XXIX. The attire1 which the minister of God is by order to use at times of divine service being but a matter of mere formality, yet such as for comeliness sake hath hitherto been judged by the wiser sort of men not unnecessary to concur with other sensible notes betokening the different kind or quality of persons and actions whereto it is tied: as we think not ourselves the holier because we use it, so neither should they with whom no such thing is in use think us therefore unholy, because we submit ourselves unto that, which in a matter so indifferent the wisdom of authority and law have thought comely. To solemn actions of royalty and justice their suitable ornaments are a beauty. Are they only in religion a stain?
“Divine religion,” saith St. Jerome, (he speaketh of the priestly attire of the Law,) “hath one kind of habit wherein to minister before the Lord, another for ordinary uses belonging unto common life2.” Pelagius having carped at the curious neatness of men’s apparel in those days, and through the sourness of his disposition spoken somewhat too hardly thereof, affirming that “the glory of clothes and ornaments was a thing contrary to God and godliness3;” St. Jerome, whose custom is not to pardon over easily his adversaries if any where they chance to trip, presseth him as thereby making all sorts of men in the world God’s enemies. “Is it enmity with God” (saith he) “if I wear my coat somewhat handsome? If a Bishop, a Priest, a Deacon, and the rest of the ecclesiastical order come to administer the usual sacrifice in a white garment4, are they hereby God’s adversaries? Clerks, Monks, Widows, Virgins, take heed, it is dangerous for you to be otherwise seen than in foul and ragged clothes. Not to speak any thing of secular men, which are proclaimed to have war with God, as oft as ever they put on precious and shining clothes.” By which words of Jerome we may take it at the least for a probable collection that his meaning was to draw Pelagius into hatred, as condemning by so general a speech even the neatness of that very garment itself, wherein the clergy did then use to administer publicly the holy Sacrament of Christ’s most blessed Body and Blood. For that they did then use some such ornament, the words of Chrysostom5 give plain testimony, who speaking to the clergy of Antioch, telleth them that if they did suffer notorious malefactors to come to the Table of our Lord and not put them by, it would be as heavily revenged upon them, as if themselves had shed his blood; that for this purpose God hath called them to the rooms which they held in the church of Christ; that this they should reckon was their dignity, this their safety, this their whole crown and glory; and therefore this they should carefully intend, and not when the Sacrament is administered imagine themselves called only to walk up and down in a white and shining garment.
Now whereas these speeches of Jerome and Chrysostom do seem plainly to allude unto such ministerial garments as were then in use, to this they answer, that by Jerome nothing can be gathered but only that the ministers came to church in handsome holyday apparel, and that himself did not think them bound by the law of God to go like slovens, but the weed which we mean he defendeth not; that Chrysostom meaneth indeed the same which we defend6, but seemeth rather to reprehend than to allow it as we do. Which answer wringeth out of Jerome and Chrysostom that which their words will not gladly yield. They both speak of the same persons, namely the Clergy; and of their weed at the same time, when they administer the blessed Sacrament; and of the selfsame kind of weed, a white garment, so far as we have wit to conceive; and for any thing we are able to see, their manner of speech is not such as doth argue either the thing itself to be different whereof they speak, or their judgments concerning it different; although the one do only maintain it against Pelagius, as a thing not therefore unlawful, because it was fair or handsome, and the other make it a matter of small commendation in itself, if they which wear it do nothing else but air the robes which their place requireth. The honesty, dignity, and estimation of white apparel in the eastern part of the world, is a token of greater fitness for this sacred use, wherein it were not convenient that any thing basely thought of should be suffered. Notwithstanding I am not bent to stand stiffly upon these probabilities, that in Jerome’s and Chrysostom’s time any such attire was made several to this purpose. Yet surely the words of Salomon are very impertinent to prove it an ornament therefore not several for the ministers to execute their ministry in, because men of credit and estimation wore their ordinary apparel white. For we know that when Salomon wrote those words, the several apparel for the ministers of the Law to execute their ministry in was such.
