favourite panacea for a little space, and put his shoulder to the work of maintaining the Gospel in the Church of England. Let the friend of Revivals not think it misspent time to give his aid in opposing Rome. If Popery once triumph, there will be no more liberty for revivals. We cannot afford to lose friends. Our ranks are already very thin. The Church of England demands of every Protestant and Evangelical Churchman, that he will do his duty.
Things look black in every direction, I freely admit. But there is no cause to despair. The day is not lost. There is yet time to win a battle. Come what will, let us not desert our position, or forsake the good old ship yet. Let us not please our enemies by spiking our guns, and marching out of our fortress without a battle. Rather let us stand to our guns, like good Bishop Hooper, and in God’s strength show a bold front to the foe. The Church of England has done some good in days gone by, and the Church is still worth preserving. If we do go down in the struggle, let us go down with colours flying. But, like the gallant sentinel of Pompeii, let no man leave his post. My own mind is fully made up. I say the Church of England had better perish and go to pieces, than forsake John Hooper’s principles and tolerate the sacrifice of the mass, and auricular confession.