PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION OF THE LIFE OF HOOKER, PUBLISHED IN 1665. TO THE READER. I THINK it necessary to inform my reader, that Dr. Gauden (the late Bishop of Worcester) hath also lately wrote and published the life of Master Hooker2. And though this be not writ by design to oppose what he hath truly written, yet I am put upon a necessity to say, that in it there be many material mistakes3, and more omissions. I conceive some of his mistakes did proceed from a belief in Master Thomas Fuller, who had too hastily published what he hath since most ingenuously retracted. And for the bishop's omissions, I suppose his more weighty business, and want of time, made him 1 [Dr. Gauden died in 1662. His edition of Hooker, dated that year, bears marks of great haste.] 2 [By Archbishop Sheldon's desire, as Gauden states himself in p. I, which perhaps made the Archbishop the more anxious to obtain a more correct life by Walton: see note on p. 3. of this volume.] 3 [E. g. "A little living called "Buscomb in the West, to which "the college of C. C. presented "him: and afterward, that other, "not much better, in Lincolnshire, "called Drayton Beauchamp." p. 12." He ever lived a single life.' (Fuller C. H. IX. 235, "living and "dying a single man.") ibid. "He was prebendary of Canter HOOKER, VOL. I. "bury." p. 25. "He made no "will" ibid.] 4 [Fuller, Worthies of England; p. 276, ed. 1662. "Here I must "retract two passages in my "Church History. For whereas "I reported him to die a bache"lor, he had wife and children," [marg. "From the mouth of his sister lately living at Hogsden" (qu. Hoxton?) "near London."] "though indeed such as were nei"ther to his comfort when living, 66 nor credit when dead. Secondly, "his monument was not erected by "Sir E. Sandys, (a person as pro"bable as any man alive for such "a performance,) but by Sir W. "Cooper, now living in the castle " of Hartford."] B pass over many things without that due examination, which my better leisure, my diligence, and my accidental advantages, have made known unto me. And now for myself, I can say, I hope, or rather know, there are no material mistakes in what I here present to you that shall become my reader. Little things that I have received by tradition (to which there may be too much and too little faith given) I will not at this distance of time undertake to justify; for though I have used great diligence, and compared relations and circumstances, and probable results and expressions, yet I shall not impose my belief upon my reader; I shall rather leave him at liberty: but if there shall appear any material omission, I desire every lover of truth and the memory of Master Hooker, that it may be made known unto me. And, to incline him to it, I here promise to acknowledge and rectify any such mistake in a second impression 5, which the printer says he hopes for; and by this means my weak (but faithful) endeavours may become a better monument, and in some degree more worthy the memory of this venerable man. I confess, that when I consider the great learning and virtue of Master Hooker, and what satisfaction and advantages many eminent scholars and admirers of him have had by his labours, I do not a little wonder, that in sixty years no man did undertake to tell posterity of the excellences of his life and learning, and the accidents of both; and sometimes wonder more at myself, that I have been persuaded to it; and, indeed, I do not easily pronounce my own pardon, nor expect that my reader shall, unless my introduction shall prove my apology, to which I refer him. 5 [Of Walton's care to fulfil this engagement, some instances will be pointed out in the notes on the ensuing Life.] 6 [In round numbers: from his death in 1600, to the publication of his Life by Bishop Gauden in 1662.] THE LIFE OF MR. RICHARD HOOKER. THE INTRODUCTION. I HAVE been persuaded by a friend1, whom I reverence, and ought to obey, to write The Life of RICHARD HOOKER, the happy author of five (if not more) of the eight learned books of The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity. And though I have undertaken it, yet it hath been with some unwillingness, because I foresee that it must prove to me, and especially at this time of my age, a work of much labour to inquire, consider, research, and determine, what is needful to be known concerning him. For I knew him not in his life, and must therefore not [Thus explained in the Epistle to the Reader, prefixed to the Lives of Donne, Wotton, Hooker, and Herbert, when first collected (in 1670) into one volume. Having writ these two