224. And not he alone but all the Calvinists do generally allow and use prescribed Forms of Prayer as Mons Durell hath very largely made out to whose Observations I will add two very Learned Men of the French Church who freely own that Liturgies and stated Forms are of very ancient use in the Christian Church and these are the Lord Du-plessis and Mons Daillè both which my Adversary often cites as if they were of his Opinion concerning the late Original of Prescribed Forms But first Mornay Lord Du-Plessis in his Book of the Mass having shewed That the Jews had Forms of public Service adds the First Christians then framed themselves after this manner of Service (d) Mornay of the Mass Book 1. pag. 19. and so runs the parallel between the Jewish and the Primitive Liturgy And a little after he tells us That those Authors who lived about the Year 800 declare That some Forms were used from the beginning and that they had industriously searched out the ancient Service of the Church and they might also in their days possibly find the Books of Rites or Prescribed Forms used in the Church before the Pope assisted by the Power of Great Princes had abolished the use and memory thereof (e) Id. ib. pag 22. Again he owns a very ancient Form of Prayer used at the Offertory (f) Ib chap 5. pag. 36. and saith there was a General Prayer for the whole World and the Estate of the Church which the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Form whereof continued as we have seen it since the time of the Primitive Church and is to be found and read in the Writers of that time (g) Ib. pag 37. He also confesseth in the same place that there was anciently One Form of Salutation and Prefaces Yea in this whole Book he every where owns there were Primitive Forms long before the Roman Church had corrupted their Service and speaking of the Liturgies of the Greek and Latin Churches he doth not so much as pretend they had no prescribed Forms only he notes That though in substance the Service of these Churches do agree together yet we must not imagine there was one and the same prescript Form observed and kept in them all (h) Mornay ut supr chap. 6. pag. 43. We see he grants Forms in all Churches but so as there was some Variety between the Forms of several Churches And now how is it possible that this Great and Learned Man had he not been misinterpreted should be Evidence for my Adversaries Opinion of Liturgies coming in after the Year 500 The like may be said of M. Dailé who understood Antiquity as well as any Writer that ever was of the French Reformed Church Now he frequently cites the Book which goes under the Title of the Apostolical Constitutions ascribed to S. Clement wherein there is a very ancient Form of Liturgy used as we have shewed in the Church of Antioch wherein there are prescribed Forms for all the Parts of Divine Service at large Now this Learned Man thus speaks of that Writer He seems to have compiled his Work a little before the Nicene Council (i) Dailé de Confirm lib. 2. cap. 11. p. 120. And in another place he saith In this Book of the Apostolical Constitutions I think no man who understands any thing of Antiquity can deny but that the Author hath painted out the Form of Ecclesiastical Worship such as it really was in those Times when he Writ (k) Idem de Relig. cultus objecto lib. 3. cap. 12. By which we see that he believed The Ecclesiastical Worship was performed by a prescribed Liturgy even before the First Council of Nice Which appears also to have been his Opinion by his citing this Liturgy of the Constitutions with divers other ancient Liturgies and then concluding thus We our selves truly do not deny but that very many of these Liturgies which we have produced are ancient and written about the very beginning of the Fourth Century though we think that they were corrupted by Additions and Alterations at several times after their first Original (l) Dailé de cult Latin relig lib. 3. cap. 13. p. 359. Wherefore this studious Searcher into Antiquity can be no Witness for my Adversary since he very expresly affirms That these Liturgies were written out for Public use in the very beginning of the Fourth Century that is as soon as the Church became setled by the Conversion of Constantine the Great To these we may add the Testimony of the Helvetian Divines and others who did not Reform after Luther's Pattern Bullenger saith The Church hath Supplications she also hath Holy days and Fasts the Church celebrates the Sacraments according to certain Laws at certain times in a certain place and by a prescribed Form which is according to the received Rules and Vsage of the Church (m) Bulleng Decad. 2. Serm. 1. pag. 38. In which Words he evidently justifies a prescribed Form and owns That the Church hath power to make such a Form and that all her Members are obliged to use it The eminent Lud. Lavater himself published the common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book of the Tigurine Church which I have seen and read The Title of which is this A Little Book of the Rites and Institutions of the Trigurine Church Wherein is contained The whole Order of their Divine Service with the several Forms by which they Administer the Sacraments and all other Offices which belong to the Ministerial Function (n) De ritib. institutis Eccles Tigurinae Opusculum Edit à Ludovic Lavatero An. 1559. so that they also have stated and prescribed Forms And Zanchius one of the most Learned of the Divines of that Age tells us That Concord and Decency or Order cannot be observed in the Church nor can all things be done decently and in order as S. Paul commands without Rules and Traditions by which as by certain Bonds Order and Decorum is preserved because there is such diversity in Mens Manners such variety in their Minds and such opposition in their Judgments that no Polity is firm unless it be constituted by certain Laws and without a Stated Form no Rites can be preserved (o) Hieron Lanch Tom 7. In Com. praecip cap. Doctrin Christ Loc. 16. So that he pleads for the necessity of such a Form and accordingly all setled Protestant Churches have composed a Liturgy and made Forms of Divine Service for their Clergy to Officiate by So have the Churches of Holland whose Common-Prayer-Book I have seen Translated into the Greek Tongue with this Title (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Impres Ludg. Bat. An. 1648. The Christian and Orthodox Doctrin and Order of the Belgick Churches viz. Their Confession of Faith their Catechism their Liturgy and their Ecclesiastical Canons And in that Part which is their Liturgy there are the Forms of Prayer prescribed for Baptism for the Lords Supper
way of Eminence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all Rites and Forms not set down there though they were writ down by the Fathers he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not written things which is further clear by the occasion of this whole Chapter wherein S. Basil is vindicating himself for using a Phrase and Form of Doxology which was not written in Scripture and his Argument is That the Church used many Rites and Forms which were not written in the Bible such as renouncing the Devil and Praying toward the East and the Forms used in Sacramental Administrations Now Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian Cyprian and many others as we have shewed had written concerning every one of these things but still they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not written in Scripture but derived from Tradition and therefore they ought not saith S. Basil to blame me if I used a Form of Doxology not written in Scripture Now this clear exposition of the place alledged shews our Authors base disingenuity who to serve a turn and patch up an Argument against Liturgies wilfully perverts S. Basil's words which being rightly understood are so far from condemning Forms or proving they were not written that they prove they were composed long before S Basil's time and then owned for Catholic Traditions Finally whereas he insinuates that S. Bosil counts these Forms to be Mysteries not to be published and thence infers that to write them down was to publish them and therefore doubtless they were not written down I reply That these Forms were daily used among the Faithful and they were not nice to publish them to these it was only the Catechumens and Infidels from whom they kept these Mysteries and considering the charge they laid upon the Faithful and the Priests not to divulge them to those who were without the Church there was no need to be afraid to write them down since the Books were only in their custody who then believed it was a damnable Sin to let the Unbaptized see these Books or hear the words of them And he hath answered this Argument himself by shewing us that the Heathens who also counted their Forms of worship to be Mysteries not to be divulged to the uninitiated did write these Forms in Books which were kept by their Priests (n) Compare Disc of Liturg. pag. 28 with 122. 123. Therefore writing is very consistent with concealing Mysteries from Strangers And there is nothing in this place of S. Basil which proves there were no written Prayers in his time Thirdly He alledges that S. Basil in Prayer with the People used the Doxology two ways both Glory be to God and the Father with the Son and with the holy Ghost and by the Son in the holy Ghost (o) Basil de Sp. Sanct cap. 1. pag. 144. and though the same Father say that the Form of Baptizing the Creed and the Doxology ought to agree yet he varied this short Form twice in one day from whence he infers more than once that S. Basil would not be bound up by any Form (p) Disc of Liturgies pag. 104. pag. 130. I answer This Objection is taken out of the same suspected Tract but I will let that pass and observe that though S. Basil saith this was done in the Prayers with the People yet it doth not follow that this was in any part of the Office it might be in the conclusion of his Forenoon and Afternoon Homily which being performed at the usual hours of Morning and Evening Prayers and when the People were met to Pray yea the Prayers both going before and following the Homily he may properly enough say this was done in the Prayers with the People Now these Homilies or Sermons being S. Basil's own composures he thought he might vary the Doxology there as he used to do at other times but fortuning to use an expression that savoured of the Arian Heresy The Orthodox People who had been used to a right Form of Doxology in their Liturgy ever since the days of Gregory Thaumaturgus as was shewed before were able by that to censure these new and strange ways of expressing himself (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil dc Sp. S. cap. 1. And were so angry at him for this Variation that he was forced to write this Book to vindicate those Phrases Wherefore this variety of Doxology being not used in the Liturgy but the Sermons or Homilies is nothing to his purpose nor will it prove that S. Basil varied from the prescribed Forms much less will it make out there were no prescribed Forms since our Clergy use variety of Doxologies at the end of their Sermons but it would be Ridiculous to Argue from thence that they will not be bound to say the Gloria Patri in that Form wherein it is set down in the Liturgy If it be again objected that S. Basil hath great variety of Doxologies yet extant in the end of his Homilies and therefore had this variation been after Sermons the People could hardly have perceived it I answer The latter of these Forms was used by the Arians in a very ill Sense to intimate the inequality of the Father and the Son and though no doubt S. Basil meant well yet it did so evidently tend towards Heresy and was so very different from the Old Orthodox Form in the Liturgy that the People who could digest various Phrases in unprescribed Composures provided the Sense was Orthodox took check at this dangerous Variation and by the way we may learn from hence how great a security it is to the Faith for the People to be accustomed to Orthodox Forms which doth enable them to observe yea and correct any kind of dangerous Innovations But if my Adversaries will not allow this variation to have been any where but in the Prayers though there is no Reason to allow that yet supposing it were so Then this was an Action of S. Basil which is not to be imitated and since he had like to have run into Heresy by taking this undue liberty it will make nothing for the Credit of Extempore Prayers that they expose such as use them to the danger at least of venting Heretical expressions involuntarily And S. Basils being forced to beg Pardon for it shews it ought not to be quoted for a Precedent yet after all it this variation were in the Prayers it shews there were then Forms well known to the People and confirms us in the necessity of prescribing and imposing such Forms to prevent Heresy from creeping into the Church which otherwise may get ground even by the well meant expressions of some Eminent Extempore Man Fourthly He affirms that S. Basil did not teach his Monks to pray by any Liturgy but to choose their Expressions out of Scripture (r) Basil Constit monast cap. 1. p. 668. 669. I answer Divers of the learned deny this Book to be genuin (s) Scultet medul p. 1056. See Discourse of Liturg. p. 120.