The wise man, which feared God from his heart, and honoured the service that was done unto him, could not mention so much as the garments of holiness but with effectual signification of most singular reverence and love7. Were it not better that the love which men bear to God should make the least things that are employed in his service amiable, than that their overscrupulous dislike of so mean a thing as a vestment should from the very service of God withdraw their hearts and affections? I term it the rather a mean thing, a thing not much to be respected, because even they so account now of it, whose first disputations against it were such as if religion had scarcely any thing of greater weight.
Their allegations were then, “That if a man were assured to gain a thousand by doing that which may offend any one brother, or be unto him a cause of falling, he ought not to do it8; that this popish apparel, the surplice especially, hath been by papists abominably abused9; that it hath been a mark and a very sacrament of abomination10; that remaining, it serveth as a monument of idolatry, and not only edifieth not, but as a dangerous and scandalous ceremony doth exceeding much harm to them of whose good we are commanded to have regard11; that it causeth men to perish and make shipwreck of conscience;” for so themselves profess they mean, when they say the weak are offended herewith12; “that it hardeneth Papists, hindereth the weak from profiting in the knowledge of the Gospel, grieveth godly minds, and giveth them occasion to think hardly of their ministers13; that if the magistrate may command, or the Church appoint rites and ceremonies, yet seeing our abstinence from things in their own nature indifferent if the weak brother should be offended is a flat commandment of the Holy Ghost, which no authority either of church or commonwealth can make void, therefore neither may the one nor the other lawfully ordain this ceremony, which hath great incommodity and no profit, great offence and no edifying14; that by the Law it should have been burnt and consumed with fire as a thing infected with leprosy15; that the example of Ezechias beating to powder the brazen serpent, and of Paul abrogating those abused feasts of charity, enforceth upon us the duty of abolishing altogether a thing which hath been and is so offensive16; finally, that God by his Prophet hath given an express commandment, which in this case toucheth us no less than of old it did the Jews17; ‘Ye shall pollute the ‘covering of the images of silver, and the rich ornament of your images of gold, and cast them away as a stained rag; thou shalt say unto it, Get thee hence18.’ ”
These and such like were their first discourses touching that church attire which with us for the most part is usual in public prayer; our ecclesiastical laws so appointing, as well because it hath been of reasonable continuance, and by special choice was taken out of the number of those holy garments which (over and besides their mystical reference) served for “comeliness” under the Law19, and is in the number of those ceremonies which may with choice and discretion be used to that purpose in the Church of Christ; as also for that it suiteth so fitly with that lightsome affection of joy, wherein God delighteth when his saints praise him20; and so lively resembleth the glory of the saints in heaven, together with the beauty wherein Angels have appeared unto men21, that they which are to appear for men in the presence of God as Angels, if they were left to their own choice and would choose any, could not easily devise a garment of more decency for such a service.
As for those fore-rehearsed vehement allegations against it, shall we give them credit when the very authors from whom they come confess they believe not their own sayings? For when once they began to perceive how many both of them in the two universities, and of others who abroad having ecclesiastical charge do favour mightily their cause and by all means set it forward, might by persisting in the extremity of that opinion hazard greatly their own estates, and so weaken that part which their places do now give them much opportunity to strengthen; they asked counsel as it seemeth from some abroad22, who wisely considered that the body is of far more worth than the raiment. Whereupon for fear of dangerous inconveniences, it hath been thought good to add, that sometimes authority “must and may with good conscience be obeyed, even where commandment is not given upon good grounds23;” that “the duty of preaching is one of the absolute commandments of God, and therefore ought not to be forsaken for the bare inconvenience of a thing which in the24 own nature is indifferent;” that25 “one of the foulest spots in the surplice is the offence which it giveth in occasioning the weak to fall and the wicked to be confirmed in their wickedness,” yet hereby there is no unlawfulness proved, but “only an inconveniency” that such things should be established, howbeit no such inconveniency neither “as may not be borne with26;” that when God doth flatly command us to abstain from things in their own nature indifferent if they offend our weak brethren, his meaning is not we should obey his commandment herein, unless we may do it “and not leave undone that which the Lord hath absolutely commanded27.” Always provided that whosoever will enjoy the benefit of this dispensation to wear a scandalous badge of idolatry, rather than forsake his pastoral charge, do “as occasion serveth teach” nevertheless still “the incommodity of the thing itself, admonish the weak brethren that they be not, and pray unto God so to strengthen them that they may not be offended thereat28.” So that whereas before they which had authority to institute rites and ceremonies were denied to have power to institute this, it is now confessed that this they may also “lawfully” but not so “conveniently” appoint; they did well before and as they ought, who had it in utter detestation and hatred, as a thing abominable, they now do well which think it may be both borne and used with a very good conscience; before, he which by wearing it were sure to win thousands unto Christ ought not to do it if there were but one which might be offended, now though it be with the offence of thousands, yet it may be done rather than that should be given over whereby notwithstanding we are not certain we shall gain one: the examples of Ezechias and of Paul, the charge which was given to the Jews by Esay, the strict apostolical prohibition of things indifferent whensoever they may be scandalous, were before so forcible laws against our ecclesiastical attire, as neither church nor commonwealth could possibly make void; which now one of far less authority than either hath found how to frustrate, by dispensing with the breach of inferior commandments, to the end that the greater may be kept.
