The iudgement of the Godly and learned father M. Henry Bullinger chiefe preacher and pastor of the Church of Zurich in Swicerlande, declaring it to be lawfull for the ministers of the Churche of Englande, to weare the apparell prescribed by the lawes and orders of the same realme.

¶ The Copie of Master Bullingers Letter to N. and M.

RIght Worshypfull and welbeloued brethrē the Lorde Iesus blesse you, and kepe you from all euill. I haue recey∣ued your Letters, wher∣by I perceiued you N. to complaine, that mine answere made to your question se∣med ouer short. Albeit I good Brother, then saw no cause, neyther now do, why I shuld write any long letters. For ye re∣quired onely my iudgement concerning the matter of Apparell, where aboute there was contention in Englande. To that question I thought good to answere you briefly. For I coulde well in fewe wordes declare my minde. Furthermore I knewe that D. Peter Martyr of bles∣sed memorie, had often & at large hand∣led the same question both at Oxeforde and here with vs, wherevnto I had not

what to adde. And I remember that mē∣tion was then made of my minde also, in the letter which I wrote to you Bro∣ther M. And againe to say what I think in a worde or two, I can neuer allow it, if ye be commaūded to execute your Mi∣nisterie at an Aultar, burthened rather than garnished with the Image of the Crucifixe, and in a Massing garment, that is, in an Albe and Vestment bea∣ring on the backe also the Image of the Crucifixe. But as farre as I can per∣ceyue by Letters brought oute of Eng∣land, there is now no contention for such apparell. But the question is, whether it be lawfull for the ministers of the gos∣pell to weare a rounde or square cappe, and the whyte Vesture whiche they call a Surplesse, by y^e wearing wherof your Ministers maye be discerned from y^e peo∣ple? And whether they ought to forsake the ministerie, and their sacred place, ra∣ther than weare such apparell? To this question, I answered y^e right Reuerende D. Robert Horne Bishoppe of Win∣chester the last Mart, and that briefly re∣peating

the wordes of D. Martyr. To him had my fellow Minister, and deare∣ly beloued Alliance Rodolph Gualter written a little afore, the copie of whose letters I send to you, and our other bre∣thren, inclosed in these. Therefore if ye wil heare vs, and y^t ye require our iudge∣ment concerning the matter of Apparel, as in your laste letters ye signified vnto me, beholde, ye haue in that Epistle our iudgemēt, whervnto if ye can not agree, we truely are most hartily sorie, and ha∣uing no further counsell, we doe hartily and without ceasing pray vnto the Lord whom we must in all things & alwayes haue respect vnto, that he with his grace and might wil ease the present troubles.

You brother N. haue propoūded cer∣taine questions, and our brother M. hath gathered moe of the same argumēt. And albeit I according to my simple rude∣nesse neuer liked to haue maters drawē into so many questions, and intangled in intricate doubtes, whiche otherwise being of themselues more simple, might in fewe wordes and plainely ynough be

answered: yet wil I note somewhat vp∣on euerye one, that I maye herein also gratifie you my worshipfull and moste dearely beloued brethren, as farre forth as my poore skill and abilitie will giue me leaue. And I beséeche you to receyue these of me your brother and harty louer in good parte, and iudge of them with a quiet minde and frée from all affections. I vtterlye abhorre contentions, and no∣thing doe I more humblie craue at the Lordes hande, than that he will remoue farre from the Churche all contentions, which from the beginning and alwayes haue greatly annoyed true Godlinesse, and rent a sunder the Churche when it was reasonablie quiet and in good case.

Where ye aske, whether lawes of ap∣parell ought to be prescribed to Ecclesi∣asticall persons, that thereby they may be discerned from laye men? I answere that there is doubtfulnesse in the worde Ought, for if it be takē for necessarie, & pertayning to the obteyning of saluati∣on, I do not think the law makers them

selues to be of this minde. But if it be meant, that this may be done for come∣linesse and beautie, or estimatiō and or∣der, to be a certaine ciuill obseruance, or some suche thing be vnderstoode, as that is that the Apostle would haue a church Minister or Bishop to be Cosmion, y^t is comely, I sée not what he offendeth that vseth such Apparell, or that commaun∣deth to vse such.