it was used in the Third and in the beginning of the Fourth Century in all the Churches of the World 'T is true there was an Orthodox Addition made to it in the Time of that Theodocius grounded on a Miracle as Nicephorus reports (m) Niceph. Histor lib. 2. cap. 46. But the Original of this Hymn is taken from the Prophet Isaiah and it was used in that Form long before this Emperour was born yea it seems it was accounted to be a Form very Sacred since they durst not alter it but by the direction of a Miracle so tenacious was that Age of their ancient Forms of Worship Gelaâ— us Episc Rom. A.D. 492. § 14. Pope Gelasius was one of the most Learned of the Roman Bishops and though as we have seen in the Life of Damasus and of Innocent there was a Liturgy at Rome before yet he took great pains to polish and reform it For all Authors affirm That he made Hymns for his Church like to those of S. Ambrose (n) Pâ—ntifical vit â— las item Platâ—na in vit Cent. Magâ—eb 5 Cent. p. 1271. c. And that he Composed some Graduals Prefaces and Collects (o) Pontif cal ut supr item Câ—sâ—andr Liturg And Durandus affirms that this Gelasius the One and filtieth Bishop from S. Peter was he that principally put the Canon into that Order wherein we now see it (p) Durand â—at lib. 4. fol. 67. iâ—em Burnes v a Gelas pag. 55. and some add that he enlarged the Preface and put in It is meet and right so to do But let us hear the Learned Du-Plessis Gelasius came in the Year 490 and he ranged and set in order the Collects and Complâ—nds amongst the which are some that do yet stand and continue pure and uncorrupted (q) Mâ—rnay of the Mass Book l. cap. 60. So that if we regard the account which we had before in the Life of Pope Innocent (r) See the beginning of this Century §. 1. or the full Evidence of these Authors ancient and modern we must grant there were prescribed Forms at Rome long before Gelasius Time but being by continuance of Time and frequent Transcribing become somewhat imperfect he undertakes to rectifie them by some Alterations and by adding something of his own made the Offices more compleat His putting the Canon into Order adding to the Prefaces and his ranging the Collects into a Method shews there were Collects and a Preface and a Canon before so that the use of prescribed Forms did not begin in his Time and yet because he took so much pains about the Liturgy of the Roman Church That Book which he had Corrected and put in Order was called Codex Gelasianus The Gelasian Book And John the Deacon who writ the Life of Pope Gregory saith that He contracted this Gelasion Book and out of it compiled the Gregorian Office (s) Johan Diac. vit Gregor 1. lib. 2. cap. 17. yet so as it seems the Book still remained in some places for the Chronicle of the Abby of Saint Richerius (t) Chronic. S. Richerii apud Dacherii Spicileg Tom. 4. reckons up Nineteen Missals of Gelasius among the Volumes in their Library And it is plain enough that Pope Gregory took the same liberty with this Gelasian Office that he had done with those our of which he first extracted it For there were Forms from the beginning and none but great Bishops presumed to alter them which had been a very impertinent labour if after they had thus Corrected the Offices they had not imposed the use of them on their subordinate Clergy and doubtless they would never have taken this pains if every private Minister might vary the Office every day at his pleasure Which fancy this Book of Gelasius utterly confutes and proves there was a Canon for the Consecration of the Eucharist written down in a Book at least an hundred years before S. Gregories Time yea we see this very Book of Gelasius was taken out of elder Forms which makes it to be somewhat strange that my Adversary should cite and own this Gelasian Book and at the same time and in the same Page affirm There was no setled Form of Consecration at Rome before Gregory 's time (u) Disc of Liturgies p 83. But of this I shall have occasion to say more in the next Century And shall conclude this Age with observing That Clovis the first Christian King of France soon after his Conversion placed certain Monks in the City of Rheims giving them great Priviledges and Possessions and the Rule which they were governed by was that which Macarius had Composed about One hundred years before for his Monks of Nitria the Ninth Article whereof enjoyns them To love the Course of their own Monastery above all things (w) Cursum Monasterii super omnia diligas Reg. S. Macar art 9. ap Cointe Annal Eccles Franc. Tom. 1. pag. 178. An. â—96 That is That they should delight in that Form of Service which was prescribed for their Monastery for a Course signifies an Office for Divine-Service And therefore Gregory of Tours saith That he himself writ a Book of Ecclesiastical Courses (x) Gregor Turon lib. 10. cap. 31. that is of Divine Offices and the same Author calls Saying the whole Service Fulfilling the Course (y) Post impleâ—â—m in Oratione Câ—râ—um id de glor Confess cap. 38. So the Roman Course is put for the Roman Missal (z) Spâ—lm Concil Tom. I. pag 177. An. 680. And in one of our ancient Saxon Councils it is Ordained That in all Churches the Course shall be reverently performed at the Canonical hours (a) Concil Calcuth Can 7. An 787. ibid. p. 295. From which use of the word we may learn That the most ancient Monks long before the Time of Benedict had their prescribed Forms of Prayer which they used in their own Oratories though among these Men who did a little incline to Raptures and some degrees of Enthusiasm if any where we might have expected to have found Extempore Prayers I shut up this Century with the Words of Du-Plessis Thus we are come to the Five hundredth year after Christ finding in all this time One Service consisting of Confessions and Prayers Psalms Reading Preaching Blessing and Distributing the Sacraments according to the Institution of our Lord. Mornay of the Mass Book I. Chap. 6. pag 44. So that he did not think this Age was much corrupted And yet we have proved and he owns that Prescribed Forms were now generally used CHAP. II. Of LITVRGIES in the Sixth Century WE need go no Lower for Authorities to prove the Use of LITURGIES because our Adversary freely and frequently grants that they began in the end of the Former and the beginning of This Century But I must here note in general concerning this Concession First That if they began no sooner yet they prescribe to at least Twelve-hundred Years and to universal Practice and
Orthodox and Heretics agreed in the use of Forms none so much as thought of Extempore Prayers no Nation pleaded for expected or enjoyed such a Liberty nor did any of the Clergy or Laity complain That the imposing there Forms was an Innovation or hindrance to their Gifts or an invading of their Christian Liberty § 12. There is nothing clearer in all History S. Gregor Mag. Episc Roman An. Dom. 590. than that there was a Canon or Form of Consecrating the Communion at Rome long before the Time of S. Gregory the Great The very Words of it have been produced out of S. Ambrose his Book of Sacraments An. 374. and we have proved it cited by the Author of the Questions out of the Old and New Testament who writ in the Fourth Century We have also brought in the plain Testimonies of Innocent Celestine Leo Gelasius and Vigilius all of them Bishops of Rome long before Gregory's Time And we now add That Johan Moschus declares there was a certain Form of the Canon at Rome in the Time of Pope Agapetus who lived An. 535 (y) Joan. Mosch pratum Spirit cap. 150. Bib. Patr. Tom. pag. 1121. And that the Lord Du Plessis whom my Adversary cites often shews very largely that there was a Canon of the Mass at Rome which was very pure and Orthodox before Gregory's Time yea he sets down divers parts of it and assures us it was common to all both Priests and People (z) Mornay of the Mass Book I. Ch. 7. pag. 53. And John the Deacon who writ S. Gregory's Life saith That he corrected the Gelasian Book for the Communion-Office taking away some things altering some few and adding other things to explain the Gospels putting it all into one Volume (a) Johan Diac. vit Gregor lib. 2. cap. 17. Which shews there was a Canon before written down in the Gelasian Book which S. Gregory only altered in some few things and it doth not appear he added any more to it except these Words O Lord order our days in thy Peace deliver us from Eternal damnation and make us to be numbred among the Flock of thine Elect For these are the only Words that all Writers say were of his Making and which he added to the Canon (b) Johan Diac. ut supr Item Pedae histor lib. 2. cap. 1. p. 53 Naucler Gener. 20. pag. 743. ita Platina vit Greg. pag. 82. wherefore he was only the Corrector of the Old Canon not the Maker of a New one And whereas some Authors of later Times ascribe the Composing of the Roman Offices to him we have seen it is usual in most Writers to call such as only corrected and reformed Liturgies The Authors of them by which they mean no more than those who published them in a more compleat Form than before But my Adversary who can prove any thing undertakes to make out two difficult things in relation to this Pope Gregory First That there was no Form of Consecration at Rome before his time Secondly That when another had made this Form he did not impose it on others (c) Disc of Lit. pag. 83 84 85 86 87. The former of these Assertions he proves from a Passage in Saint Gregory his Epistles which the ignorant editor of the Discourse of Liturgies hath put into a wrong Page But I shall cite it at large and then will examine the true meaning of it We therefore say the Lords Prayer immediately after the Prayer of Consecration because it was the custom of the Apostles with that Prayer alone to Consecrate the Host and it seems to me very inconvenient that we should say over the Host that Prayer which a Scholastical Man had composed and not say that Form which our Lord himself composed over his Body and Blood (d) Ut precem quam Scholasticus composuerat super Oblationem diceremus c. Greg. Epist 63. lib. 7. pag. 230. Now from hence he gathers that Scholasticus is a Mans Name who was Contemporary with S. Gregory and since he affirms this Scholasticus composed the Canon therefore the Canon as he pretends could not be made before Gregory's Time The weakness and mistakes of which Inference we shall easily perceive if we consider the occasion and the sense of these Words S. Gregory was accused for imitating the Custom at Constantinople In ordering the Lords Prayer to be repeated immediately after the Canon and these Words are his defence of his bringing in this Custom Now doubtless it had been more rational to object his setting up a New Canon made by a late obscure Author if he had done any such thing than to alledge his only adding the Lords Prayer to it and if he had first brought in this Canon of Scholasticus that had been an imitation of Constantinople too so far as it was a Canon for they had long used the Canon of S. Basil and that of S. Chrysostom there but of this the Objectors take no notice which makes it probable that the Canon was setled long before it was a Prayer which he found and added the Lords Prayer to it But my Adversary urges S. Gregory's Saying That the Apostles only Consecrated with the Lords Prayer and therefore Scholasticus his Canon must be composed about S. Gregory's Time Why so was there not above Five hundred years between the Apostles and S. Gregory If this Canon were not extant in their Time might it not be made in some of the intervening Ages and yet be long enough before S. Gregory And indeed there is a Mistake as learned Men think in the Popes premises for he is supposed to refer to S. Hierom who only saith Christ taught his Apostles that the Faithful might daily say in the Sacrifice of his Body Our Father (e) Hieren adv Pelag. Tom. 2. pag. 469. But neither he nor any Ancient Writer before this Gregory did ever affirm That the Apostles themselves used no other Form of Consecration but only the Lords Prayer it being generally believed they used the Words of Institution recorded in the Gospel and the Lords Prayer when they Consecrated to which long before S. Basil's and S. Ambrose his Time as we have shewed other parts of the Canon were added And for the Roman Canon whatever Du-Moulin and my Adversary say (f) Disc of Lit pag. 84 85. Du-Plessis and other both ancient and modern Writers do agree That several of the old Popes made the several Parts of it in divers Ages long before the Time of Gregory (g) Mornay of the Mass B.I. Chap. 6. p. 44. But Gelasius gathered together all these Additions and put them into that Form wherein Gregory found it and he as Cassander thinks is called by the Title of Scholasticus because he was first a Scholastical Man before he was chosen Pope (h) Gelasius ex Scholastico Papa factus Exp. vet Miss ap Cassand de Liturg. lib. 1. And if this be so as it is very probable then
still extant was made at least as early as the Age in which S. Martin lived (p) Bona rerum Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 12. in Append. And that in the Time of Sidonius Apollinaris the Clergy there generally used a common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book in that same Fifth Century An. 475. We have proved That in the end of the Sixth Age Gregory the Great directed Augustin the Monk to read over the Gallican Liturgy as well as the Roman which shews it was then Written in a Book Yea my Adversaries own Author Mornay in the place cited by him which he must needs see affirms That before the Time of Gregory there was another manner of Service in France than there was at Rome and that Innocent and Gelasius who were Popes in the Fifth Century as well as Gregory had used their utmost endeavours to bring them to conform to the Roman Order (q) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap. 8. pag. 63. Which supposes plainly they had a Service of their own differing from the Roman in Innocents and in Gelasius his Time that is in the Fifth Century and that Epistle of Hildewinus to Lewes the Gentile An. 825. mentioned in Mornay implies the same thing For Hildewinus saith We have still divers very ancient Mass-Books almost consumed with extreme Age containing the Order of the Gallican Service which was used from the time that the Faith was first received in this part of the West until we admitted the Roman Order (r) Hildevinus Abb. praefat ad opera Dionys Areop Where we see He not only affirms they had a Form of Service from their first Conversion but that in the beginning of the Ninth Age some of the Copies of that Service were worn out with extreme Antiquity so that probably these Copies were writ in the Sixth Age And from hence we may discern the falshood of my Adversaries Pretence That there were no Service-Books in France before the 8th Century Secondly He affirms That these Books were used at the discretion of him that Officiated But this is as false as the former for we have proved by divers French Canons in the Fifth and Sixth Ages That all the Clergy in one Province were bound to use the same Form of Service which was used by their Metropolitan And in the Eighth Century Theodulphus Bishop of Orleance enjoyns his Clergy When they came to his Synod to bring their Common Prayer-Books with them and two or three Clerks who assisted them in the celebrating Divine Service that so it might appear hour exactly and diligently they had performed their Duties (s) Theodulph Aurel. Ep. ad Cler. cap. 4. ap Bon. rer Liturg. p. 349. which is a stricter course than is now taken in our Church But my Adversary pretends he hath Evidence for this Liberty out of an ancient Chronicle in Mornay (t) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap 8. pag. 64. which saith That every one at his pleasure had depraved the Book of Offices by adding and diminishing To which I Reply That these Words are not in Mornay and if they be in the Chronicle of Engolism as the Margen recites them The meaning is plainly this That those who writ out these Forms had depraved them by leaving out some things and putting in others Not that those who used these Books altered or added at their pleasure for he who officiates cannot properly be said to have depraved a Book by not reading it aright it was the Scribes who writ the Copies falsly and variously that had depraved the Old Office so much that it gave a good Pretence to French Kings to bring in the Roman Service Herein therefore he hath no ground for his false Assertion That these Books were used at the discretion of him that did Officiate Thirdly He mistakes again in saying That Charlemaign in the beginning of the Ninth Age reformed them after the Roman guise For first his own Author Mornay affirms That King Pepin for reverence of Pope Steven received the whole Order of Rome and cites two Capitulars for this wherein Charles the Great declares That his Father Pepin first put down the Gallican and set up the Roman Service in France (u) Capit. lib. 1. cap. 80 lib. 5. cap. 219. in Mornay ut supr pag 64. Now Pope Steven died An. 755. which is near Fifty years before the Ninth Age began Moreover the Centuriators out of Sigebert and divers ancient Historians tell us That it is apparent there was a different way of Singing in the Roman and the Gallican Churches till Pepin upon his being made King of France by the Pope brought in the Roman Rites and way of Singing into the Gallican Church (w) Magdebur Cent. 8. cap. 6. pag. 342 343. Now this was in the year 751. that is in the midst of the Eighth Age. 'T is true Charles the Great did go on with the same work but then it was before the beginning of the Ninth Age which is the Period that my Adversary assigns to this Matter For finding still that some Churches kept up the Old way of Singing he sent two Clerks to Rome to learn there the Authentic way of Singing and they first taught the Church of Metz and then all France (x) Magdeb. ibid Sigeb Chron. An. 774. But this was in the year 774 Six and twenty years before the Ninth Age began Again He owns this Uniformity was brought in by his Father Pepin and enjoyns it once more (y) Capitul Franc. Tom. I. in Cap. An. 788. pag. 203. about the Year 788. The next Year in another Capitular Charles the Great obliges the Monks also to follow that Roman Order of Singing which his Father appointed when he put down the Old Gallican way (z) Capitul ibid. An. 789. cap. 78. p. 239. In the same year also was this Law made That the Clergy should have Orthodox Books very well Corrected lest those who desire to pray to God aright by Ill written Books should ask amiss and therefore none was to write out the Gospel the Psalter or Missal but a Man of mature Age (a) Capitul ibid. Tom. I. cap. 70. p. 237. And finally The last Persons sent from Rome about compleating this Uniformity were Adrian's two Chanters who came into France An. 790 (b) Magdeb. Cent. 8. cap. 6. pag. 343. Sigebert An. 790. Wherefore he is out in his Chronology as to this Matter because the Roman Order was brought into the Gallican Church by Pepin first and then universally setled there by Charles the Great before the Ninth Age began But to let that pass it is certain there was no more liberty allowed to any Ministers in the Gallican Church before the Roman Offices came in there than there was afterward because it is plain they had a Liturgy before imposed strictly by divers Canons of several Councils and while that Gallican Office was in Force the Clergy were as much bound to use those Forms as they were to use the