But it booteth them not thus to soder up a broken cause, whereof their first and last discourses will fall asunder do what they can. Let them ingenuously confess that their invectives were too bitter, their arguments too weak, the matter not so dangerous as they did imagine. If those alleged testimonies of Scripture did indeed concern the matter to such effect as was pretended, that which they should infer were unlawfulness, because they were cited as prohibitions of that thing which indeed they concern. If they prove not our attire unlawful because in truth they concern it not, it followeth that they prove not any thing against it, and consequently not so much as uncomeliness or inconveniency. Unless therefore they be able throughly to resolve themselves that there is no one sentence in all the Scriptures of God which doth control the wearing of it in such manner and to such purpose as the church of England alloweth; unless they can fully rest and settle their minds in this most sound persuasion, that they are not to make themselves the only competent judges of decency in these cases, and to despise the solemn judgment of the whole Church, preferring before it their own conceit, grounded only upon uncertain suspicions and fears, whereof if there were at the first some probable cause when things were but raw and tender, yet now very tract of time hath itself worn that out also; unless I say thus resolved in mind they hold their pastoral charge with the comfort of a good conscience, no way grudging at that which they do, or doing that which they think themselves bound of duty to reprove, how should it possibly help or further them in their course to take such occasions as they say are requisite to be taken, and in pensive manner to tell their audience, “Brethren, our hearts’ desire is that we might enjoy the full liberty of the Gospel as in other reformed churches they do elsewhere, upon whom the heavy hand of authority hath imposed no grievous burden. But such is the misery of these our days, that so great happiness we cannot look to attain unto. Were it so, that the equity of the Law of Moses could prevail, or the zeal of Ezechias be found in the hearts of those guides and governors under whom we live; or the voice of God’s own prophets be duly heard; or the example of the Apostles of Christ be followed, yea or their precepts be answered with full and perfect obedience: these abominable rags, polluted garments, marks and sacraments of idolatry, which power as you see constraineth us to wear and conscience to abhor, had long ere this day been removed both out of sight and out of memory. But as now things stand, behold to what narrow straits we are driven. On the one side we fear the words of our Saviour Christ, ‘Wo be to them by whom scandal and offence cometh;’ on the other side at the Apostle’s speech we cannot but quake and tremble, ‘If I preach not the Gospel wo be unto me.’ Being thus hardly beset, we see not any other remedy but to hazard your souls the one way, that we may the other way endeavour to save them. Touching the offence of the weak therefore, we must adventure it. If they perish, they perish. Our pastoral charge is God’s absolute commandment. Rather than that shall be taken from us, we are resolved to take this filth and to put it on, although we judge it to be so unfit and inconvenient, that as oft as ever we pray or preach so arrayed before you, we do as much as in us lieth to cast away your souls that are weak-minded, and to bring you unto endless perdition. But we beseech you, brethren, have care of your own safety, take heed to your steps that ye be not taken in those snares which we lay before you. And our prayer in your behalf to Almighty God is, that the poison which we offer you may never have the power to do you harm.”
