C 3o8 1 P. 69. ' Hooper (tàys Mr. N) not willing to rely upon his ovi n Judgment, writ to Buser at Cam- ' bridge, and to Peter Martyr at Oxford, who gave their Opinions againfi the Habits, as Inventions of Antichriff. Bifhop Burnet has given a large Account of what Bucerwrote upon this Head. As a Proofof Mr. N's manner of Writing, the Reader shall have the very liia.Reform. Words. ' Since thefe Garments had been ufed by v01.114.153." the ancient Fathers, BEFORE POPERY, and might Rill be of good Ufe to theWeak, when well un- derflood, and help to maintain the miniflerial Dig - ' nity, and to thew that the Church did not of any Lightnefs change oldCutloms, he (Bucer) thought the retaining of them was expedient." In the next Page Bifhop Burnet Pays, Peter Martyr was allo wrote to, and, as he wrote toBucer, he was fullyof his Mind, and approved of all he had wrote about it. Bucer further obferves, ' that lince thefeGarments ` wereabufed by Tome to Superflition, and byothers, to be Matter of Contention, he wifh'd they were ' takenaway, &c." Mr.N. ibid. Pays, that Bucer's Opinion was, that ' Hooper might acquiefce in the ' Ufe of them for a Time, 'till they were taken away by Law." Bifhop Burnet, on the contrary, Pays it, as Part of his Letter, ' On the whole Matter, he thought they finned who refufed to obey the ' Laws in that Particular." This Mr. N. afferts to be giving an Opinion againfl the Habits, as Inventi- ons of Antichrift ! ro1.11, p: t t. N's Hifl. p. 73. ' 3ohn Alafco did not pleafe the Court Prelates. 'Tis no Wonder he did not, for as Bithop Burnet obferves, ' he did not carry himfelf with that De- ' cencywhichbecame aStranger, fokindly received." But why Court Prelates, or any thing that is intend- ed for a Termof Reproach to thole pious Reformers, Cranmer, Ridley, &c.? N's Hill. p. 74. ' The Articles ofReligion] were not brought into Parliament, nor agreed to inCon- ' vocation,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=