the Sybils Books their extraordinary Ritual had also a Liturgy sent to them in Writing by Apollo He also mentions a Public Table wherein their usual Prayer was writ and saith That Scipio reformed their common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book common-prayer-(q) Ibid. p. 124. We leave him or his Friends to reconcile these Contradictions But being sure the Heathens did conceal their Mysteries and yet write them in Books and read them out of them He must infallibly grant That the Christians might both conceal their Mysteries and yet write them in Books also and read them out of them and if the Christians as he saith learned of the Heathens to conceal their Administrations they might also learn of them to write them in Books and deliver those Books to the custody of the Clergy to keep them from the sight of such as were not Initiated And this sufficiently shews the weakness and falshood of his Consequence viz. That the Christians could have no Written Liturgies because they concealed their Mysteries from the Uninitiated But since he hath filled so many needless Pages upon this Subject I will give some short Touches upon all that looks like Objection in each of them First He discourses as if this Silence and concealing of Mysteries were to be restrained especially to the Fourth and Fifth Ages (r) Disc of Lit. pag. 28. And the two Authors which furnished him with these Quotations Dailé (s) Dail de object cult lib. 2. cap. 25. and Chamier (t) Chamier Panstrat Tom. 4. lib. 6. cap. 8. both say This sort of Niceness did not begin till the Fourth or Fifth Age. Now if this be so and his Quotations generally fall within this Period then for all this doughty Argument the Chrians might have Written Liturgies for Three hundred years or more at the first since they did not endeavour in those first and best Times to conceal their Mysteries as these Men think Therefore we may have Precedents of prescribed Forms in the first Ages though all this were true Secondly Their calling the Sacraments Mysteries did not hinder them from Administring them in an audible Voice before the Faithful every day and therefore this doth not prove That they durst not commit them to Writing for daily reading or speaking these Words in public with so loud a Voice that all the Faithful might hear and answer was much more a publishing them than Writing them in Books committed to the custody of the Clergy So that all that Margen which he heaps up (u) Disc of Lit. pag. 29. only proves That they concealed them from the Unbaptized who were turned out when these Mysteries began as well as kept from seeing the Books and so remained ignorant of the Solemn Words but the Faithful were so well acquainted with the very Phrases and Expressions that if the least hint were but given them in a Sermon before a promiscuous Auditory it put them in mind of that Passage in the Offices which the Preacher hinted at Which undeniably proves they were known and usual Forms and being such they must of necessity be written down otherwise such Variations would have been made that no Appeal could have been made to the Faithful concerning any part of the Office because no Extempore Man now can appeal to his Congregation for his Words or Phrases used some time before Therefore they were Mysteries only with respect to the Uninitiated but well-known Forms to the Faithful and written down to prevent all Variation Thirdly As to the tedious Proofs of the Gentiles Secrecy (w) Disc of Lit. pag. 30 31 32 33. I have noted that he owns they writ down these Mysteries and pag. 32. he saith That the Romans had a Book of their public Rites as old as King Tarquin 's Time and that Valerius Max. mentions one who was punished for letting an unconcerned Person Transcribe it Which shews how impertinent all these Quotations are to prove his Point which is That Mysteries must not at all be committed to Writing Indeed fearing this Consequence he adds in the next Page 33. If they did commit them to Writing it was in such a Character as none of the Vninitiated understood But then he makes out nothing but that the Egyptians described their Mysteries in such unintelligible Hieroglyphicks which doth not prove that either Greeks or Romans writ them in such Figures much less doth it shew that the Christians used any Hieroglyphicks to conceal their Mysteries and therefore there is no reason to argue from that Custom peculiar to Pagan Egypt as if we might learn the Christian Usage from thence Fourthly The excluding the Catechamens from hearing the Prayers and refusing to recite any Phrases of them in a Sermon made to a promiscuous Auditory which he speaks of (x) Disc of Lit. pag. 35 36. are very good Arguments That these Offices were celebrated by prescribed Forms which Words had they been suffered daily to hear in the Church when the Administration was performed or had often heard them in Sermons they might easily learn and remember them And it was because they were prescribed constant invariable Forms that they durst neither let them stay in the Church when they repeated them nor openly mention them in a Sermon Had they Officiated variously and in his Extempore way they might have stood by for Seven years and heard the Sermons in which some part of them was referred to and there had been no danger of their learning them And since we see the Heathens did write down their Mysteries and make them known to the Initiated the Christians might do so also and yet keep them secret enough from the Unconverted or Unbaptized for they might as well keep them from seeing their Books of Mysteries as to turn them out of the Church to prevent their hearing them And his instance of the Creed pag. 37. proves this for the Creed was written down and expounded in the Time of Cyril and Ruffinus and yet then and long after it was kept secret from the Catechumens till some small time before the Day of their Baptism therefore every thing that was written was not published to the Uninitiated Fifthly Baronius doth not say the Primitive Literae formatae were not drawn up in Writing Spondanus indeed his Epitomator doth say something to that purpose (y) Disc of Lit. pag. 38. c Spondan â—pit An. 325. H. 44. but Baronius himself only saith That the Council of Nice would not put the Words of these Formed Epistles the private Cognizances by which Stranger-Christians were known to be Catholics where-ever they came into the Canons of their Council But he adds They agreed upon a Form there and setting down what it was he saith Such was the Form prescribed by the Fathers for these Formed Epistles (z) Baron An. 325. §. 166 167. pag. 32â— But still it was a Secret writ down then but not published among the Canons for fear the Hereticks might get Copies and deceive the Catholic Bishops thereby Which
and for all the Occasional Offices which Book so translated was Printed at Leiden An. 1648. To this I may add another Book put out by Jo. Alasco a Noble Polonian Protestant in the days of King Edward the Sixth the Title whereof runs thus The Form and Manner of the whole Ecclesiastical Ministration in the Church for Strangers and especially Germans appointed at London by the most Religious King Edward the Sixth An. 1550 (q) Forma ratio tota Ecclesiastici ministerii c. Lond. An. 1550. Wherein there are also divers Set Forms of Prayer and Thanksgiving to be used in the several Offices of their Church And to name no more I have in my possession a Scotch-Common-Prayer-Book said to be Composed by Mr. Knox containing A Kalendar with Holy-days The Psalms of David in Meeter Forms of Prayer in the Visitation of the Sick Forms of Confession of Sin A Form of Intercession for all Estates of Men A Form of Prayer for the King Forms for Administring the Lords Supper and Baptism The Form of Matrimony and other occasional Offices c. for the use of the Kirk of Scotland Imprinted at Middleburgh An. 1594. I do not cite these Books as if there were no other or no more Protestant Liturgies but because I have seen all these lately and have most of them by me and because these are sufficient to convince any man That all established Protestant Churches do approve of and use Prescribed Forms so that if we should cast off ours to oblige that sort of Dissenters whom Mr. Clarkson Patronizes we must act contrary to the judgment and practice of the most famous Protestant Churches abroad and the most eminent Reformed Divines of all Nations and therefore I refer it to any Man to consider if this be a probable way to unite us with all Forein Protestants as some vainly discourse § 4. I know nothing can remain to be objected now unless it be That there are some great and just Exceptions lye against our Liturgy in particular To which I shall not now Reply by Repeating what I have said in my Larger Discourses upon the Common-Prayer where every one of the Objections that I have ever met with are considered and answered already But I shall now shew what esteem our Common-Prayer-Book hath been in among the most learned and judicious Protestant Writers ever since it was first Compos'd And I begin with Alexander Alesius an eminent Scotch Divine who Translated King Edward's Common-Prayer Book into Latin and in his Preface to it he saith He did this that it might be seen and read by many for the honour of the English Church whose care and diligence herein he doubted not would be for the example and comfort of some and for the shame of others and he hoped it might provoke the rest of the Reformed to imitate this most noble and divine Work in setling the Church believing that God put it into his hands to publish it at that time for the General Good (r) Praef. ad Libr. precum per Alex. Aâ—es inter Buceri script Anglicaâ— pag. 373 3â—5 c. with much more to the same purpose And here I must note that probably this was that Interpretation of our English Service Book which the judicious and modest Mr. Bucer looked over so diligently to satisfie himself whether he ought to conform to it And upon this he saith When I throughly understood it I gave Thanks to God who had granted to this Church to Reform her Rites to that degree of Purity For I found nothing in them which was not taken out of the Word of God or at least which was contrary thereunto if it were candidly expounded (s) Buceri censura super Libr. Sâ—croâ— praef pag. 456. And when by Archbishop Cranmer's special Command he had perused the whole Book in order to his censuring what he thought was to be amended He declares his Judgment thus In the prescript Form for the Communion and the daily Prayers I see nothing writ in this Book which is not taken out of the Word of God if not in express Words as the Psalms and Lessons yet in Sense as the Collects and also the Order of these Lessons and Prayers and the Times when they are to be used are very agreeable to the Word of God and to the Constitution observed in the Ancient Church (t) Buceri censura c. cap. 1. p. 457. And afterwards he is for writing down all holy Rites and the Words of the sacred Administrations and he owns that the Church of England hath done this very purely and conformable to Christ's Institution As for the things which he modestly supposed might be altered for the better it is evident That most of them were regulated afterwards and many of them were rectified according to his Advice there so that we not only see he was clearly for the use of prescribed Forms but liked the Book of King Edward with some few Amendments and had he seen our present Common-Prayer no doubt he would have wholly approved it The next Evidence shall be the most learned Archbishop of Spalato who affirms against Suarez That the English Liturgy containeth nothing in it which is not holy which is not pious and truly Christian as well as Catholic (u) Ant. de Dom. Spalat osteus error Fran. Suarez cap. 6. §. 82. pag. 340. And a little after The Form of Divine Offices that is of Public Prayers for all England which as I have said is taken out of the most ancient and most laudable Liturgies approved even by the Roman Church collected with great Judgment so as to leave out those things which the Romanists themselves are not very ready to defend (w) Ibid §. 37. pag. 342. Thus this Great Man stops the Mouth of a Malicious Enemy to our Liturgy And Causabon at the same time had as great an esteem for it For in his Epistle to King James the First he saith Your Majesty hath such a Church in your Kingdoms partly so instituted of Old and partly so regulated by your Endeavours that none at this day comes nearer to the Form of the most Flourishing Ages of the Ancient Church following a middle way between those who have offended both in the Excess and the Defect (x) Causaâ— Ep. ad Reg. jac praeâ—ix ad exerc Baron And in an Epistle to Salmasius he saith If his Conjecture do not fail the soundest part of the whole Reformation is in England (y) Id. Ep. ad Salmas qu. 709. Moreover Salmasius himself though in some Points he differed from our Church yet relates it as a Reason of King Charles the Martyrs constancy to our Liturgy That the Form of it was long since approved by most of the Reformed Pastors and those Men of the first Rank both in France and elsewhere and as being a Book which seemed to contain nothing but what agreed to Piety and to the Evangelical Doctrin (z)
them repeated Again he cites this Father to prove that those who were Baptized were taught the Words of the Lords Prayer (u) Isid lib 4. ep 24. Disc of Lit. pag. 2. Which shews that Forms were not held unlawful in that Age. But if my Adversary had not been obliged to keep back all that makes for Liturgies it is not easy to be imagined why he should never mention that Famous Epistle which Isidore Writ on purpose to expound that old piece of Liturgy Pronounced by the Bishop in the public Forms as we saw in the Constitutions S. Chrysostom and others that is Peace be with you unto which as Isidore tells us the people answered and with thy Spirit (w) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isid lib. 1. ep 122. This Form so well explained by this Father gives us reason to believe that the rest of those Liturgies wherein this known Form is found were used in his time and that when he advises a Clergy-Man not to abuse the Holy Liturgy (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. lib. 1. ep 313. he means that he ought not to profane and desecrate the sacred Forms by a most unholy Life and Conversation especially since he was not only a Scholar of S. Chrysostoms who made a Liturgy but also tells us (y) Id. lib. 1. ep 90. that the Women in his time Sung their part of the Church Service and when they were deservedly Excommunicate they were not all wed this great Priviledge which sufficiently shews there were Forms prescribed in his days wherein all the People had their share § 4. His Contemporary was the Learned Synesius Synesius An. Dom. 412. who lived also in the same Country he was bred among the Gentile Philosophers and not Converted till he was come to be of a good Age So that he had learned before he became a Christian what silence and secrecy was due to Mysteries and therefore he furnishes my Adversary with divers Passages concerning the Heathens care to conceal them (z) Disc of Lit. pag. 34. but since he hath owned the Pagans writ their Mysteries down He must not conclude that the Christians had no written Prayers in this Age wherein they called them Mysteries for though they were concealed from the Infidels and Uninitiated they were daily used among the Faithful And that they were Forms prescribed hath been fully proved However though we cannot expect that Synesius should write down the Sacred Words in his Books or Epistles which might fall into common or profane Hands yet there are intimations in him that there were Forms of Prayer in his time and long before For when he speaks of the Worship of God he saith The Sacred Prayers of our Fore-fathers in the holy Mysteries do cry unto that God who is above all not so much setting forth his Power as reverencing his Providence (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Synes de Regno pag. 9. Now these Sacred Prayers could not be Extempore since they were delivered down to them by their Fore-fathers therefore they must be ancient Forms Extempore Devotions are properly our own Prayers but the Prayers of our Fathers are Forms received from the Ages before us Besides we may note that he describes the Service in which these Prayers were used by this Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and elsewhere he styles it The hidden Mysteries (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes Ep. 57. pag. 194. And Nicephorus his Scholiast explains 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be such things as are mystically delivered both as to the words and actions (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nâ—ceph Scholia id Synes p. 401. That is in a Form of Words and an order of Ceremonies which are the two essential parts of a Liturgy Which Name also we have in Synesius where he is reciting the Injuries done to him by Andronicus for he saith The Devil endeavoured by this Mans means to make him fly from the Liturgy of the Altar (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. 