The Zurich Letters [first series], A.D. 1558–1579

Letter LXXI

Dated July, iSfiO.

As your diligence, most illustrious Sir, is proved to us by your writing, so also your incredible love towards us, and especial affection for our church, and most ardent desire for peace, are all evident from your very courteous letter-1.

We sent your reverence some questions, upon which the force, and as it were the hinge, of the whole controversy seemed to turn.

To these your reverence has accurately replied ; but, if we may be permitted to say so, not entirely to our satisfaction. Fn the first place, your reverence replies, that such regulations respecting their habits may be prescribed to ministers, as that they may be distinguished both by colour and shape from those of the laity; for that it is merely a civil ordinance, and the apostle required the bishop to be KO<J/ULIOS, orderly4. But since this question is brought forward concerning church men, and relates to ecclesiastical polity, we do not see how the peculiar and clerical habit of ministers can be regarded as a mere civil matter. We admit, indeed, that a bishop must be icooyuos, but this we refer with Ambrose to the or naments of the mind, and not the decoration of the person. And as we require in dress both decency, and dignity, and gravity, so we deny that decorum is the object aimed at by the enemies of our religion.

In the second place, you answer hypothetical!}', that if a cap, and a habit not unseemly and without superstition, be prescribed to the clergy, Judaism is not on this account

[3 The letter of Bullinger to which this is an answer, v.ill )>e found in the Appendix. See note 3, p. 155.]

[j4 See 1 Tim. iii. 2, where the word is translated of goo<1 behaviour, or, in the marginal version, modest.'}

158 LAURENCE HUMPHREY AND THOMAS SAMPSON [LET.

brought back. But how can that habit be thought consistent with the simple ministry of Christ, which used to set off the theatrical pomp of the popish priesthood ? For not only (as our people wish to persuade your reverence) are the square cap and gown required in public, but the sacred garments are used in divine service ; and the surplice, or white dress of the choir, and the cope are re-introduced. Which things not only do the papists declare in their books to be copies and imitations of Judaism, but your reverence has more than once taught the same from Innocent. We most willingly subscribe to the testimony of our most revered master, Doctor Martyr : but the instances which he produces, tend to de cency and order ; these deform the church, disturb order, over turn all that is decent. The former [instances] are agreeable to the light of nature; the latter are unnatural and monstrous. Those, according to Tertullian's rule, had a shew of necessity and use : these are altogether frivolous, and superfluous, and useless; and neither conducive to edification nor any good end whatever, but more truly, to use the language of the same Peter Martyr, they were splendid accompaniments of that worship which all godly persons now abominate. The papists themselves are boasting that the distinction of ecclesiastical habits now adopted was a popish invention; the constitutions of Otho speak the same thing; the Roman pontifical shews it, and the eyes and lips of all prove it to be the case. The use of churches, stipends, baptism, the creed, &c. was esta blished by divine command long before the pope was born. And, whatever we meet with in any heresy, that is of divine and legitimate authority, we do not deny that, with Augus tine, we both approve and retain it. But because this matter is peculiarly one of error and disagreement, we resolutely argue and contend with it.

As to your adding, that the use of the habits was not abolished at the beginning of the Reformation, your informants have again stated what is by no means the fact. For in the time of the most serene king Edward the Sixth, the Lord's supper was celebrated in simplicity in many places without the surplice ; and the cope1, which was then abrogated by law, is

[* The use of this vestment, however, observes Mr Soames, must have been merely optional after the queen's injunctions were issued. It

LXXI.] TO HENRY BULLINGER. 159

now restored by a public ordinance. This is not to extirpate popery, but to replant it ; not to advance in religion, but to recede. You say that the priestly garment is a matter of civil concern, and deny that it savours of monachism, popery, or Judaism. What the papists babble about the surplice, of how great importance the clerical dress is esteemed among them, and to what religion it is dedicated, we doubt not but that your prudence is well acquainted with from their books. In the next place, this ambitious and Pharisaical prescribing of a peculiar dress savours of monkery and popery, and those of the present age ascribe no less virtue to it than the monks of old did to their cowls. Nor in truth has this opinion of holiness and merit burst forth all at once, but has crept on insensibly by little and little. We are therefore hesitating, not without reason, and are endeavouring to check at the out set, what we fear will come to pass in this country. We do not agree with Eustathius2, who placed religion in dress; so far from it, that we are at issue with those who super- stitiously require peculiar and religious habits as badges of their priesthood. The like also may be said of the canon of the council of Gangra3 and Laodicea4, and of the sixth synod; and to depart from that liberty in which we have hither to stood, we consider to be giving a kind of sanction to sla very. But neither in this are we too scrupulous; we make no vexatious opposition; we always avoid any bitterness of contention ; we are ready to enter into an amicable confer ence ; we do not voluntarily leave [our churches] to the wolves ; but constrained and driven from our places, we depart with unwillingness and regret. We leave our brethren and the bishops to stand or fall to their own master; and we look most submissively, but in vain, for the like forbearance towards

is a pity, therefore, he adds, that the excellent writers mentioned it, as they were thus plainly denying a liberty to others whu-h they insisted upon for themselves. Soames' Elizabethan Religious History, p. 31.]

