T. C. Pag. 60. Sect. 1.
You say the cause of disorder is not in the apparell, but in the mindes of men. You meane I am sure, those that refuse the apparell, but if you make them authors of discorde, bycause they consente not wyth you in wearing, do you not see it is assone sayd, that you are the causers of discord, by∣cause you doe not consent with those which weare not? For as there should be vnitie in that point if all did weare that apparell, so shoulde there be, if all did weare none of it. It is a very vnequall comparison that you compare the vse of this apparell, with the vse of wyne, and of a sworde, which are profitable and necessarie, but it is more intollerable, that you match it with the worde of God. I coulde throwe it as farre downe, as you li〈1 line〉〈1 line〉te it vp, but I will not doe so. This onely I wyll say, if there were no harme in it, and that it were also profitable, yet forasmuch as it is not commaū∣ded of God expressely, but a thing (as you say) indifferent, and notwithstanding is cause of so ma∣nie incommodities, and so abused (as I haue before declared) it ought to be sufficient reason to a∣bolishe them: seing that the brasen serpent, which was instituted of the Lorde himselfe, and con∣teyned a profitable remembrance of the wonderfull benefite of God towardes his people, was bea∣ten to pouder, when as it beganne to be an occasion of falling vnto the children of Israell: and see∣ing that S. Paule after the loue feastes (which were kepte at the administration of the Lordes Supper, and were meanes to nourish〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 loue amongst the Churches) were abused and drawne to another vse than they were first ordeyned, did vtterly take them away, and commaunde that they should not be vsed any more.
Io. Whitgifte.
I may answere you almost in the selfe same wordes and maner, that M. Zuinglius answered one Balthazar an Anabaptist, who charged him then, as you charge vs now in this place: consider, saith he, who be the authors and causes of dissention: whether we that attempt nothing of our owne priuate authoritie, but haue submitted our selues to the iudgement of the Church, and of those that be gouernours of the same, or rather you, who so arrogantly, without any such authoritie doe what you list, speake what you list, allow and condemne at your pleasure▪ But for further tryall hereof, I referre you to such notes, as I haue collected out of Zuinglius and others, and placed in the second edition of my Answere to the Admonition.
Our consenting is according to our duetie required of vs by the worde of God to∣wards such as be in authoritie: your dissenting is contrarie to your dutie of obedience in such cases inioyned vnto you by the word of God. If all refused the apparell wyth you, yet would you not be quiet, for you make this the least cause of your schisme. I do not compare this apparell with the word of God, but by these examples I shew the vn∣aptnesse of such arguments as be à non causa ad causam. You haue throwne it downe as low as you can, and if you could cast it lower, your will is good, & therfore to say you coulde do it and wil not, is as great an offence as was the midwiues lying to Pharao.
I haue shewed in my answere, that as the case now standeth, it is rather commodi∣ous: as for abuses in it, as it is nowe vsed, you haue hitherto shewed none, & if it were abused, yet doth it not follow that therefore it is to be remoued, except the abuse coulde not be taken away without the abolishing of the thing, as it was in the brasen serpent: which serpent though it was by God commaūded to be set vp, yet was it (as M. Mar∣tyr saith) but for that time, wherin power was giuen vnto it to heale and cure those that were bitten of the serpents, Num. 21. and therfore being but temporal, and thus a∣bused, was lawfully takē away, neither would the Idolatrie committed vnto it other∣wise haue ceased. But do you thinke that any man doth worship the apparell, as the Israelites did worship the serpent? S. Paul in that Chapter of the. 1. Cor. reproueth them for certaine abuses about the Lords Supper, whereof this was one of the chiefe, that they made it an occasion of feasting and banquetting, which maner of feasting in the Church was not onely borowed of the gentils, as M. Bullinger sayth, but occasion also of much contention, and very vnséemely for that time and place. And as Master Caluine sayth vpon that place. The Corinthians are reproued, bycause they had mingled prophane banquettes (and that also with the contumely of the poore) with that holy and spirituall feast: and therefore expedient it was, that they shoulde betaken awaye, and if you can shewe the like vncurable abuse in the apparell, I will crye away with it, as fast as you do.