lives," (of Dr. Donne and sir H. Wotton,) 66 "I 66 66 66 66 lay quiet twenty years, without “a thought of either troubling myself or others, by any new engagement in this kind, for I thought I knew my unfitness. "But, about that time, Dr. Gauden "(then Lord Bishop of Exeter) "publisht the Life of Mr. Richard "Hooker, (so he called it,) with so "many dangerous mistakes, both "of him and his books, that dis"coursing of them with his Grace, "Gilbert" [Sheldon] "that now is "Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, "he enjoined me to examine some only look back to his death, (now sixty-four years past,) but almost fifty years beyond that, even to his childhood and youth, and gather thence such observations and prognostics, as may at least adorn, if not prove necessary for the completing of what I have undertaken. This trouble I foresee, and foresee also, that it is impossible to escape censures; against which I will not hope my wellmeaning and diligence can protect me, (for I consider the age in which I live,) and shall therefore but entreat of my reader a suspension of his censures, till I have made known unto him some reasons, which I myself would now gladly believe do make me in some measure fit for this undertaking: and if these reasons shall not acquit me from all censures, they may at least abate of their severity; and this is all I can probably hope for. My reasons follow. About forty years past2 (for I am now past the seventy of my age) I began a happy affinity with William Cranmer, (now with God,) grand nephew unto the great archbishop of that name; a family of noted prudence and resolution; with him and two of his sisters I had an entire and free friendship: one of them was the wife of Dr. Spencer, a bosom friend, and sometime com-pupil with Mr. Hooker in Corpus Christi college in Oxford, and after, President of the same. I name Walton says that George Cranmer's sister was his (Walton's) aunt. This passage shews that he means his aunt by marriage: and we may conclude that his first wife was Rachel, daughter of William Cranmer, one of the younger sons of Thomas, son of Edmund, who was brother to the Archbishop, and archdeacon of Canterbury. Dr. Zouch, apparently on the strength of the passage in the Appendix alone, states (vol. II. p. 314.) that " Isaac Walton's mo"ther was the daughter of Ed"mund Cranmer:" which is evidently inconsistent with the manner of speaking in the text.] 66 3 ["I have almost attained the declining year of fifty of mine age." Robert Beal ap. Strype, A. ÏV. 116.] MR. RICHARD HOOKER. 5 them here, for that I shall have occasion to mention them in this following discourse; as also George Cranmer their brother, of whose useful abilities my reader may have a more authentic testimony than my pen can purchase for him, by that of our learned Camden and others. This William Cranmer, and his two forenamed sisters, had some affinity, and a most familiar friendship with Mr. Hooker, and had had some part of their education with him in his house, when he was parson of Bishop's-Borne near Canterbury; in which city their good father then lived. They had (I say) a part of their education with him, as myself, since that time, a happy cohabitation with them; and having some years before read part of Mr. Hooker's works with great liking and satisfaction, my affection to them made me a diligent inquisitor into many things that concerned him: as namely, of his person, his nature, the management of his time, his wife, his family, and the fortune of him and his. Which inquiry hath given me much advantage in the knowledge of what is now under my consideration, and intended for the satisfaction of my reader. I had also a friendship with the reverend Doctor Usher, the late learned Archbishop of Armagh; and with Doctor Morton, the late learned and charitable Bishop of Durham; as also with the learned John Hales, of Eton College; and with them also (who loved the very name of Mr. Hooker) I have had many discourses concerning him; and from them, and many others that have now put off mortality, I might have had more informations, if I could then have admitted a thought of any fitness for what by persuasion I have now undertaken. But, though that full harvest be irrecoverably lost, yet my memory hath preserved some gleanings, and my diligence made such additions to them, as I hope will prove useful to the completing of what I intend. In the discovery of which I shall be faithful, and with this assurance put a period to my introduction. 4 [Archbishop Usher died 1655, aged 75; Bishop Morton 1660, aged 96: Mr. Hales 1056, aged 72.] |