Whether the Ceremoniall obser∣uaunce of the Leuitical Priesthoode be to be called againe into the Church? I an∣swere, If a cappe and garment not vn∣comelye for a Minister, and voyde of su∣perstition, be commaunded to be vsed of Ministers, no man verely can truelye saye, that Iudaisme is restored. Fur∣thermore I repeate here that I sée D. Martyr to haue answered to this questi∣on, who when he had shewed that the Sacramentes of the olde Lawe are abo∣lished, which may not be brought again into the Church of Christ hauing bap∣tisme and the holye Supper, he added: There were neuerthelesse in the Leui∣ticall

lawe certaine actions of such sort, as they coulde not properly be called ho∣ly, for they serued for comelynesse and or∣der, & some cōmodious vse, which things as agréeable to the light of nature, and helping somewhat to our commoditie, I iudge may both be restored and retained. Who séeth not that the Apostles for the peace and better agréement of the faith∣ful, cōmaunded the Gentiles to abstaine from bloud & strangled? These things without controuersie were legall and Leuiticall. And none of vs is ignorant that Tithes also are at this day in many places appointed to finde the Ministers. It is manifest that Psalmes & Hymnes are song in the Church, which thinges yet the Leuites also vsed. And not to o∣mit this, we haue holy dayes in memory of the Lordes resurrection, and others. Nowe shall all these be done away bi∣cause they be monuments of y^e old law? ye sée then that all the Leuiticals are not so abrogate, but that some of them may still be vsed. Thus much he.

Whether it be lawefull to commu∣nicate

with the Papistes in apparell? I answere. It is not yet proued that the Pope brought difference of apparell in∣to the Church. Nay, it is certaine that difference of apparell is farre more aun∣cient than the Pope. Neyther doe I sée why we may not communicate with the Papistes, in apparell not superstitious, but politike and comely. If in nothing we might cōmunicate with them, then must we forsake all Churches, receyue no stipends, vse no baptisme, reade ney∣ther y^e Apostles, nor Nicene Créede, yea, and then must we away with the Lords Prayer. Neyther doe ye borrow of them any ceremonies. Apparell from the be∣ginning of your reformation was neuer remoued, & is still retayned, not by Po∣pishe order, but by force of the Princes lawe, as a thing indifferēt and politike. So verely, if ye vse as a ciuill thing the Cap and distinct Apparell, it sauoureth neither of Iudaisme, nor Monkerie. For these séeke to séeme separate from ciuill life, and put merite in their peculiar ha∣bite. So Eustachius Bishop of Sebastia

was condēpned, not simplie for his pecu∣liar habite, but for that he put holinesse in it. The Cannons of the Councell of Gangra, Laodicea, and of the sixt Sy∣node are wel knowen. If so be that some of the common people be persuaded, that this sauoureth of Poperie, Iewishnesse and Monkerie, let them be admonished, and better taught concerning these mat∣ters. And if by the vndiscrete clamors of some, blowen out aboute this matter a∣mong the Common people, many are made vnquiet, lette them that doe it be∣ware, they pul not heauier burthens vp∣on their owne neckes, and prouoke the Quéenes Maiestie, & finally bring ma∣nye faithfull Ministers into daunger, whence they shall hardelye be able to winde out.

Whether suche as haue hitherto en∣ioyed their libertie, may with safe consci∣ence wrappe both them selues and the Church in this seruitude, by force of the Quéenes Iniunctions? I aunswere. I thinke best to prouide that there be no odious disputations, clamors, and con∣tentions

about the matter of Apparell, and so by suche importunitie occasion be giuen to the Quenes maiestie no longer to leaue it free for them y^e hitherto haue vsed their libertie, but being exasperated with their outcries be in maner forced to commaunde either to receiue the eccle∣siasticall Apparell, or giue ouer their rowmes. Surely me think it a straunge thing (I speake it vnder your correction right worshipfull and welbeloued Bre∣thren) that ye persuade your selues, that ye may not with safe conscience submitte your selues and the Churches to the ser∣uitude of Apparell, and doe not rather weighe, that if ye will not vse a thing méere pollitike and indifferent but still contende odiously, into what a seruitude ye then bring both your selues and your Churches, by leauing of your rowmes, and setting of the Churches wide open vnto Wolues, or at the lest to more vn∣fit Teachers, which are not so furnished as ye be to instruct the people, haue ye then well defended the libertie of the Church, when ye minister occasion to

oppresse the Church with more and he∣uier burdens? ye are not ignoraūt what a number séeke for, how they be affected towardes the preaching of the Gospell, what maner of persons shall succéede in your places, and what is to be looked for at their hands.

Whether the Apparell of the cleargie be a thing indifferent? Verilie it séemeth a thing indifferent, being a ciuill thing, and hauing regarde to comelinesse, order and beautie, without putting anye Reli∣gion in it. Thus much briefly I thought to say to your questions my right well learned and welbeloued Brother N.