Advice and counsel is best sought for at their hands which either have no part at all in the cause whereof they instruct, or else are so far engaged that themselves are to bear the greatest adventure in the success of their own counsels. The one of which two considerations maketh men the less respective, and the other the more circumspect. Those good and learned men which gave the first direction to this course had reason to wish that their own proceedings at home might be favoured abroad also, and that the good affection of such as inclined towards them might be kept alive. But if themselves had gone under those sails which they require to be hoised29 up, if they had been themselves to execute their own theory in this church, I doubt not but easily they would have seen being nearer at hand, that the way was not good which they took of advising men, first to wear the apparel, that thereby they might be free to continue their preaching, and then of requiring them so to preach as they might be sure they could not continue, except they imagine that laws which permit them not to do as they would, will endure them to speak as they list even against that which themselves do by constraint of laws; they would have easily seen that our people being accustomed to think evermore that thing evil which is publicly under any pretence reproved, and the men themselves worse which reprove it and use it too, it should be to little purpose for them to salve the wound by making protestations in disgrace of their own actions, with plain acknowledgment that they are scandalous, or by using fair entreaty with the weak brethren; they would easily have seen how with us it cannot be endured to hear a man openly profess that he putteth fire to his neighbour’s house, but yet so halloweth the same with prayer that he hopeth it shall not burn. It had been therefore perhaps safer and better for ours to have observed St. Basil’s advice30 both in this and in all things of like nature: “Let him which approveth not his governors’ ordinances either plainly (but privately always) shew his dislike if he have λόγον ἰσχυρὸν, strong and invincible reason against them, according to the true will and meaning of Scripture; or else let him quietly with silence do that which is enjoined.” Obedience with professed unwillingness to obey is no better than manifest disobedience.
← The Form of our Liturgy too near the Papists · Contents · Of Gesture in praying, and of different Plac →
Footnotes
-
T. C. lib. i. p. 71. [51.] “We think the surplice especially unmeet for a minister of the Gospel to wear.” p. 75. [55.] “It is easily seen by Salomon, Eccles. ix. 8, that to wear a white garment was greatly esteemed in the east parts, and was ordinary to those that were in any estimation, as black with us: and therefore was no several apparel for the ministers to execute their ministry in.” [See Adm. ap. Whitg. 281 … 3, 286, 292, 3, 5. Answ. 149, 290, &c. T. C. i. 52, &c. Def. 256, &c. T. C. ii. 402 … 464. iii. 242.] ↩
-
Hieron. in xliv. Ezech. [t. v. 668. “Religio divina alterum habitum habet in ministerio, alterum in usu vitaque communi.”] ↩
-