67. p. 193. that is as he explains himself afterwards to make him omit the celebration of the Sacrament and give over reciting the public Offices which were then performed by a Liturgy in all regular Churches And though he be very nice of writing down any of the Forms in his common Writings yet he gives us either the Substance or the Words of one of his Prayers which he used not only in private but in the public Offices viz. That Justice might overcome Injustice and that the City might he purged from all Wickedness (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. Ep. 121. p. 258. Which Passage probably was a part of the Liturgy then used in his Country there being something very like it in other ancient Liturgies which were used elsewhere in that Age. However our Adversary who cites Synesius so often and to no purpose about Mysteries could not or would not see any of these places which shew there were ancient and prescribed Forms in his days Celestinus Ep. Rom. A.D. 423. § 5. Pope Celestine as is affirmed by many Authors ordered the Psalms to be sung in the Communion Office by the whole Congregation in the way of Antiphone (f) Vita Celest ap Bin. Tom. 1. par 1. pag 732. Bena. rerum Liturg. lib. 2. cap. 3. p 502. That is as Isidore expounds it with reciprocal Voices each side of the Choir alternately answering the other (g) Isâ—â—â—r Orig. lib. 6. cap. 19. And Platina adds That he put some particulars into the Offices then in use (h) Platin vita Celest pag. 61. Which shews That the Roman Church was accustomed to Forms in his days Yet my contentious Adversary twice produces this Popes Testimony to shew that in his Time at Rome there was no more than an Order and Uniformity as to the persons and things prayed for but that they did not pray for them in the same Words (i) Disc of Lit. pag 6. p 29. and he cites the same place again to prove that Forms cannot be justified from that Passage (k) Ibid. p. 138. But to manifest his Mistake I will first transcribe and then explain these Words of Celestine from whence he makes this false Conclusion The Words are these Let us look upon the Mysteries of the Priests Prayers which being delivered by the Apostles are uniformly celebrated in all the World and in every Orthodox Church That so the Rule for Praying may fix the Rule of Believing For when the Bishops of the Faithful perform their enjoyned Embassy they plead with the Divine Mercy for all Mankind the whole Church Praying with them They intreat and pray That Faith may be granted to Vnbelievers that Idolaters may be delivered from their impious Errors that the light of Truth may appear to the Jews by the removing of the Veil from their Hearts that Hereticks may repent and receive the Catholic Faith that Schismatics may be revived by the Spirit
when the New-fashion Directory ha◠got possession of a Mans fancy he may dream that an Order or an Ordinal mus◠needs signifie some such thing Voconius Episc Musaeus Presb. Marscil An. Dom. 458. § 12. It was in the same Country and much about the Time of this Council that Voconius a Bishop and Musaeus a Priest of Marseilles did Compose very famous Volumes of Sacraments and Offices as Gennadius who lived also at Marseilles and flourished not above 30 years after this doth testifie (x) Gennad lib. de Script Eccl. in Musaeo Which still confirms my Observation That upon this Second Conversion of France after the Northern Pagans had overspread it the most Learned and Eminent of the Clergy began to reduce the several Provinces to one Form of Divine Service For it was not long after that the eloquent Bishop of Auvergne Sidonius Apollin Ep. Avern An. Dom. 472. Sidonius Composed a Book of Masses that is as the Phrase then signified a Book of Forms of Prayer c. (y) Vid. vit Sidonii praefix oper and Gregory of Tours who writ his History in the next Century tells us That he had written a Preface to this Liturgy and published it as Sidonius had reform'd it (z) Greg. Turon lib. 2. cap. 22. And not long before this viz. about the Year 458 Mamercus Bishop of Viennè had set up the use of Litanies after the manner of the Eastern Church ordering all the People with Fasting and great Devotion to use them in a public Procession when they were pressed with heavy Calamities (a) Greg. Turon lib. 2. cap. 34. Sidon Epist lib. 7. ep 1. And Sidonius tells us That there were Litanies used in the Gallican Church before but they were not said with that fervency vigour and frequency no nor with such strict Fasting as Mamercus had appointed (b) Sidon lib. 5. ep 14. And therefore as the Diocess of Viennè had been delivered by this devout use of the Litany so he thought fit to appoint it should be repeated in the same manner in his City when the Goths broke into that Province From which Relation we learn That Litanies were used in France before this Age though not with so much devotion and success and therefore we must by no means think Mamercus was the first Author of these Prescribed Forms of public Supplication There is another memorable Passage in the Life of Sidonius which confirms the general use of Written Forms in his Time which is That being to celebrate a Festival in his Church some wicke◠persons had stollen away the Book by which he was wont to Officiate but h◠was so ready a Man that even without Book he went through the whole Office for the Feast to the wonder of all the Congregation who thought he spake rather like an Angel than a Man (c) Vit. Sidonii Praef. oper Greg. Turon lib. 2. cap. 22. Now here we have express Testimony of a Common-Prayer which this excellent Bishop was wont to use and it seems it was a Wonder in this Age to see any Clergy-man perform the public Office without a Book which could not have been strange if my Adversaries way of Extempore Prayer had been usual For if every Bishop and Priest as he pretends had daily prayed without Book it had been ridiculous to have written this as a singular Excellency in Sidonius to be able to repeat the Office by the strength of his Memory without that Book which used to guide him therein And if it be Objected That this Relation seems rather to suppose he made a new Office Extempore I Reply That still makes out my Assertion Since it could not be the common way to pray on the sudden because it was thought almost a Miracle in Sidonius to do so therefore other Clergy-men generally used written Forms and made use of Common-Prayer-Books as we do now The same Sidonius tells us in one of his Epistles That the Monks and the Clergy celebrated the Vigils together with the Chanters of Psalms in Tunes which they sang alternately (d) Sidon lib. 5. ep 17. And it was in his Time as that Historian remarks they used to sing the Antiphons in the Church of S. Martin at Tours (e) Greg. Turon histor pag. 83. Now these were Forms of public Worship and as we have often noted must be either written or however certainly known before to those who make use of them and therefore prescribed Forms were the way by which God was worshiped in this Age Not only in France but also in Africa where Victor relates That it was the Custom at Carthage to bring up Boys in the skill of Music for the public Service of the Church Twelve of which Boys fell into the hands of Hunnericus the Vandal King (f) Victor histor persec Vandal lib. 5. Ad. Dom. 478. Now these Singing-Boys were not capable of bearing a part in the public Service if it had not been in Prescribed Forms Petrus Cnapheus Eplsc An ioc◠An. Dom. 483. § 13. And the same way was continued in the East for Petrus Cnapheus about this Time ordered the Creed to be daily repeated in the public Office at Antioch as my Adversary doth confess (g) Disc of Lit. pag. 102. and other Authors testifie (h) Theod. Lect. lib 2. pag. 189. Bona de rebus Liturg. p 537. And no opposition was made to this it being a known Form as well as the rest of the Service But when the same Bishop being infected with Heresie did attempt to make an addition to the ancient Hymn called the Trisagion and would have put in these Words Which was Crucified for us the People who had been long accustomed to that Orthodox Form delivered down to them from their Fore fathers would not endure it (i) Baron Annal. An 483. p. 381. and when others at Constantinople added this Sentence to the Response as the Chanter was singing the Hymn in the accustomed way there was a very great Tumult made upon that occasion (k) Theodor. Lect. Synops pag 187. Disc of Lit. pag. 2◠compar'd with pag. 25. And here I cannot but wonder at my Adversaries rare dexterity who when he had undertaken to prove that there could be no Liturgies in these Ages because we never read of any change or alterations made in them pag. 25. within two Pages relates The great tumult at Constantinople and the wise which was made through the World by attempting to alter this ancient Hymn Which was an eminent part of the Communion-Service to which the People had been so long used that they soon perceived and highly resented this Alteration of their Sacred Forms Which strongly proves not only that they used prescribed Forms now but had done so long before And as to this very Trisagian he mistakes in saying it was first used in the Time of Theodosius the Younger (l) Disc of Lit. pag. 177. For we have proved by divers Testimonies that
Canon it self do only direct the Order in which these several parts of the Service shall be used and forbid the altering that Order yet withal it refers to these several parts of the Service and calls them by their proper Names supposing a Book well known in which they were written down in the same order which is prescribed by this Canon It is plain the Antiphons Hymns Collects c. were certain fixed Forms not made in this Council but supposed to be commonly known by all long before and since some variety in the reciting these Forms had crept in so as one Diocess differed somewhat from another that Variety though it were but in the order of using these Forms is forbid here and the same Uniformity established in this Province which had been setled every where else And indeed this Canon convinces me there was no difference in the Forms themselves the same Antiphons Hymns Collects c. were used every where that needed not any regulation only they were differently placed in the Liturgies of divers Churches and this they Reform by setling one Liturgy for the whole Gallican Church which is called Ordo Ecclesiae and This Order contained not only the Rubrics or disposal of these several parts of Service but also The Forms themselves so disposed and set in Order And doubtless if any had then been so bold to vary the Hymns and Forms of Prayer these Fathers who would not suffer any Variety in the method and placing them would much less have endured the presumption of altering the Words and Expressions but that was a piece of Confidence that was not heard of in this Age. The next Year was held the first Council of Orleance Concil Aurel. I. An. Dom. 507. which again forbids Any of the People to go out of the Church before that final Blessing after the Lords Prayer in the end of the Communion Service (h) Concil Aurel. I. Can. 28. Bin. Tom. II. par l. pag 562. and enjoyns the Litanies shall be used three days before Ascension day and orders the People who had so large a share in this ancient Form to leave Work and joyn in presenting this general Supplication to Almighty God (i) Ibid. Can. 29. Agreeable to which is that Passage in Caesarius his Homilies where he tells us That the whole Church throughout the World then celebrated these Three Days with Litanies and then no Christian ought to be absent from that Religious Assembly (k) In tribus istis diebus quas regulariter in toto mundo celebrat Ecclesia nullus se à sancto Conventu subaucat Caesar hom 1. Now can any man doubt of the use of Prescribed Forms when these Litanies were so generally observed both in the Eastern and Western Churches Is it not plain the Communion Service was the same in all these Provinces since so many Authors and Councils agree That that Office every where ended with the Lords Prayer and the Blessing An Order now must signifie more than a Rubric For undoubtedly they had a prescribed Rule containing both the Forms and the Method also And the better to secure this Liturgy from being altered Concil Epaun. An. Dom. 509. the Council of Pamiers Ordains That all Churches in the Province shall observe the same Order in celebrating Divine Offices which was used by the Metropolitan Bishop (l) Ad celebrandum divina Officia â—â—dinem quem Metropolitani tenent Provinciales observare debent Concil Epaun. Can. 27. Bin. Tom. II. par I. pag. 553. And a few years after the same Order was made in Spain where Variety of Nations and Opinions had made some difference in their Liturgies But at Girone in Catalonia it was decreed That as to the appointing of Divine Service as it was performed in the Metropolitan Church so in Gods Name let that same Vsage be observed through the whole Province of Catalonia as well in the Communion-Office as in that of Singing and Ministring (m) De institutione Missarum ut â—uâ—modo in Metropolitanâ Ecclesiâ fuerâ—t ita in Dei nomine in omni Tarraconensi Provinciâ tam ipsius Misa Orao quam psallenai ministrandi consuetudo servetur Concil Gerund An. 517. Can. 1. Bin. ibid. pag. 618. that is The Order of Divine Offices which by a prescribed Rule was setled in the Metropolitan Church for the Communion-Service the Hymns and other Administrations were to be the Guide to all the Diocesses under the Jurisdiction thereof Which supposes that the Original Liturgy was written and kept carefully there by which all the Books of Divine Offices transcribed for the several Diocesses of his Suffragans were to be corrected which was a very fit Means to preserve that Unity both as to the Forms and Order which they now laboured to restore in all these parts of the VVorld The last named Council also mentions Litanies in two Canons Can. 2 and Can. 3. And informs us That the Lords Prayer was there repeated daily in the end both of Morning and Evening Prayer Can. 10. And all this leaves us no room to doubt of their using those ancient Forms which after these great Confusions began to be restored in these Countries upon the Conversion of both Pagans and Hereticks to the Faith and their beginning to incorporate with the People which they had Conquered in the last Age. And I have a little transgressed the Order of Time that I might lay these Canons together which were all made upon the same Occasion and do mutually explain one another Fulgentius Ep. Ruâ—pens Ann. Dom. 508. § 3. We must now step into Africa where that Pious Bishop Fulgentius flourished who was the most Eminent Champion for the true Faith against the Arians then very numerous in that Country And this holy Confessor hath left us sufficient Evidence of the continuance of the ancient African Forms For he largely expounds that Primitive Petition so generally used at the Consecration in all the old Liturgies viz. That God would send down the holy Spirit upon the Elements to sanctifie them and make them the Body of his deer Son (n) Fulgent ad Monim lib. 2. cap. 6. p. 79. Yea he confirms the Orthodox Faith from this ancient and well known Form of Prayer He also discourses very fully upon that general conclusion of the Collects which the Arians cavilled at Through Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord who liveth and Reigneth with thee in the unity of the holy Spirit (o) Per universas pene Africae regiones Catholica dicere consuevit Ecclesia Per Jesum c. Fulg. ad Ferrand Diac. Resp ad Quaest 4. pag. 266. Assuring us that the Catholick Church in almost all the Regions of Africa concluded their Prayers in this Form which he proves is agreeable to Scripture to the usage of the Primitive Church and to the Doctrin of the Orthodox Fathers And that must be a very ancient piece of Liturgy which is of Authority in dispute with