P Eustathius was a Greek monk of the fourth century, whose errors were condemned at the council of Gangra. See next note.]

[3 Held about A.D. 365 or 370. The canon here referred to is the twelfth, "against those who fancy themselves to be1 more holy than others, because they wear a singular habit, and who condemn those that wear decent apparel." Du Pin, Bibliothe'que, Tom. 11. p. 340. Paris. 1693.]

[4 Held A.D. 363.]

160 LAURENCE HUMPHREY AND THOMAS SAMPSON [LET.

ourselves. In the rites nothing is discretionary ; not that the queen's majesty has been excited to this by us, but she has been influenced by the persuasion of others; so that at length that is established, not which is for the interest of the church, but merely what is not unlawful ; and what is not altogether impious, is accounted wholesome, and salutary, and holy, and is confirmed by law.

As ceremonies and sacerdotal habits are signs of religion and marks of profession, they are not of a civil character ; and being borrowed from our adversaries, as all allow them to be, they cannot be convenient ; and being marked with the divine anathema, and detested by all godly persons, and had in honour by the wicked and the weak, who think that without them we can neither be ministers, nor that the sacraments can be rightly administered, they neither can nor ought to be reckoned among things indifferent. The ancient fathers had their habits ; but they were neither peculiar to bishops, nor distin guished from those of the laity. The instances of St John1 and Cyprian2 are peculiar. Sisinius was a heretic, and is neither to be held out for our commendation nor example. The pallium was a dress common to all Christians3, as Tertullian relates in his book4, and as your reverence has elsewhere re marked. Chrysostom makes mention of a white garment, but only incidentally ; he neither commends it nor finds fault with it, and it is not yet ascertained whether it was peculiar to the priests or to the Greeks in general ; linen or woollen ; white or merely clean in appearance. In the address to the people of Antioch it is certainly opposed both by him and Jerome to a sordid [garment,] and in Blondus there is mention of a pallium

E1 Bullinger had quoted a passage from Eusebius, Hist. v. 24, speaking of St John as TO ireraXov ire^op^mac, wearing a plate [of gold]. Epiplianius relates the same of James, the brother of our Lord. Haer. LXXVIII.]

P This was the opinion of Scaliger; Salmasius, on the contrary, maintained that it was peculiar to the priests.^]

Q4 De pallio, written about A.D. 209. It is a kind of satirical defence of Tertullion's having laid aside the Roman toga or gown, and assumed the pallium

LXXI.] TO HENRY BULLINGER. 161

[cloak] of woollen ; so that in a matter of so much doubt nothing can be determined.

That the prescribing habits [to the clergy] is inconsistent with Christian liberty, we have the testimony of Bucer, who was of opinion that the distinction of dress should be entirely done away with, as well on account of the present abuse of it in the English churches, as for a more decided declaration of our abhorrence of antichrist, a more full assertion of our christian liberty, and the removal of dissensions amongst brethren. These words he made use of in his letter to master a Lasco, who was altogether on our side. Whence it is evident, that great offence is occasioned, and edification impeded by it. We must indeed submit to the time, but only for a time ; so that we may always be making progress, and never re treating. Far be it from us either to sow schisms in the church by a vexatious contest, or by a hostile opposition to our brethren to do an injury to ourselves5: far be it from us, most excellent Bullinger, to charge with impiety things which are in their nature indifferent : far be it from us either to make our own feelings the pretence of abuse, or under the name of conscience to conceal a fondness for dispute. These dregs and this leaven of popery are, believe us, the source of the whole controversy : we desire it to be taken away and buried in eternal oblivion, that no traces of antichristian superstition may remain. The assumption of preeminence and pride has always displeased us in the papacy ; and can tyranny please us in a free church ? A free synod among Christians hath heretofore untied the knots of controversy : why should every thing be now referred to the pleasure of one or two individuals ? Where the liberty of voting and speaking prevails, the truth is vigorous and flourishing.

You will understand then, reverend father, in a few words, that these things are our principal object, — the authority of the scriptures, — the simplicity of the ministry of Christ, — the purity of the earliest and best churches, which, for the sake of brevity, we refrain from mentioning. But on the other side it has not hitherto been our lot either to hear or

P The original is, Camarinam moveamus, a proverbial expression, derived, according to Suidas, from a lake of that name in Sicily, which being drained contrary to the advice of the oracle occasioned a pesti lence.]

[ZURICH LETTERS.]

162 LAURENCE HUMPHREY AND THOMAS SAMPSON [LET.

read of any law or general decree, either of Almighty God, or of any reformed church, or general council, (which is the rule of Augustine). We have discovered moreover, that the pre cedents hitherto adduced are particular ones, and do not confirm the general case.