Hieron. adver. Pelag. lib. i. c. 9. [t. ii. 274. “Adjungis, gloriam vestium et ornamentorum Deo esse contrariam. Quæ sunt, rogo, inimicitiæ contra Deum, si tunicam habuero mundiorem: si Episcopus, Presbyter, et Diaconus, et reliquus ordo ecclesiasticus in administratione sacrificiorum candida veste processerint? Cavete clerici, cavete monachi, viduæ et virgines: periclitamini, nisi sordidas vos atque pannosas vulgus aspexerit. Taceo de hominibus sæculi, quibus aperte bellum indicitur, et inimicitiæ contra Deum, si pretiosis atque nitentibus utantur exuviis.”] ↩
-
T. C. lib. i. p. 77. [57.] “By a white garment is meant a comely apparel, and not slovenly.” ↩
-
Chrysost. ad Popul. Antioch. tom. v. serm. 60. [in S. Mat. Hom. 82. t. ii. 515. Οὐ γὰρ μικρὰ κόλασις ὑμι̑ν ἐστὶν, εἴ τινι συνειδότες τινὰ πονηρίαν, συγχωρήσητε μετασχει̑ν ταύτης τη̑ς τραπέζης, ὅτι τὸ αἷμα αὐτου̑ ἐκ τω̑ν χειρω̑ν τω̑ν ὑμετέρων ἐκζητηθήσεται. κᾂν στρατηγός τις ᾐ̑, κᾂν ὕπαρχος, κᾂν αὐτὸς ὁ τὸ διάδημα περικείμενος, ὰναξίως δὲ προσίῃ, κώλυσον. μείζονα ἐκείνου τὴν ἐξουσίαν ἔχεις. σὺ δὲ εἰ μὲν πηγὴν ὕδατος ἐνεχειρίσθης ϕυλάττειν ποιμνίῳ καθαρὰν, εἰ̑τα εἰ̑δες πρόβατον πολὺν ἐπὶ του̑ στόματος ϕέρον τὸν βόρβορον, οὐκ ἂν εἴασας ἐπικύψαι κάτω, καὶ θολω̑σαι τὸ ῥει̑θρον· νυνὶ δὲ οὐχ ὕδατος, ἀλλ’ αἵματος καὶ πνεύματος πηγὴν ἐγκεχειρισμένος, καὶ ὁρω̑ν τοὺς βορβόρου χαλεπωτέραν ἁμαρτίαν ἔχοντας καὶ προσιόντας οὐκ ἀγανακτει̑ς, οὐδὲ ἀπείργεις; καὶ τίνα ἂν σχοίης συγγνώμην; διὰ του̑το ὑμα̑ς ὁ θεὸς ἐτίμησε ταύτῃ τῃ̑ τιμῃ̑, ἵνα τὰ τοιαυ̑τα διακρίνητε. του̑το ὑμω̑ν ἡ ἀξία, του̑το ἡ ἀσϕάλεια, του̑το ὁ στέϕανος ἅπας, οὐχ ἵνα λευκὸν χιτωνισκὸν καὶ ἀποστίλβοντα περιβαλλόμενοι περιᾐ̑ητε.] ↩
-
T. C. lib. i. p. 75. [55.] “It is true, Chrysostom maketh mention of a white garment, but not in commendation of it, but rather to the contrary, for he sheweth that the dignity of their ministry was in taking heed that none unmeet were admitted to the Lord’s Supper, not in going about the church with a white garment.” ↩
-
Eccles. xlv. 7. ↩
-
T. C. lib. i. p. 79. [58.] ↩
-
Page 71. [52.] ↩
-
Page 75. [55.] ↩
-
Page 72. [52.] ↩
-
T. C. ii. 403. ↩
-
T. C. i. 73. [53.] ↩
-
Lib. i. 76. [56.] ii. 403. ↩
-
[Decl. of Disc. transl. by T. C. 109, and 135. Also T. C. i. 57; iii. 259. And Eccl. Disc. fol. 82, 101. “Non abluenda sed cremanda, nec aquæ effusione purganda sed ignis incendio consumenda.”] ↩
-
Page 78. [60.] ↩
-
Isa. xxx. 22. ↩
-
[Adm. p. 31. al. 17. T. C. iii. 257.] ↩
-
Exod. xxviii. 2; xxxix. 27. ↩
-
Psal. cxlix. 2. ↩
-
Apoc. xv. 6; Mark xvi. 5. ↩
-
[In 1565, Sampson and Humfrey wrote to Bullinger and Gualter at Zurich, and to Beza at Geneva, on this subject. Their answers, to the effect here stated, may be found in Strype, Ann. I. ii. 505, from Bullinger, May, 1566: and in the Life of Grindal, 511, from Beza, Oct. 1567. Bullinger (p. 508.) says, “Mirum sane mihi videtur (vestra pace, viri ornatissimi, et fratres charissimi, dixerim) quod vobis persuadetis, salva conscientia, vos et ecclesias servituti vestiariæ subjicere se non posse; et non potius expenditis, si re politica et indifferenti uti nolitis, et perpetuo contendatis odiosius, cujusmodi servituti et vos et ecclesias subjiciatis; quod vestra statione cedentes lupis exponitis ecclesias, aut saltem parum idoneis doctoribus.” Beza (having first endeavoured to stir up the church of Zurich to a public