could not be satisfied unless the Bishops would put in the Names of the four General Councils into the Dyptics to be Read at the Altar And when these Names were put in as they desired the whole Multitude came together to observe and hear this new and grateful Addition And dividing themselves into two parts they Sang for a long time the Benedictus Blessed be the Lord God of Israel until the Choir began the Trisagion to which they all listned and after the Reading of the holy Gospel the Liturgy was performed according to the Custom that is the Office for Catechumens Then the Doors being shut and the holy accustomed Lessons read At the time for Reading the Dyptics all the People with silence drew neer to the Altar and upon hearing the Deacon recite those Names they all Cried with a Loud Voice Glory be to thee O Lord and then through Gods help the rest of the Liturgy was finished with all Decency (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Constant sub Men. Act. 5. Bin. Tom. 2. par 1. pag. 733. Now here we have not only the Name of Liturgy used in the sense we now take it but the several parts of it are set down and particular notice of divers Forms therein contained viz. The Benedictus The Trisagion and the Gloria tibi Domine The Prayers for the Catechumens the Dyptics c. And the Prayers themselves are called the accustomed Liturgy and said to be performed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with all good Order that is according to that excellent Order appointed by the ancient Liturgies § 7. Pope Vigilius lived in the time of this Emperor Vigilius Ep. Rom. An. Dom. 540. and writes an Epistle to him wherein he blesseth God for that Princes Religious care of the Church which requited him by her daily Prayers for him And Vigilius notes that Justinians affection to the Church was a sign that their usual Prayer for it was heard and Answered And when he comes to describe that Prayer he doth it in these Words All Bishops by an ancient Traditiâ—n in the Communion Office desire and Pray that the Lord would please to Vnite Govern and Preserve the Catholic Faith throughout the whole World (n) Omnes Pontifices antiâ—uâ in offerendo sâ—cripcio Traditione aepeâ—â—mus excrantes ut Catholicam fidem adunaâ—e regere Donamus custodire toto orâ—e dignetuâ— Vigil ep 4. ad Justin Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 5. Which Words are certainly the Roman Form as it was in the days of Vigilius being according to the Book of Gelasius his Correcting not much altered from the Liturgy ascribed to S. Clement or the old Roman Form before Gelasius (o) Pro Sanctà tuà Catâ—olicà Apostolicâ Ecâ—lesiâ ut pacificare custodire gubernare digneris omnes fines terrae Liturg. S. Clem. Bib. Patr. Tom. 2. edit Paris p. 119. And when Gregory the Great in the next Century corrected the Gelasian Office he evidently made his Form out of both those elder Liturgies (p) Pro Eccles â tuâ Sancta Catholicâ quam pacificare custodire adunare regâ—râ—â—igneris toto terrarum erbe Offâ—c Gregorian ibid. pag. 128. As the Reader will see by comparing the several ways of expressing this in these several Offices in divers Ages used in the Roman Church Which shews not only that there was a Form of Prayer for the Church professing the Catholic Faith in the time of Vigilius but that the Form was then believed to be from ancient Tradition and was made almost in the very Words which had been used for many hundred Years before Had Liturgies been newly set up as my Adversary pretends nothing had been more false nor more Ridiculous than to alledge an ancient Tradition for this Form and had all Ministers before this had the liberty to Pray in what Expressions they pleased nothing had been more imposible than this Harmony between these Offices which only differ in divers Ages by reason of the several Corrections of the Forms but were always in every Age done by a prescribed Form Which will be still more plain by the same Vigilius his Answer to the Consultations of Etherius whom he first informs concerning the certain Time on which Easter was to be kept for that year And because this Bishop was placed in a Country newly converted to the Catholic Faith and not yet well instructed in the regular way of performing Divine Offices he had it seems desired to know how they celebrated the Service at Rome on the greater Festivals To which Vigilius gives this Answer We also acquaint you that as to the Order of Prayer in celebrating the Communion it is not different at any time nor upon any Festival but we always consecrate the Gifts offered to God after the same Manner Then he goes on to tell him That they had indeed proper Prefaces for commemorating the Mercy peculiarly to be remembred in each of the greater Festivals And then adds these Words But the rest of the Service we perform according to the accustomed Order And therefore we have herewith sent you the Text it self of that Canonical Prayer which by Gods Mercy we have received from Apostolical Tradition And that you may know in what place to add proper things for each Festival we have also added the Prayers for Easter-day (q) Oâ—dinem quâ—que precum in celebritate M ssarar nullo nâ—s tâ—mpore nuâ—â—â 〈◊〉 sign â—uacaâ—â— habere aâ—vâ—â— sed semper â—â—aem tenore oblata Deo munera consecrare pp. Caetera vero Ordine consueto prosequimur Qua prepter ipsius Canonicae precis textum direximus subter adâ—â—ectâ—â— quaâ—â—â— Deo propitio ex Apostolicâ traditione suscepimus c. Vâ—gâ—l Ep. 2. ad Etherâ—um Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 4. Here we see the Communion-Service and especially the Prayer of Consecration was an ancient Form derived from Apostolical Tradition and the whole Office was written down in a Book and sent into that Country where Etherius was Bishop which some suppose to have been some parts of Spain lately Converted from Heresie (r) Baron Annal An. 538. pag. 278 279. And if so probably this was the foundation of that Office which is called the Mosarabick and was Composed by S. Leander about Fifty year after out of the old Gothic and African Forms compared with this Roman Office However it appears that though in some places where the Faith was newly planted they needed help to settle and correct their Offices yet both the New and Ancient Churches did all agree in the use of Forms And when a new Liturgy was to be made for a Newly Converted Nation the Bishops consulted the most Ancient Forms they could find in other Churches choosing out of them what they thought proper for their own Country and that Form they enjoyned upon all that were under their Jurisdiction We must also observe further That the Roman Office which was writ down and the very Words
3 4 5. apud Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 212. Here we have one Kalendar fixed appointing the very same Lessons one Form of Salutation derived from the Apostles one Written Form for the celebration of the Eucharist and another being the Order of Baptism which in the days of a Bishop who was dead some years before this Council were sent in Writing from Rome and had been ever since used in these Provinces which can be nothing else but a Liturgy from which they will not suffer any Minister to vary in the least And it signifies nothing to alledge That this is one of the first Injunctions for such Uniformity in this Country that had been for an Age and more over-run with Barbarous People and overspread with Heresies because there are evident Supposals That the Ancient Churches which had not been renversed by these Calamities but kept to their old accustomed Ways furnished the New regulated Churches with ancient Forms which had been used among them from the Primitive Ages and that sufficiently proves the Antiquity of Liturgies My Adversary who conceals all this Evidence cites the 30th Canon of this Council but very falsly for he reads it thus Besides the Psalms of the Old Testament let nothing Poetically Composed be Sung in the Church and he false dates it also (z) Disc of Lit. pag. 179. Concil Bracar Can. 30. An. 565. But the Words of the Canon are a Translation of the Canon of Laodicea made 200 years before Forbidding the Singing of any Poetical Compositions in the Church except the Psalms and what Hymns were taken out of the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament (a) Vid. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 212. which was designed to set aside the late composed Hymns of the Arians used among the Heretical Goths and other corrupt modern Composures Not to reject the Magnificat the Benedictus Nunc dimittis and other Canonical Hymns which our Dissenters now totally disuse He adds That Ordo Psallendi in the Council of Tours signifies not what but how many Psalms shall be Sung (b) Disc of Lit. pag. 174. But let the Canon be consulted and any Man who knows the Custom of the Age will see that the design of that Canon was to establish a Kalendar which did appoint and prescribe the very Psalms as well as the Number which were to be Sung at the certain Seasons there mentioned (c) Vid. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. in Concil Turon 2. An. 570. Can. 19. p. 228. And he unfortunately forgot one Canon of this Council of Tours which enlarges the former Canon of Braga and takes in all the ancient Hymns which he pretends are rejected by that Canon for it says Though we have the Hymns of Ambrose in the Canon yet since we have other Forms worthy to be Sung we willingly receive them unless they have no Authors Name in the Title because if they be agreeable to the Faith they ought not to be left out of use (d) Ib. Can. 24. pag. 230. So that we see this Canon owns the Te Deum the Benedicite and other Hymns provided they be Orthodox and the Authors were known Friends to the Catholic Faith and here are Forms supposed as generally used and a Council to allow them after which the Church may use them though they be not taken out of Canonical Scripture I have no more to add here but a scattered Passage or two to confirm the continuance of the old Forms in the Gallican Church First Whereas there was a necessity of leaving the Priest at liberty to put the Names of those who Offered into the Prayer for all Estates of Men some ventured to take more freedom and in that part of the Office varied from their Mother Church Which occasion'd a Council at Arles to Decree That the Oblations made at the Holy Altar should not be offered up by any of the Bishops of that Province otherwise than according to the Form used in the Church of Arles (e) Concil Arelat An. Dom. 554. Can. 1. apud Cointe Annal. pag. 799. Or if with some we expound this Canon of the Prayer of Consecration still it proves That the Forms used in the Metropolitan Church were to be an invariable Rule to all the Churches in that Province The Council of Tours also before cited mentions Litanies Antiphons and the Hallelujah (f) Concil Turon 2. An. 570. Can. 18 c. And we have a farther account of the Use of Litanies there in the first Council of Lions (g) Concil Ludg. 1. eod An. Can. 6. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 232. All which are the Forms which we have shewed were in use in the preceding Centuries And when Chilperic a King of France about this Time pretended to Compose new Hymns and Prayers our Author tells us They would by no means receive them into the Churches Offices (h) Greg. Turon lib. 6. cap. 46. pag. 308. for those were fixed before and none but a Council of Bishops could be permitted to alter or add to them I had almost forgot Martin Bishop of Braga Martin Episcop Bracar An. Dom. 572. who came into that See very soon after the fore-mentioned Council and being a Grecian by Birth he collected and translated divers Canons of the Greek Church into Latin for the use of Spain in which Collection of his we have very many plain Indications of a Liturgy One of these Canons obliges every Clergy-man in a City or any place where there is a Church to be present at the daily Office of Singing Mattens and Vespers (m) Canones Martin Bracar Can. 63. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 246. And another forbids New composed Psalms made by some of the Vulgar to be said in the Church (n) Ib. Can. 67. For indeed the Hours of Prayer and the Offices appointed for them were then so fixed that as none might neglect them so none were allowed to change them or add to them in any sort whatsoever And I must note by the way that this very Martin who collected these Canons was he that had Converted the Suevians in Spain to the Catholic Faith that so we may be satisfied that part of Spain a little before this had a second and New Conversion and that gave occasion to divers of these Canons for an Uniformity in the Divine Service which was to be established there Pelagius II. Ep. Rom. An Dom. 577. § 10. To proceed with the Western Church the Bishops of France and Germany about this Time desired Pope Pelagius the Second to inform them what were the Prefaces then used in the Roman Church that is what Festivals there were upon which they made a peculiar Addition to the Primitive Form of Lift up your Hearts c. suitable to the occasion of that particular Festival And his Reply is this Having diligently read over the holy Roman Order and the sacred Constitutions of our Predecessors we find only these Nine
one Order without the least Variation and that one Order was as we see plainly the Old Spanish Liturgy the very Words of which are yet extant (p) Vid Biâ— Pati Tom. xv ut supr Item Bona de reb Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 11. p. 365. which was that Office whereby all the little Varieties occasioned by diversity of Religion mixture of People and division of Kingdoms were happily taken away for many Ages and this is the true state of this Matter But my Adversary generously undertakes from this very Council and these Canons to prove First That the Spanish Churches at this time were not subject to Imposed Orders for one Form of Worship no not in the Sacraments which were celebrated there not only variously but unduly (q) Disc of Lit. pag. 133. And this he proves by the Preface to this Council which in a detached Sentence saith The Divine Sacraments in the Churches of Spain are celebrated in a different and unlawful manner (r) In Sâ—cramentis â— vâ—nis quâ—â—â—â— verso 〈…〉 medo in Hispaniaâ—um â—â—â—â—sas celebrantur Baâ— Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 345. And this he pretends shews some remaining Ruins of the ancient Liberty even after the Imposing Spirit was rouzed and active But alas the History and Occasion of this diversity shews it was a modern Corruption no ancient Liberty and this very place which he cites calls this diversity Vnlawful as being contrary to the ancient Canons For one Liturgy in one Country was the Old Rule and Original Practice the Variety which yet was no liberty of Praying without Forms was the Innovation yea the same Preface there calls it An Vsurpation assuming licence to it self from Mens negligence contrary to the Ecclesiastical Vsage (s) Quae dum per negligentiam in usum venerunt contra Ecclesiasticos meres â—â—â—â—tiam libi de usur atione 〈…〉 Praelat ibid. 'T is plain they had divers Kings different Creeds and all had been confused for some time past but now they had broke through those unhappy Circumstances they resolve to cast out this seemingly Schismatical and really Scandalous Diversity and reduce all to the ancient Uniformity Secondly he saith One of the first Books for public Service that he meets with is the Libellus Officialis in the 25th Canon of this Council which seems rather a short Directory than a compleat Liturgy given to every Presbyter at his Ordination to instruct him how to Administer the Sacraments lest through ignorance of his Duty herein he should offend (t) Disc of Lit. pag. 15. And to make this out he quotes as usually only half that 25th Canon But the whole Canon is this When Priests are Ordained for Parishes let them receive a Book of Offices from their Bishop that they may succeed in their Cures duly instructed lest by Ignorance in the Divine Mysteries they offend Christ (u) Quando Presbyteri in Parochiis ordinantur libellum Officialem à Sacerdete suo accipiant ut ad Ecclesias sibi deputatas instructi succedant ne per ignorantiam etiam in ipsis divinis Sacramentis Christum offendant ita ut quod Quando ad Litanias vel ad Concilium venâ—rint rationem Episcopo suo reddant qualitâ—r susceptum Officium celebrant vel baptizant Bin. ibid. Can. 25. pag. 351. Here he breaks off but the Canon goes on So that when they come to Litanies or to a Council they may give an account to their Bishop how they have performed the Offices they have undertaken and how they have Baptized This is the Canon entire And to his Objections I Reply First That he did meet with the Codex Gelasianus almost 150 years before this and with Gregory's Ordo Romanus which was made made Thirty year before (w) Disc of Lit. pag. 83. yea he had met with Written Prayers in the Third Council of Carthage An. 398. (x) Ibid pag. 44. And he might have met with a Common-Prayer-Book in Sidonius Apollinaris with Sacerdotalem librum in Vincentius Lirinensis cited before with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Sozomen with a whole Liturgy in the Apostical Constitutions with the Books of enjoyned Prayers in Constantine's Time These and many more Books for public Service he might have met with but that none is so blind as he that will not see He affirms Secondly That the Book of Offices mentioned in this Council was rather a short Directory than a compleat Liturgy But this is to outface the Sun when it is certainly meant of the Mozarabic Office wherein all the Hymns and Prayers are writ out at large And it argues a Mind strangely possessed with the Notion of a Directory to tell us That all those Canons which we cited before viz. Can. 2 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16th and 17th had been needless if those Churches had been furnished with such a Liturgy as provided sufficiently for the Severals there mentioned (y) Disc of laÌ„t pag. 16. For those Canons do all suppose there had been divers Liturgies appointing a various use of those Forms but since now one Liturgy was established as the Second Canon shews they add the Authority of a National Council to that One Order agreed on and forbid all former ways which did in the least vary from it and considering how apt Men are to be tenacious of their own Way which they have long used all these Canons were little enough to secure and restore the ancient Uniformity yea the very Reason given in this 25th Canon why the Bishop delivered this Book of Offices to every Parish-Minister at his Ordination is that they might Officiate by none of the Old Liturgies but by this alone and when these Country-Ministers came to their Bishop either upon occasion of the Grand Procession used when the Litany was publickly said by the whole Clergy of the Diocess or at those Synods which were then held at least once a year Then he might bring this Book along with him to certifie the Bishop that he had used no other Forms but these established in any Offices of his Ministration Now had this been only a Directory according to my Adversaries extravagant Fancy some might offend Christ out of Ignorance by not choosing or making proper Forms and it had been impossible they should all have agreed so exactly in every Office as the Second Canon requires that the People could not observe the least difference To conclude The Fathers of this Council tell us in the 13th Canon That divers Hymns used in the Church were composed by the Ecclesiastical Doctors and if any for that Reason would not use them they must also reject the Forms of Prayer For say they these Hymns are composed as Masses or Supplications or Prayers or Commendations that is Intercessions for all Estates of Men or Impositions of Hands are Composed Which if they might not be said in the Church all Ecclesiastical Offices must cease And therefore they conclude That as none of them did refuse