Nowe I come to the questions of our brother M. also, in declaration whereof I will paraduenture be shorter. Whe∣ther peculiar Apparell distinct from laye men were euer appointed for ministers of y^e Church? Whether at this day such ought to be appointed in reformed Chur∣ches also? I answere: That in the olde Churche there was distinct Apparell of priestes it appeareth by the ecclesiasticall historie of Theodoret lib. 2 cap. 27. and

Socrates lib. 6. cap. 22. And y^t they vsed Pallium in ministratiō, none y^t hath but ouer séene the monumentes of olde wri∣ters, can be ignorant. Therefore I sig∣nified afore that diuersitie of apparel had not his beginning of y^e Pope. Eusebius at the least recordeth out of y^e moste aun∣cient writers, how that Iohn the Apostle wore at Ephaesus a Bishops attire vpō his head, terming it: Pelatum seu La∣mina pontificalis. As touching saint Ciprian the holy martyr, Pontius the Deacon writeth, that a little before he shoulde be beheaded, he gaue vnto him that shoulde beheade him, his vesture called Birrus, and to his Deacon, his vesture called Dalmatica, and so stoode himselfe in linnen. Furthermore Chri∣sostome maketh mention of the whyte vesture of ministers of the Church. And it is certayne that Christians when they came first vnto Christes religion, and to the Church, for a gowne put on a cloke. For which cause when they were moc∣ked of the Gentiles Tertullian wrote a very learned treatise de Pallio. I coulde

bring forthe manye other things of this sorte, if these were not sufficient. In deede I had rather haue nothing layed vpon the ministers against their willes, and that they might vse the maner of the Apostles, but for as much as y^e Quéenes Maiestie requireth the Cap only and the Surplesse, wherein (as is oftentimes sayde already) she putteth no Religion, and the same things haue bene vsed of the auncient Fathers, when the Church was in better case, without all supersti∣tion and fault, I woulde wish good Mi∣nisters not to put all the going forward of Religion in these things, as if they were all, and summe, according to the prouerb, but yelde somewhat to the time and not odiousely to striue about a thing indifferent, but iudge soberly that these things may be borne, but we must goe forwarde with the tyme. For that suche are nearer to the simplicitie of the Apos∣tles as knowe no such differences or en∣force them not, & yet in the meane whyle abhorre not discipline in Apparell.

Whether prescription of Apparell a∣gréeth

with christiā libertie? I answere: That things indifferent admitte some∣time prescription, and enforcement also, as I may terme it, as touching the vse, and not for necessitie, so as that which is by nature indifferent shoulde be thrust vpon the conscience as necessarie, and so y^e mindes driuē into scrupolositie. Times verilie, and places of holy assemblies, are rightely compted among indifferent things, and yet if these then be no set or∣der, what confusion I pray you, and dis∣order woulde growe therevpon?

Whether any new ceremonies maye be heaped beside the expresse rule of the worde of God? I answere, that I lyke not heaping of new ceremonies, and yet I denie not but that some may be ordey∣ned, so that the seruice of God be not put in them, but appointed for order and discipline. Christ himselfe kept the feast or ceremonie of the Encoenia or dedica∣tion, and yet we finde not this feast pre∣scribed in the lawe. To be shorte, the greater part of y^e propositions or questi∣ons concerning Apparell, standeth in

this, whether lawes for Apparell ought or be lawfull to be made in the Church. And it bringeth the question to a gene∣ralitie, to wit, what order may be taken for ceremonies. To these propositions I answere briefely, that I for my parte I had rather haue no ceremonies, but such as are necessarie, thrust vpō the Church, yet in the meane season I graunt, that lawes concerning ceremonies, paraduē∣ture not very necessarie, and sometime vnprofitable, may not straight waye be condemned of impietie, and so troubles and schismes raysed in the Church, so long as they be voyde of superstition, and the things are in their owne nature in∣different.

Whether it be lawfull to restore the abolished rytes of the Iewes, & to trans∣late ceremonies properly dedicate to reli∣gion of Idolaters, to the vse of refor∣med Churches? To this question I an∣swere afore, when I entreated of Leui∣ticall rytes. And I woulde not haue I∣dolatrous rytes vnpurged of errours, translated into reformed Churches. And

agayne, and on the contrarie parte, it might be demaunded, whether receyued Rytes, superstition being remoued, may not by discipline and order be retained without sinne.