interference, Ann. I. ii. 522.) advises as follows: “Petitur etiam a nobis utrum istam in pileis et vestibus tum in communi usu tum in ministerii functione distinctionem probemus … . Respondemus igitur ingenue, si ita res habent ut audimus, nobis videri pessime mereri de Ecclesia Dei, et coram Christi tribunali rationem hujus facti reddituros, qui sunt istius rei auctores … . Sunt (dicet aliquis) res per se mediæ. Concedimus sane ita esse, si per se considerentur. Sed quis illas ita considerabit? Nam qui Papistæ sunt, quicquid lex civilis prætexat, sane hac ratione in sua superstitione inveterata confirmantur. Qui cœperunt superstitiones eo usque detestari, ut etiam illarum vestigia cœperint execrari, quantopere offenduntur! Qui melius sunt instituti, quem fructum inde percipient? Anne vero tanti est ista distinctio, ut propterea tam multorum conscientias perturbari oporteat, repetita videlicet ab ipsis manifestis et juratis sanæ doctrinæ hostibus istius distinctionis ratione? Quid quod ex iis qui Ecclesiastici vocantur non minima pars dicitur adhuc Papismum in pectore gestare? An isti vero in melius proficient, restituto hoc habitu, ac non potius instaurandi quoque ipsius Papismi spe cristas erigent? … Quid ergo, inquiunt fratres, nobis quibus ista obtruduntur faciendum censetis? Respondemus distinctione hic opus esse; alia enim est ministrorum alia gregis conditio. Deinde possunt ac etiam debent multa tolerari quæ tamen recte non præcipiuntur. Itaque primum respondemus, etsi nostro quidem judicio non recte revehuntur in Ecclesiam, tamen cum non sint ex earum rerum genere, quæ per se impiæ sunt, non videri nobis illas tanti momenti, ut propterea vel pastoribus deserendum sit potius ministerium quam ut vestes illas assumant, vel gregibus omittendum publicum pabulum, potius quam ita vestitos pastores audiant. Tantum, ut et pastores et greges in conscientia non peccent, (modo salva sit doctrinæ ipsius sive dogmatum puritas,) suademus pastoribus, ut postquam et coram Regia Majestate et apud episcopos suas conscientias modesta quidem (sicut Christianos ab omni tumultu et seditione alienos decet) et tamen gravi, prout rei magnitudo requirit, obtestatione liberarint; aperte quidem apud suos greges ea inculcent, quæ ad tollendum hoc offendiculum pertinent, et in istorum etiam abusuum emendationem, prudenter simul ac placide, prout occasionem offeret Dominus, incumbant: sed ista tamen quæ mutare non possunt ferant potius quam ecclesias ob eam causam deserendo majoribus et periculosioribus malis occasionem Satanæ nihil aliud quærenti præbeant.” Tract. Theol. iii. 219.] ↩
-
T. C. lib. i. p. 74. [54.] et lib. iii. p. 250; Index, lib. iii. c. 8. ↩
-
[“the,” so A. C.: Keble, “its,” but without authority; see vol. i. p. 212, note 1.] 1886. ↩
-
T. C. iii. 262. ↩
-
Ibid. 263. ↩
-
Lib. iii. p. 263. ↩
-
Page 263. ↩
-
[So original edd. Cf. Acts xxvii. 40, A. V. “hoisted,” K.] 1886. ↩
-
Basil. Ascet. Respons. ad Interrog. 47. [in later editions called “Regulæ fusius tractatæ.” t. ii. p. 493. Paris. 1618; t. ii. p. 393. ed. Bened. Τὸν μὴ καταδεχόμενον τὰ παρὰ του̑ προεστω̑τος ἐγκριθέντα, χρὴ ϕανερω̑ς ἢ ἰδίᾳ αὐτῷ ἀντιλέγειν, εἴ τινα ἔχοι λόγον ἰσχυρὸν κατὰ τὸ βούλημα τω̑ν γραϕω̑ν, ἢ σιωπήσαντα τὸ προστεταγμένον ποιει̑ν.] ↩