Antiq Brit. Eccles pag. 370. An. Dom. 560. Moreover Baleus further tells us That S. Asaph the Scholar and Successor of Kentigern writ a Book Of the Ordinations of his Church (g) Balaeus de script Brit. fol. 34. An. Dom. 590. which seems to be the Forms used there in Ordaining Presbyters and Deacons and perhaps in Admitting of Monks This may suffice to shew us the Britons had written and prescribed Forms before my Adversary will allow them to have been used any where and if any require further satisfaction he may consult the Learned B. Vsher's Antiquity of the British Churches where there are divers Evidences of this Truth We proceed therefore to the Saxons who were Converted by Augustin the Monk about the end of the Sixth Century And He no doubt according to S. Gregory's direction made a Liturgy for them taken out of the Roman the Gallican and other Forms which continued in use for some time But after Gregory's Roman way of Singing began to be so generally admired in all these Parts of the World That was also laboured by Augustin's Successors to be brought in here For Bede mentions one James a Deacon who was skilled both in the Roman and the Canterbury way of Song saying of him That Paulinus leaving York and returning to Rochester left this James behind him in the North who when that Province had Peace and the Number of the Faithful encreased being very skilful in Singing in the Church became a Master of Ecclesiastical Song to many after the way either of Rome or of Canterbury (h) Bedae histor lib. 2. cap. 20. circ A. D. 640. Which must signifie his teaching Clerks how to recite Gregory's or Augustin's Forms of Service because in that Age they chanted their Prayers and Praises both About Thirty years after this in Theodorus his Time They learned to Sing the Office all England over and one Eddi after the aforesaid James was their Master in the Churches on the North of Humber (i) Beda ibid. lib. 4. cap. 2. circ An. 670. And a little after those who Instructed Men in Ecclesiastical Offices are called Masters of Singing (k) Idem lib. 5. cap. 20. because the Offices were set to some certain Notes and that alone is enough to prove they then Prayed by certain prescribed Forms it being impossible to set Arbitrary or Extempore Prayers to Notes which though some have affirmed liable to be Canted yet none ever thought them capable to be Chanted But we proceed I doubt not but the Gregorian Forms as well as his way of Singing came into use here before the Year 700 For in the late elaborare Collection of Old Saxon Books and Manuscripts put out by my Worthy Friend Dr. Hicks there is a Sacramentary of S. Gregory which is at least a Thousand years old (l) Grammatica Maeso-Gothic D. Hick p. 148. and then it must be Written about the Year 690. But this is more plain in the Famous Council of Clovesho which sat 24 year after wherein there is not only clear Testimony for the use of Forms but a full Evidence of the prevailing Interest of the Roman Offices For there it is appointed That All Priests shall learn to repeat the whole Office by Law appointed for their Order and shall be able to interpret the Creed the Lords Prayer and the holy Words pronounced in the Mass into the Vulgar Tongue Can 10th As also That all Priests shall perform all their Offices after the same way and manner Can. 11th And further it is Decreed That the Festivals in memory of our Lord be celebrated in one and the same manner in all Offices belonging to them as to Baptism Administring the Communion and the manner of Singing according to the Written Form which we have received from the Roman Church and that the Festivals of the Martyrs shall be observed on the same day according to the Roman Martyrology with the Psalms and Hymns proper to each of them Can. 13th And finally That the Seven Canonical Hours of Prayer be observed with the proper Psalms and Hymns and that the Monasteries shall all Sing alike and shall neither Sing or Read any thing but what is generally used and is derived from Scripture or permitted by the Custom of the Roman Church that so all may with one Mind and one Mouth glorifie God Can. 15th (m) Concil Clovesho Can. 10 11 13 15. apud Spelm. Concil Tom. l. p. 249. circ An. D. 714. From which Canons it is very plain that the Saxons within one Century after their Conversion had Written Forms of Prayer for all Offices and that the Roman Liturgy was now beginning to be generally received in this Land I shall make but one Remark more in so clear a case which is That Venerable Bede dying on Ascension-day is by ancient Historians said to have repeated the Collect for the Day in these Words O King of Glory and Lord of Hosts who as on this day didst ascend triumphantly into the Heaven of Heavens leave us not comfortless but send us the Promise of the Father even the Spirit of Truth (n) Gul. Malms de gest reg lib. 1. cap. 3. pag. 12. Sim. Dunelm lib. 1. cap. 15. and soon after he gave up the Ghost Now this is the Collect in the Old Roman Forms and is yet continued in our Liturgy almost Verbatim which gives that Collect the honour of having been received in this Nation for near a Thousand years But since my Adversary dares not attempt the Saxons and Spelman's Councils afford so many undeniable Proofs of prescribed and imposed Forms used here from the Time of their Conversion I shall not heap up needless Instances but proceed to the Kingdoms and Churches in France and Germany where the same Order and Method of Praying was observed § 5. I have so fully proved Ecclesia Gallicana ab An. Dom. 450. that there was a Form of Service peculiar to the Gallican Church that I need not have added any thing on that Subject but that my Adversary hath the confidence to say In France they had Books for public Service in the 8th Century yet they were used at the discretion of those that officiated who added and left out as they thought fit till Charlemain in the beginning of the Ninth Age would have them Reformed after the Roman guise And this he proves by a Passage cited out of the Chronicle of Engolism related in Mornay of the Mass (o) Disc of Lit. p. 134. but the whole Story is nothing else but Falshood and Fallacy For First He speaks of Books for public Service in France in the 8th Century as if they had none before Whereas we have made it appear That S. Hilary made a Book of Hymns for the Gallican Church in the Fourth Age An. 354. That Museaus of Marseils composed a Book of Prayers for Consecrating the Sacrament in the Fifth Century An. 458. We have shewed That the Gallican Office which is
of Rome (m) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap. 9. pag. 74. For then it follows That the ancient German Offices were still used in some Parts that were subject to the Archbishop of Colen So that still this is exchanging one Form for another and no proof at all of liberty in Praying a thing unknown in this Age. Agobardus Episc Lugdun An. 831. § 7. We have little more in this Discourse against Liturgies out of Antiquity excepting only some few pretended proofs from late Ages to shew that they used various words in the distribution of the Eucharist As First he tells us that Agobardus the Famous Arch-Bishop of Lions could not well like that Common Roman Form The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ c. since he was only for Scripture Expressions in the public Offices And then he intimates that Agobardus was censured for this by Baronius and his Epitomator (n) Disc of Lit. pag. 90. 91. To which I reply First That Baronius never censures this great Bishop at all for this passage is not in Baronius but only in Spondanus the Epitomator and from him alone my Adversary cites it (o) Vid. Baron Tom. 9. An. 831. p. 797. 798. Secondly Spondanus speaks not one word of Agobardus his correcting the Communion-Office but only that he took great pains in restoring the ancient Antiphonary or Book of Hymns (p) Spondan Epitom An. 831. Num. 2. And Baluzius hath now put out the very Tract which Spondanus refers to and there is not one Syllable in all that Book expressing any dislike at the Words used in the distribution (q) Agobardi lib. de divin Psalmod lib. de correct Antiph oper Tom. 2. edit Paris 1666. Yea there is a peculiar discourse of this Bishop against Amalarius his Comment on the Mass wherein he speaks of the Roman Canon Te igitur c. yet never makes the least exception against the Roman Order or any thing contained in it (r) Ibid. lib. contr Amal. pag. 101. So that this pretended dislike of the Roman Form of distribution is a meer Fiction of his own Brain And if it were true that Agobardus did not like any thing in Sacred Offices but what was Scripture Yet there is no cause he should for that cause dislike this which he calls the Roman but was the Primitive and is now our Protestant Form since the words are taken out of and grounded on express places of Holy Scripture The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ is a Scripture Expresion (s) Math. xxvi 26. Luk. xxii 19. 1 Cor. xi 24. and the next words Preserve thy Body and Soul to Eternal Life are grounded on Scripture Promises (t) John vi ver 50.51.53.54 58. so that if Agobardus were never so scrupulous he might very well like and use this Form But because my Adversary deals only in Epitomes I will now give a full Account of this matter We must observe therefore that Leidradus the Predecessor of Agobardus in the year 799. according to the desire of Charles the Great had brought in the Roman Order of Singing into the Church of Lyons and had put out an Antiphonary with an Epistle before it the Hymns whereof were generally taken out of the Holy Scripture (u) Leidradi Ep. ad Carol. Mag. inter oper Agob Tom. 2. p. 127. But about 30 years after Amalarius a busy Monk pretends to bring a new Antiphonary from Rome Corrected after the Roman Office in the time of Gregory the Fourth which he presented to Lewis the Godly and hoped by his Authority to impose it on all the Gallican Church But Agobardus the Primate of France rejects this new Antiphonary and writ a Book to prove there were Heresies Blasphemies and Nonsense in these Hymns of Amalarius and keeps to the old Roman Antiphonary established by his Predecessor the Hymns of which were for the most part taken out of the Psalms and other parts of Holy Scripture commending this to his Clergy and giving them his Reasons why he would not admit of the other And this Book of Agobardus concludes with these words As the Church hath a Book of Mysteries for Celebrating the Solemnity of the Mass digested Orthodoxly and with convenient Brevity and hath a Book of Lessons collected Judiciously out of the Divine Books so they ought to have this Third Book the Antiphonary purged from all Human Figments and Lies sufficiently ordered out of the pure words of Scripture through the whole Circle of the year That so in performing sacred Offices according to the most approved Rule of Faith and the Authority of ancient discipline there may be kept among us one and the same Form of Prayer of Lessons and of Ecclesiastical Songs (w) Agobard de correct Antiphon §. 19. Tom. ii p. 100. This is the whole Story and the passage which Spondanus ignorantly or at least rashly Censures and my Adversary Ridiculously brings in to shew Agobardus his dislike of the words of distribution Whereas these words refer only to the Hymns which yet probably were not all the very words of Scripture but were either Transcribed thence or agreeable thereto much more than the new Hymns of Amalarius And since Agobardus received and used the Roman Canon and the whole Roman Missal wherein were many things which are not the words of Scripture we must not expound these words cited but now so strictly as Spondanus doth as if he would not use any words in Divine Offices but those of Scripture For Agobardus means no more than that the Hymns ought to be either taken out of Scripture or agreeable to the Doctrine thereof for he proves that the Hymns of Amalarius were Heretical and Blasphemous contrary in many things to the Holy Scripture and therefore he rejected them But as to any Liberty in varying the Prayers Lessons or Hymns that were established or altering the Roman Forms This great Bishop was so far from it that he enjoyns the old Gregorian Office and imposes that prescribed Form together with the Lessons and the Hymns and opposes those Innovations and Alterations which some attempted to make because the Forms and Order then established were agreeable both to the Rule of Faith and to the acient Ecclesiastical Laws upon which occasion he produceth that African Canon before cited (x) Part. i. Cent. 4. §. 24. pag. 257. in these Words viz. That no Supplications and Prayers be said unless they have been approved in a Council nor shall any of these at all be Sung in the Church till they have been considered by the Prudent and approved of in a Synod lest any thing against the Faith be composed either my mistake or by design (y) Canon Afric ap Agob de correct Antiph §. ii p. 92. And now the Reader shall judge whether this Author be for my Adversaries purpose or no since he imposes Books of prescribed Prayers Lessons and Hymns and thinks the keeping strictly to them is
descended so low but since his Fancy for a bad Cause puts him upon these poor shifts I was not willing to leave any thing that might amuse a common Reader But now as to these later Ages the Point is clear certain and undeniable that Liturgies were every where imposed and no Church permitted its own Clergy to vary from their own way It is true many Corruptions and Superstitions in these Ages crept into the Liturgies of all Churches but they grafted still upon the old Stock kept the Primitive way of Praying Yea retained so many of the ancient and pure Forms as do frequently confute divers of these Corruptions and Innovations So that it is no difficult thing to disprove many of the Romish Modern Opinions by some parts of their ancient Missals but that is not my busisiness It is sufficient to my purpose that I have made it Evident there were prescribed Forms used in the public Service even from the beginning of Christianity and that the way of Serving God by Liturgies was the Practice of all Regular Churches and had the Approbation of all Eminent Fathers and of very many Councils all along in every Century since the time of the Apostles and from the beginning of setling Christianity CHAP. IV. Of the Arguments against the Antiquity of LITVRGIES THERE are some things relating to the Antiquity of Prescribed Forms and Liturgies which are dispersed up and down my Adversary's Book and would not easily be brought under the order of Time in the History and yet must be considered that no Scruple may remain concerning this great Truth And though some of these have been briefly examined before yet we will here put them together and give a fuller Answer to all that looks like an Objection § 1. First He thinks to disprove the ancient use of Prescribed Forms by affirming That of old they had no more but a certain Order wherein divers Churches agreed to administer the several Parts of Worship particularly the Severals in the Sacrament so as each had its known and fixed place This he finds in many Fathers and he saith the 19th Canon of Laodicea An. 365. was a Rule for this Order (f) Disc of Lit. pag. 4 5. which elsewhere he makes to be no more than a Rubric or a Directory (g) Ib. pag. 174. But this should have been proved not only by the word Ordo which we have shewed signifies a Liturgy containing not only the Method but the very Forms themselves He should have produced some such ancient Rubric or Directory which had nothing but the Method of the several Parts of Divine-Service without any Forms For we have produced Liturgies at least as ancient as that Canon of Laodicea viz. That of Jerusalem and that in the Apostolical Constitutions having all the Forms at large and if he cannot shew one of these Directories he only dreams of such a thing Now though it be hard to make out a Negative yet we may go far to prove there was no such thing distinct from a Liturgy For these Severals in the Sacrament were Prayers Intercessions Giving of Thanks Prefaces Hymns and the like Now these must be called by some distinguishing Names in this pretended Rubric and that they could not well be unless they were Forms Now if the Severals were all Forms as the Prefaces and Hymns certainly were then they might have proper Names for each of them and might easily describe them by some of the first words as Our Father Lord have mercy Lift up your Hearts c. and then if the Forms were known by those short Names that makes this Rubric become a shorter Liturgy Besides He tells us This Order was certain and agreed on by several Churches and made some kind of Vniformity among them in praying for the same