Whether conformitie in ceremonies, be of necessitie to be exacted? I answere, That conformitie in ceremonies is not paraduenture necessarie in al Churches. In the meane season if a thing not neces∣sarie be commaunded, so that the same be not vngodly, it seemeth not that therfore the Church shoulde be forsaken. There was not conformitie in rytes in all the olde Churches. Yet suche as kéept not conformitie, reproued not the kéepers of vniforme rites. And I am easely persua∣ded that pollitike wise men vrge this v∣niformitie of rytes, bicause they thinke it maketh vnto concorde, and bicause the Church of al Englande, is one Church, wherein if there be no impietie mixed, I sée not howe ye can so fiercely sette your selues againste suche orders being not euill.

Whether Ceremonies openly offen∣siue

may be retayned? I aunswere, that offence ought to be auoyded. In y^e meane time, we must beware that we couer not our owne affections vnder the name of offence. Ye knowe there is an offence giuen, and an offence taken, and as it were sought of our selues. I dispute not now, whether you can for a thing indif∣ferent without giuing of grieuous of∣fence, forsake the Churches that Christ dyed for.

Whether any orders are to be borne in the Church, which in their owne na∣ture in déede are not vngodlie, but yet make nothing for edificatiō? I answere, if the orders which the Quenes maiestie enioyneth you be voyde of impietie, ye ought rather to beare them than forsake your Churches, for if the edifying of the Church is chiefely to be sought in this matter, verily we shall soner destroy the Church by forsaking it than by putting on the Apparell. And where vngodly∣nesse is not, neyther the conscience offen∣ded, there must we not giue ouer, though we shoulde beare some seruitude. And

here agayne it might be demaunded, whether Apparell may iustly be compted seruitude, so farre forth as it serueth to comlynesse and order.

Whether y^e Prince ought to prescribe anye thing to the Churches in Ceremo∣nies without the good will and frée con∣sent of ecclesiasticall persons. I answere, if the Prince shoulde alwayes haue stay∣ed for the good will of his cleargie, parad∣uenture the moste wise and godly kings Iosaphat, Ezechias, Asa and Iosias and other good Princes, had neuer brought the Leuites and Ministers of the Chur∣ches into order. Albeit my mind is not at all, that Bishops shoulde be shut out of consultations for the Church. Againe I would not haue them chalenge such au∣thoritie to themselues as they haue vsur∣ped against Princes and Magistrates in Papacie. Neyther woulde I haue Bi∣shops to holde their peace and agrée vn∣to vniust ordinaunces of Princes.

The last two questions touch the ma∣ter nearer. Whether it were better in thys order to serue the Churche, or

for these thinges to be cast out of eccle∣siasticall function? And whether good Pastors may for the neglecting of suche Ceremonies, iustly be put from the mi∣nisterie? I answere, if there be no super∣stition nor impietie in the rytes, and yet they are enforced, and enioyned good Pas∣tours, which had rather be discharged of them, in déede I will graunt, and that more liberally than néedeth, that a bur∣then and seruitude is layde vpon them, but I will not graunt, and that for most iust causes, that therefore they shoulde forsake their place or ministerie, and giue ouer vnto Wolues, as it hath bene sayd already, or to vnfitter Ministers, special∣ly when libertie to preache is not taken away, and prouision may be made that no further seruitude creepe in, and many such like things.

I haue sayde what I thought to be saide of the matters propounded in ques∣tion, knowing that other men for their learning coulde haue better and more finely discussed them, but bicause it was your mindes, that I shoulde answere,

I haue done as I coulde, leauing to o∣thers at libertie both pen and iudgemēt. To ende, my minde is not with these, to force or entangle any mans consciēce, but I offer them to be examined, and I aduise, that no man in this controuersie, frame himselfe a conscience, of a desire to contende. And I exhort you al by Ie∣sus Christ our Lord, the Sauiour, Head, and King of his Churche, that euerye one well weighe with him selfe, which way he shall more edifie the Church of Christ, by putting on the Apparell as a thing indifferent, for order and comely∣nesse sake, and so far somewhat making to concorde and profite of the Church, or for Apparell to forsake the Church, and leaue it to be possessed afterwarde if not of manifest Wolues, yet of vnfitter and worsse Ministers at the least. The Lord Iesus graunt you to see, sauour, and fol∣low that which maketh to his glory, and the safetie and peace of his Church. Fare ye well in the Lorde, together with all the faithfull Ministers. Wée will hear∣tily praye to the Lorde for, you that ye

maye thinke and doe, that is holye and holesome. D. Gualter hath him moste heartily commended vnto you, & wish∣eth you all prosperitie. And so doe the rest of the Ministers also.

At Zurich the first day of Maij In the yeare of our Lorde. 1566.

Henry Bullinger, Minister of the Church of Zurich: in his owne, and Gualters name.