In 1631 Charles I directed the surplice to be worn. In 1633, when he visited Scotland, the bishops and chaplains officiated before him in surplices. He induced Parliament to pass an Act like that of 1609, giving him the power to regulate clerical costume; but this was so much objected to by the clergy themselves (some of whom expressed a fear that his Majesty would order them to wear 'hoods and bells'), that in 1634 they petitioned the King not to interfere with the arrangements of his predecessor; and their request seems to have been granted.
§ III. The Reformed Churches of Spain and Portugal.
The practices of both these churches are commendably simple: a white tunic, or surplice, and a white stole, are the only vestments or ornaments at any time to be worn, except in sermons or at funerals, when a black gown may be assumed. Deacons wear their stoles in the ancient diaconal fashion, i.e., over the left shoulder and under the right arm; presbyters wear theirs round the neck and hanging straight down.
§ IV. The Presbyterian Church.
We have already shown that in Apostolic times, and the first few years of the post-Apostolic period, robes of office were not worn by the officiating minister. Vestments do not meet us until the moderatorship of the Ecclesiastical Assemblies had crystallized into the Episcopate.
Fig. 29.—A Synod Meeting of the Reformed Church of France.
The oldest Christian organization now existing in which the diordinal system of government has been restored is undoubtedly the Waldensian church. Although this church has not been proved to be older than the thirteenth century, it cannot be asserted that its foundation is not anterior to that date; an impenetrable mist—rendered more obscure, it must be admitted, by the doubtful authenticity of many of the church documents—shrouds its early years. Unfortunately it cannot be discovered whether its clergy wore any distinctive robes when conducting its services. The chroniclers have not thought it worth their while to tell us, but it is improbable that anything very elaborate was worn, as a church which made a change so drastic as the abolition of the Episcopate would be unlikely to maintain the elaborate accessories of the non-reformed church. At present the simple black gown is worn, as in all other branches of the Presbyterian church throughout the world.
The task of compiling details regarding the vestments of the Presbyterian church is rendered easy by the small account which that church, in all its sections, takes of ritual matters; but the same cause also increases its difficulty in another direction. Paradoxical as this statement may appear, it becomes intelligible when we reflect that but few Presbyterian assemblies would consider it consistent with their dignity to take any notice of matters of dress, personal or official; while on the other hand few Presbyterian writers have thought such matters worthy of their notice. The writer has referred to liturgies in the English, French, German, Roumanian, and other languages, representing the chief reformed Churches of Europe holding the Presbyterian system, but has failed to find any rubrical direction or reference containing any information. The collecting of material is thus simplified by the small amount of material actually available, but rendered difficult by the baldness of the records in which the materials have to be sought.
The vestments worn by clergy of the Presbyterian Churches are not so much ecclesiastical as professional or academical, like the barrister's gown. They are at most four in number: the cassock, scarf, bands, and gown, to which the hood of the wearer's degree is added.