things But it is hard to conceive how Extempore Prayers could be agreed on by distant Churches to be used in one certain Order or how this agreement could produce Uniformity if the Words of the Prayers every where differed and the Phrases in the same place daily varied No Canons of Councils not written Rule nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can suffice to make an Uniformity out of such diversity He finds but one Canon till the beginning of the Sixth Age to direct this Order viz. the 19th Canon of Laodicea and that is a very short one which only mentions Six Prayers as known by their proper Names therefore to be sure that Canon was not all the Rule the Church had for this Agreement and Uniformity And for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was that which the Deacon lifted up at the end of every Collect when the Bishop or Priest came to say Through Jesus Christ our Lord to give Notice to the People to say Amen or to make some Response And sometimes to call them off from their Knees to joyn in Hymns or the like which supposes known Forms when so slight a Signal served a great Congregation to make them ready for all Parts of the Service in which they had any share Therefore there must be more to make this Uniformity in distant Churches and in very large Congregations and that was Prescribed Liturgies which we have made out to be much elder than his imaginary Rubric or Directory But for once let us suppose That they had in those Early Ages no more than some Canons or Written Rubric prescribing and enjoyning the certain Order of the several Parts of Worship and this so exact as to make divers Churches agree to pray for the same things and in the same Method Would not this be as much an abridgment of the Liberty which is claimed and a stinting of the Spirit as if the Words were prescribed If Ministers then had the Gift of Prayer could not that one Spirit which inspired them teach them the Order and Method as well as the Words and Phrases Would not this Gift have made them as Uniform as Written Canons or Rubrics and rendred a Directory as needless as a Liturgy It must be so unless my Adversary will say the only use of the Spirit is to furnish Men with Phrases and Expressions in Prayer but that he cannot say without contradicting himself and blaspheming the Spirit because he saith God minds not so much the Expressions as the inward Affections (h) Disc of Lit. pag. 132. and proves this by a Set of Golden-Sayings out of the Fathers (i) Ibid. pag. 50. Wherefore at this rate the Gift of Prayer would only enable Men for that part of our Prayer which God doth not much mind So that this imaginary Order of his devised to protect the Gift of Praying Extempore overthrows it as much as a common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book And if he could make it out Wise Men could not but see That so soon as there was need to agree upon his sort of Order and to write down the Method and the Things to be prayed for so soon the Gif of Prayer was ceased and so soon
Singular Number the Holy Bible to make his Reader suppose it was meant alone of that Book But the Original speaks of more Books and therefore since a Liturgy was then in use at Alexandria no doubt that was one of the Holy Books which they here falsly accused Macarius for Burning And since the Author calls them Holy not Divine Books it is more probable he meant it of the Books of Offices which were counted only Sacred than of the Scripture which they generally call Divine or Divinely inspired Books Which distinction is very evident in Eusebius where he relates how in the Persecution under Dioclesian They Burnt the Divine and Sacred Books in the Mâ—rket places (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 8. cap. 2. p. 217. In which place the Divine Books are the Holy Scriptures and the Sacred Books those which contained the Service of the Church The same Author in the Life of Constantine makes a plain distinction between these Books as being several Volums For he saith the Emperor took the Books for the explaining the Divinly inspired Scriptures and after for repeating the prescribed Prayers with those who dwelt in his Roy. al Palace (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb vit Const lib. 4. cap. 17. First he took the Bible into his Hands and then after that it seems he took the other Book wherein the usual Established Prayers were written For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Books implies more Books than one Secondly As to the Books which Constantine sent to Eusebius into Palaestine to procure for his Churches at Constantinople he calls them Those Divine Books which he knew most necessary according to the Ecclesiastical Catalogue to be prepared and used (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. l. 4. cap. 35. And this might be expounded of Books of Offices as well as Bibles but suppose we grant this Catalogue here mentioned to be the Canon of Scripture agreed on by the Church and so the Books he sent for were only the Canonical Books of Scripture His inference that the Churches in Constantine's Time had no other Book will by no means follow Eusebius lived in Palaestine where the Scriptures were first written and best understood and there the best Copies were to be had and Eusebius who lived there was the fittest Judge of them therefore Constantine sent thither and to him perhaps for no more but Bibles Not because Churches were furnished then with no other Books but because we know Constantine had prayer-Prayer-Books at home and could get acurate Copies of the Service writ out at Constantinople and need not send so far as Palaestine for those Books but it was most proper to send thither for Copies of Canonical Scripture Thirdly The Council of Carthage also doth mention a Book of the Gospels held over the Bishops Head a Book of Exorcisms to be given to the Exorcist and a Book of Lessons to be delivered to the Reader at their Ordination But doth not mention the Service-Book delivered to any that entred into Orders (k) Concil 4. Carthag can 1. 7 8. But it is too much from thence to conclude there was no Service-Book there in the year 498 because we have proved by many Testimonies which are Positive that they had prescribed Prayers there long before And he may as well argue that we have no Common-Prayer-Book in England since it is not delivered either to any Bishop Priest or Deacon at their Ordination that is there is no more done here than was there and yet both we have and they had a Book of Offices for all that Optatus S. Augustin and others before cited do fully attest it Moreover these Books of Exorcisms were Forms of Prayer and of Catechising Collected out of Holy Scripture (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril praef ad Catech. for those who were newly Converted to Christianity And such Books had been long time used in the Church before this Council though this formal delivery of them is not mentioned till this Council Orders it Fourthly As to the Persecutors not enquiring for or finding or the Christians delivering no other Books to them but only Bibles I reply the matter of Fact is not True and therefore his Consequence viz. that they had no Prayer-Books then is false Indeed the Bible was the most Eminent of all the Christian Books and the Foundation of their Faith their Worship and their Manners And in those Ages the Bible was in all Christians Hands the People Read it at Home whereas the Liturgy was only in the Priests Hands and upon the Notion they had of the necessity of concealing Mysteries from Pagans was kept very close By which means no doubt Bibles were oftner found by the Persecutors and better known to them than the Book of Offices the Dyptics the Book of Exorcisms the Book of Anthems written and composed to the Honour of Christ Yet we are sure they had these Books then though they are rarely or never mentioned singlâ— only they come under the general Titles of Christian Writings Divine Sacred or Holy Books c. and no doubt sometimes the Persecutors found and Burned these as well as Bibles For we may observe that all Authors generally speak in the Plural Number The Divine and Holy Writings and the Writings The Books of the Church in Eusebius are said to be Burnt and Destroyed by the Persecutors (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 8. cap. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. cap. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. lib. 10. cap. 4. Why do our Writings deserve to be committed to the Flames saith Arnobius (n) Nâ—â—strâ— quidem Scripta cur ignibus merueruâ—t dari Arnob. l 4. They Demanded the Divine Books for the Fire Saith Augustin (o) Peterent divinos câ—dices exurendos Aâ—â— brevic Câ—l l. 3. So they ask the Holy Martyrs if they had any Writings in their keeping (p) Dicas aliquas Scripturas habeas â—ron An. 30◠§. 53. And the Canon of Arles is general against all that had delivered up the Holy Writings (q) De his qui Scripturas Sanctas tradidisse dicuntur Concil Arcl. can 13. An. 316. Now why should they so Constantly and Unanimously speak of more Books if there had been no Book but a Bible But further some of the Acts of the Martyrs mention Volumes of Parchment and other folded Books besides the Bible (r) Baron An. 303. §. 10. In the Acts under Zenophilus the Persecutors demanded If they had any Writings of their Law or any thing else in their Library (s) Ibid. §. 13. 14. Now they had removed the Books before they came conveying them to the Readers House where at last they found 24 great and small Volums and in another House 8 Books and 4 folded Tomes Now certainly these were not all Bibles no doubt some of them were Books of Prayers Hymns and Passions or Names at least of Martyrs Writ out as S. Cyprian had directed Another
Liturgy was imposed on the Roman Clergy and those of Aquileia and Ravenna upon the Clergy subject to those Churches And then my Adversaries whole Book which is written to assert that Liturgies were not imposed before the end of the Fifth or beginning of the Sixth Age that is 200 year after is false and utterly wrong And then also the Church of England both in composing a Form and imposing it imitates a very pure Age of the Church viz. The time a little before the begining of the Fourth Century or thereabouts and hath the Prescription of 1400 years to justifie her in both But because his main Author is Vostius we will here observe what that learned Man freely owns as to Creeds viz. That there was a â—orm in the Oriental Church very like to that which is called the Apostles Creed long before the Council of Nice And this which we call the Apostles Creed was the Roman Form bâ—fâ—re the time of that same Council and the Creed of Aquileia differed from this but very little (r) Vosâ— de trib â—ymb diss 1. §. â—0 pag. 24. Again he saith these Forms were not made by any General Council and were so old in Ruffinus his time that they were taken to be Apostolical (s) Ibid. §. 45. pag. 31. And the Church of Jerusalem had a Form which seems to have been elder than any of them being explained by S Cyril An. 350. and then delivered as from a very ancient Tradition (t) Ibid. §. 51. pag. 34. And both he and Grotius who fancy the Creed consisted at first of no more Articles than those of the Trinity do believe the remaining Articles about the Catholic Church the Remission of Sins the Resurrection of the Body and the Life everlasting were added as early as Tertullian's Time So that if these Authors Conjectures be allowed then there were Forms of Creeds in every great and eminent Church before the Third Century began From whence I thus Argue in my Adversaries own way and almost in his very words It is not probable that they who had a Creed in a Set Form in every Principal Church and did impose this Form to be learned and used by all that were Admitted Members of that Church by Baptism even before the Third Century should not also have their Set Forms of Prayer to the use of which all the Members of that Church and all under its Jurisdiction were obliged How credible and likely is it that they who did not leave their Creed at liberty also did not allow Arbitrary Prayers Since Heresies might creep in by the way of Extempore Prayers and Hymns as easily as by the use of various and arbitrary Creeds If they thought it requisite to limit the Rule of Faith for this Reason there was the very same Reason to Limit the Prayers Supplications Lauds and Litanies (u) See the Disc of Lit. p. 102 103. This is his way of Arguing upon a false Supposition That the Creed was not in a Set Form in the First Ages Wherefore since it appears by his own Authors that it was in a Set Form in or before the Third Century he must allow this to be a firm Argument against him It is nothing to my Question to enter into the Controversie Whether the Apostles themselves made that Creed which goes under their Name But after I have considered all that Vossius c. have said in this Matter I am verily persuaded That the Apostles themselves did make one Form of Faith at first but did not commit it to writing because it was to be taught orally to every Christian at his Baptism and kept as the Cognizance to distinguish between Hereticks and true Believers and the likeness of all the ancient Forms to one another shews they had one and the same Original at first and were derived from the first Planters of Christianity As for the variety between these ancient Forms in several Churches it was the natural and necessary effect of delivering it Orally which in distant Countries and in tract of Time by passing through divers hands must needs produce some small difference in the Order and Words and that shews That Oral Tradition is not so safe a way to convey Articles of Faith as Writing and though the Apostles had left the Scripture to be a standing Rule to secure the Creed from any dangerous Corruption yet it was necessary to have this short Form besides to teach the Candidates for Baptism But if the Reader desire to see this more fully proved I refer him to a Learned Book writ by a very Worthy Author Mr. G. Ashwell Wherein both by Arguments and evidence of Antiquity it is strongly and clearly made out that this Creed was made by the Apostles themselves (w) 〈◊〉 Apoâ—â—â— or â— Dâ—scourse aâ—â—â—ting the Antâ—â—s and Autâ—◠〈…〉 Creed P inted at Oâ—â—a 1683. And there it may be seen how bold my Adversary is to give Ruffinus the Lye since all the Writers of that Age generally agree in the same thing There also it appears that my Adversary is grosly mistaken in affirming that the Ancients took no notice of this Creed for above 300 Years As for his Arguing That the subsequent Creeds varying from it shews they did not own that to be Apostolical especially since they preferred their own Forms before it on the most solemn occasions (x) Disc of Lâ—t 〈…〉 it proceeds upon a Mistake For Vossius owns that the later superadded Creeds were only taken to be Commentaries on the Former and clearer explications of such Articles as the Hereticks had attempted to pervert and he shews that they did not cast off nor disuse the ancient Form when they made these New ones They kept the Apostles Creed still and used that in the most solemn Office of Baptism Yea they gave it the precedence before all other Creeds and therefore the Third General Council says They received in the first place the Creed delivered to them by the most Holy Apostles and then the Confession made by 318 Holy Fathers in the City of Nice (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Act. Concil Ephesin Bin. Tom. I. par 2. pag. 415. Wherefore this was used and reckoned in the first place even after other Creeds came in Finally He need not wonder that the Creed in the Constitutions is not the same with that which we call the Apostles because no Man pretends now that the Apostles made those Constitutions The Creed found there as we have shewed is the Apostles Form as it was varied at Antioch about the Year 330 which Daillé owns to be the Time when that Clemens writ the Constitutions (z) Daill praef ad Dissert de relig cult objecto not the Year 500 as my Adversary falsly pretends (a) Disc of Lit. pag. 111. Now it is no wonder that the same Form in 300 Years time should be varied as much in two several Churches so far distant as Rome and