Besides, we are of opinion, not that whatever may be in any way lawful, should be obtruded, but what in every way tends to the edification of the church should be introduced ; and that what may be lawful to some, is not forthwith lawful to all. We have, (praised be God!) a doctrine pure and incorrupt: why should we go halting in regard to divine worship, which is not the least important part of religion ? Why should we re ceive Christ rather maimed, than entire, and pure, and perfect ? Why should we look for precedents from our enemies, the papists, and not from you, our brethren of the reformation ? We have the same confession in our churches, the same rule of doctrine and faith ; why should there be so great a dissimi larity and discrepancy in rites and ceremonies? The thing signified is the same ; why do the signs so differ as to be unlike yours, and to resemble those of the papists? We have the same captain and leader, Christ ; why are the ban ners of the enemy set up in our churches ? which, if we were men of God, if we were endued with any zeal, we should long since have abominated and destroyed. We have always thought well of the bishops; we have put a candid interpreta tion upon their display of grandeur: why cannot they endure us tvho formerly bore the same cross with them, and who now preach the same Christ, and bear that most delightful yoke together with themselves ? Why do they cast us into prison ? Why do they persecute us on account of the habits ? Why do they spoil us of our property and means of subsistence ? Why do they publicly traduce us in their books? Why do they in their published writings commend a bad cause to pos terity? For they have translated into our language some papers of Bucer and of Peter Martyr, and they have now sent forth to the public your private letters to us without our knowledge and consent. So that in pleading their own cause, and vindicating their honour, they neither consult the interests of our church, nor their brethren, nor your dignity, nor the succeeding generation.

LXXI.] TO HENRY BULLINGER. 163

But that your reverence may understand that the con troversy is of no light or trifling character, but of great importance, and that we are not merely disputing about a cap or a surplice, we send you some straws and chips of the popish religion1, from which with your wonted prudence you may imagine the rest, and with your wonted piety think upon a remedy as soon as possible. And we pray our Lord Jesus Christ to allay these tumults and disorders, to assert his glory, to send forth labourers into his vineyard, that a joyous and abundant harvest may ensue. And we implore you, that by your paternal advice, public writings, and private letters, you will exert yourself, and be active in effecting either the removal of these evils, or the toleration of those good men who are not yet convinced ; lest the Roman ceremonial should disunite those whom the firm bond of doctrine hath joined together.

Give our salutations to Gualter, Simler, Lavater, "Wolfius, our esteemed masters, with whom if you will confer, you will exceedingly gratify both ourselves and the church at large. May the Lord Jesus Christ bless his tabernacle and your Zurich!— July, 1566.

We have written briefly and in haste, and not so much by way of reply, as of admonishing you that there is no end to what might be said upon this subject. Do you then not decide upon what may or can be done, but upon what ought to be done2.

Your reverence's most devoted,

Some blemishes which still attach to the church of Eng land :

1. In the public prayers, although there is nothing im pure, there is however a kind of popish superstition, which

[J Sec at the end of this letter.]

[? For Bullinger's reply to this letter in conjunction with Gualter, (lex-lining to enter further into the dispute, see Burnet, Hist. Reform, iv. .583. It will also be found in the Appendix to this volume.]

164 LAURENCE HUMPHREY AND THOMAS SAMPSON [LET.

may not only be seen in the morning and evening service, but also in the Lord's supper.

2. In addition to the exquisite singing in parts, the use of organs is becoming more general in the churches.

3. In the administration of baptism the minister ad dresses the infant ; in whose name the sponsors, in the absence of the parent, make answer concerning faith, and renouncing the world, the flesh, and the devil. The person baptized is signed with the [sign of the] cross.

4. Licence is also given to women to baptize in private houses.

5. The sacred habits, namely the cope and surplice, are used at the Lord's supper ; kneeling is enjoined to those who communicate, and an unleavened cake is substituted for com mon bread.

6. The popish habits are ordered to be worn out of church, and by ministers in general ; and the bishops wear their linen garment, which they call a rochet; while both parties wear the square cap, tippets, and long gowns, borrowed from the papists.

7. But what shall we say respecting discipline, the sinews of religion I There is none at all, neither has our church its rod, or any exercise of superintendence.

8. The marriage of the clergy is not allowed and sane tioned by the public laws of the kingdom, but their children are by some persons regarded as illegitimate.

9. Solemn betrothing takes place after the popish method and rites, by the [giving of a] ring.

10. Women continue to wear a veil when they come to be churched.

11. In the ecclesiastical regimen there are retained many traces of the church of antichrist. For as formerly at Eome every thing might be had for money in the court of the pope, so almost all things are saleable in the court of the metro politan1; pluralities of benefices, licences of non-residence, for not entering into orders, 'for eating meat on days forbidden, and in Lent, at which time also it is forbidden to celebrate marriages without a dispensation and a fee.

[x For a list of dispensations and their prices, see Strype's Life of Grindal, p. 542.]

12. The free liberty of preaching is taken away from the ministers of Christ : those who are now willing to preach are forbidden to recommend any innovation with regard to rites ; but all are obliged to give their assent to ceremonies by sub scribing their hands.

13. Lastly, the article composed in the time of Edward the Sixth respecting the spiritual eating, which expressly oppugned and took away the real presence in the Eucharist2, and contained a most clear explanation of the truth, is now set forth among us mutilated and imperfect.