in and secondly by a most odious Representation of that Age For the first he concludes That for Five hundred years after Christ if not more the ordinary way of Worshiping God in public Assemblies was not by prescribed Liturgies (e) Disc of Lit. pag. 181. The falshood of which Conclusion this whole Discourse hath sufficiently discovered And his not being able to produce one clear Proof That Extempore Prayer was the way of Worshiping God in public in all this Period gives me reason more justly to conclude That for Five hundred years and more after Christ that kind of Praying was not used in Christian Assemblies Because to use his own words if there had been such a Way of Praying used constantly in all Churches for so long a time together there would have been such clear Evidence of it in many of the Ancients that there might have been had as full proof thereof as of any one thing and especially when this Author and his party have been searching so narrowly in Antiquity for this and are sensible how much their Cause is concerned in it and yet here is nothing produced that is positive or express (f) Disc of Lit. pag. 179 180. However let us for once suppose that Extempore or Arbitrary Praying was the Usage of the Church for Five hundred years together or more and that then Liturgies began to be imposed This was a remarkable and mighty change in the Public Service of God the restraining of a Liberty which we must suppose the Christian Priests and People had enjoyed down from the Time of the Apostles Now this could not have been done in an Age wherein there were so many eminent Writers and so many zealous Assertors of Apostolical Usages but it must have made a great noise in the World some would have complained of and written against this daring Innovation and as our Dissenters count it bold usurpation upon Mens Consciences and manifest quenching of the Spirit But my Adversary though very quick sighted can find nothing of this Matter he hath not one Quotation to this purpose There is an absolute Silence in all Authors of these Ages none claimed this pretended ancient Right none complained that it was taken from them nor did any so much as take notice of this eminent and public Alteration which undeniably proves there was no such Change then made and shews that prescribed Forms had been used in the foregoing Ages and continued in this Century as they were before My Adversary hath noted what Seditions hapned in divers Churches and what Noise was made over all the Christian World upon a small alteration in an ancient Form and is it likely all People would be so quiet and silent when the whole Manner of God's public Service was changed at once When we charge the Roman Church with the novelty of her Corruptions we prove that Accusation by shewing That such as lived before that Corruption came in believed or practised otherwise That such as lived when it was coming in opposed it and writ against it and many refused to submit to it after it was come in as in the case of Images But in this unjust Charge no such thing is made out wherefore we conclude That Liturgies are neither a Corruption nor an Innovation but the Pure and Primitive Way of the Christians public Worship But Secondly he is so confident that Liturgies were brought in and imposed about the Year 500 that he spends 17 Pages together which is all the rest of his Book in vilifying that Age and to this end he rakes together a mighty heap of Quotations to expose the Bishops and Clergy and indeed all the People of those Times the design of which is besides the gratifying his Ill-will to the Sacred Order of Episcopacy to shew That since the Governours of the Church and the whole Age was so extreamly bad and degenerate when Liturgies first were imposed therefore they are a Corruption and the Vse of them is by no means to be approved But he hath managed this odious Charge with so much Spite and so many Fallacies That though his gross misdating the Original of Liturgies makes all this to be nothing to our Question yet I cannot shut up this Discourse till I have shewed First the weakness of this Argument suppoposing the Premisses were true And Secondly the many Fallacies and Mistakes that appear in his managing of it and in the Instances which he brings to make it out First The Argument it self is trifling and the Reasoning very frivolous upon Two Accounts For First No wise Man will say that every thing must be Evil which is begun in an ill Age No Times were worse than those wherein our Lord began to Preach the Gospel no People wickeder than the Jews at that Time The Northern Nations were bloody and barbarous cruel and persidious to the highest Degree when the Scripture was first Translated into the Gothic Tongue And King Alfred's Age was extreamly Ignorant and notoriously Vitious yet then the Gospels and other excellent Books were translated into Saxon. The Reformation it self was begun in an Age when the generality of the Clergy and Laity both were as destitute of Learning as they were of Vertue But how ridiculous would he be that should disparage the Reformation the Translating of Holy Scripture and the Gospel it self by haranguing upon the Times when these things first appeared in the World There have been many Ill things brought in even in good Times and many Good things in bad Times so that there is no Arguing from this Topic with any solidity or certainty indeed if he had proved that these Evil Men brought in Liturgies and none but Evil Men used them and submitted to them that had been something to the purpose Now this we might do as to his Dear Way of Extempore Prayer For the Directory was first set up and enjoyned here in a Time of Rebellion and Sacriledge in a Time wherein there were more vile Hypocrites and profligate Wretches under the Mask of Religion than ever were known in this Nation in any Age before which is largely made out by very many Books then Writ which beyond contradiction declare the Matter of Fact to be true (g) See Edward's Gangrena in three Parts History of Independency Mercurius Rusticus c. Yea I could prove That divers who promoted this New Way of Praying and pretended to the Gift in a most extraordinary degree were tried and upon full proof convicted of the blackest Crimes that Men or Women could possibly commit such as Witchcraft Incest and other Sins not to be named and suffered Death for them (h) Mrs 〈◊〉 in the Counteâ—n me â—heâ—â— Mâ—â—â—r Weer in Raâ—â—â— realrivus which is more concluding against Directories and Extempore Praying than any thing he urges against Liturgies But I will not insist upon so odious and ungrateful a way of Arguing Secondly There never was any Age of which the Good Men then alive did not
do good (c) Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 6. Now these being the constant and common wants of all Men and things daily needful for every one it was most fit to ask them in a set Form of Words and if they had pray'd for these things Extempore Clemens could not have been so positive in the Method as he seems to be I had almost forgot one of his Objections which is That the Christians then lifted up their Hands and Eyes to Heaven in Prayer which shews they had no Books (d) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 9. Clem. Alex. ibid. I reply It proves no such matter because though the Priest did read his part out of a Book the People might lift up their Hands and Eyes so long as he prayed alone and by frequent use of the common Forms both they and he would be so ready at the accustomed Words as to have liberty enough to look off from their Books and look up to Heaven as we in this Church often do in the use of our Liturgy § 4. At the same time flourished Tertullian Tertullian An. Dom. 192. in whose Works we have sufficient evidence that they used Forms of Prayer and Praises For he declares That Christ hath fixed a new Form of Prayer for us who are his Disciples viz. The Lord's Prayer which he expounds in a peculiar Tract (e) Tertul. de Orat. cap. 1. And in divers places calls it The lawful and the ordinary Prayer (f) De Orat. cap. 9. de Jejun cap. 15. pag. 553. de fuga in persec cap. 2. there being clear proof in him that the Christians daily repeated this very Form Now if they used but one Form in their Devotions they could not think Forms were unlawful nor imagine that Forms stinted the Spirit as our Dissenters now believe Yea that they used in public to pray by Forms seems to be intimated in that Passage That the Christians met together and as if they were drawn up to Battel did joyntly set upon God with their Prayers which Violence was acceptable to the Almighty (g) Quasi manu factâ precationibus ambiamus haec vis Deo grata est Tertul. Apol. cap. 39. for this implies their joyning Voices as well as Hearts And though he do not give us the very words of their Litany because he writ to the Unbelievers yet he describes some of the things which they desired of God to bestow on the Emperours viz. That they might have a long life and a quiet Empire that their Family might be safe their Armies valiant their Senate faithful their People virtuous and that the whole World might be in peace (h) Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. And it must be noted that Tertullian could not have quoted these particulars as a proof of the Christians Loyalty if they had not generally asked these very things Extempore Prayers would have been so various that they could have been no evidence in this or any other case Moreover he calls the Offices used in the celebration of the Eucharist Divine and Solemn Rites and adds That after these solemn Rites were finished the People were dismissed (i) Dominica solennia transacta solennia dimissa plebe Tert. de anim cap. 9. where though he studiously avoid reciting any part of the Office yet he intimates by that Phrase it was a Form because Solennes Preces Solemn Prayers among the Romans were those certain and solemn words in Prayer from which they might not vary (k) Brisson de formul lib. 1. pag. 61. He also saith concerning Baptism That Christ had not only imposed the Law of Baptizing but also prescribed the Form of it (l) Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 13. So that Baptism doubtless was performed then by a certain and set Form and though our Adversary argues that Tertullian uses variety of Words concerning this Form (m) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 94. 95. yet it is to be noted that this is only in his discoursing concerning it where Tertullian doth not pretend to cite the words but mentions the thing occasionally As to the Laudatory part of the Service it appears from him that they sang Psalms and Hymns alternately and therefore in Forms (n) Tert. ad uxor lib. 2. pag. 172. one of which Forms was the Gloria Patri which he describes as Irenaeus did by the last words World without end Amen For he asks the Christians If they could give testimony to a Gladiator in the Theatre with that Mouth which said Amen in the Church or if they could say World without end to any but God or Christ (o) Ex ore que Amen in sanctum protuleris gladiatori testimonium reddere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alii omnino dicere nisi Deo Christo Tert. de spectac pag. 83. From whence we may infer that the Glory be to the Father c. which was a Form in the Gallican Church in Irenaeus his time was also a Form used in Tertullian's time in Africa and so may be justly taken for one of the primitive and universal Forms by which all Churches did glorifie God And it will be very hard for our Adversary to give a Reason why they might not use Forms in their Prayers as well as in their Praises He urges against this one passage of Tertullian where describing their Love-Feasts he saith After they have washed their hands and brought in Lights they called for some to sing either Psalms or somewhat of their own Composing (p) Tertul. Apol. cap. 39. Discourse of Liturg. p. 126 143. But if we look on the place we shall find this was after the public Worship was done at their common Meal and if this Hymn was taken out of the Psalms then it was a Form most certainly or if it were of their own Composing probably it was made at home however it will not follow that now those miraculous Gifts of Inspiration are ceased we may compose Extempore Hymns because they did it in an Age when many had those Gifts Some other slight Objections he raises out of this Author against Forms of Prayer As First That Christians then looked up to Heaven when they prayed (q) Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. Disc of Liturg. p. 9. But this was answered before and yet we must add that Tertullian affirms they did not always look up to Heaven in Prayer For sometimes he saith They did not look up with confidence toward Heaven but imitated the Publican who prayed with an humble and down-cast Countenance (r) Idem de Oratione c. 13. And S. Cyprian observes That the Christians did not impudently lift up their Eyes to Heaven (s) Cypr. de Orat. Dom. §. 4. p. 310 So that no Argument can be drawn from the one posture or the other But his main Objection out of Tertullian is that Phrase of Sine monitore quia de pectore viz. That the Christians prayed without a Monitor because they prayed out of their Breast
how they should do (m) Math. viii 4. Mark i. 44. Luke v. 14. and the Word whence it is derived signifies to methodize put in order and to place Souldiers in their Ranks (n) Cor. 15.23 so to do all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to Order (o) 1 Cor. xiv 40. is to act according to a prescribed Rule which Rule S. Paul saith he will make or prescribe when he came (p) 1 Cor. xi 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This then being the proper and natural signification of this Word we may reasonably expound it of Prescribed Forms of Prayer both for Morning and Evening of which as the Centuriators observe Origen speaks in other places (q) Magdeb. Cent. 3. cap. 6. pag. 134. But our Adversary would shift off this proof also First By asking If these were not private Prayers (r) Disc of Liturg pag 140. I Answer The Words are general not restrained either to public or private Prayers expresly but it being certain the Christians had a custom to assemble Morning and Evening to Prayers the phrase of using these Prayers Night and Day seems chiefly to be referred to public Offices Secondly He asks If no Prayers can be commanded but in Set Forms I Reply The Word doth not barely signifie Prayers commanded but enjoyned according to a prescribed Order as I have proved Now Prayers left to the Invention of Men to be daily made new cannot properly be called Ordered Prayers And therefore though Christian Ministers were commanded to preach yet the Words and Method being left to their invention or choice our Adversary can no where find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 made use of as an Epithet for a Sermon or Homily Note also Origen doth not say The Christians made these enjoyned Prayers but used them which supposes they were made into a prescribed Form before Thirdly He enquires If there be no Commands for Praying frequently but Human Prescriptions and I must ask what is this to the purpose Origen is not speaking of Commanding Men to pray nor declaring whether the Duty of Prayer be prescribed by God or the Church He is speaking of the Prayers themselves and gives them this Character that they were Ordered or Prescribed so that he is very impertinent to tell us of Divine Commands to pray frequently since Origen's Words are not about Obeying a Precept to Pray but using ordered enjoyned or prescribed Prayers which all ingenuous Men must own to be in Forms and that proves a Liturgy because it is Prayers in the plural Number Thirdly in the same Books against Celsus when Origen cites some certain passages out of the Psalms â—e brings them in with these Prefaces We â—nd in the Prayers or We say often in the Prayer (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. in Cels lib. 4. p. 178 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. pag. 197. And thus it is said in the Prayer or The prudent when he prayeth â—aith (t) Idem lib. 6. pag. 285. lib. 7. pag. 354. Now when we consider that the Psalms were the main part of the Jewish Liturgy and that the Christians in the first Ages inclined to imitate their Forms and above all the Old Testament admired and frequently used the Book of Psalms and took their Forms of Praise from thence we may conclude they borrowed many Forms of Prayer also from the Psalms and transcribed them into their Liturgy so that Origen appeals to these passages as being known by the Christians to be a part of their Prayers Which will still be clearer when we observe that the Abassine Christians who are very tenacious of primitive Rites and derived most of their Usages from the Ancient Church of Alexandria as Ludolfus relates Take most of their daily Prayers out of the Psalter (u) Ludolf hist Ethiop lib. 2. cap. 12. And therefore Origen who belonged to Alexandria no doubt refers by these Prefaces to the public and known Liturgy then used in that famous Church Our Adversary is not pleased at this Inference and whereas his own Eyes are so blinded with his Extempore Way that he cannot see the clearest light for Forms he saith it argues a Fancy deeply tinctured with Liturgies to suppose this to be any proof of them But let it be noted he barely asserts it is no proof and most falsly represents the matter for he saith When Origen quotes any passage out of the Psalms he thus speaks c. (w) Discourse of Liturg. p. 139. Now this is not true because first Origen in that very Book cites an hundred passages out of the Psalms without any such Preface without saying They are found in the Prayers c. Secondly The places which he doth cite with such a Preface are always very proper to be used in a Liturgy as Forms of Praise or Prayer Such as these The Earth is full of the Goodness of the Lord and Open thou mine Eyes that I may see the wondrous things of thy Law Create in me a clean Heart O God and the like So that these and no other passages being said to be found in the Prayers c. no doubt we have all imaginable cause to think that these very words of the Psalms were in Origen 's time used in the Churches Liturgy and prescribed in the Forms of Public Prayer Especially since he can ascribe no sufficient Reason but the peculiar use made of these Select places in the public Offices which made Origen quote them with such a Preface and cite other passages of the Psalms as he doth other Scriptures without any Preface at all Fourthly Our Adversary cites another place out of Origen's Homilies taken at the second hand from Dailé to prove they used no Forms of Prayer in that Age because it is said Our Thoughts must not wander after our Senses in Prayer but be wholly intent and fixed on God not being disturbed by the Idea of any External appearance (y) Orig. in Num. hom XI I shall not here need to fly to his help at a dead lift that possibly Ruffinus the Translator did put in these Words For allowing them to be genuine it must be more unlawful to let our Minds wander after new Phrases and our Fancy rove about for Matter Order and Words which is the case in Extempore Prayer than it is to repeat the Words of a known Form which we can say by heart or read without disturbance because the actings of the Fancy and Invention in Extempore Prayer do much more hinder the Mind from steddy thinking upon God than having a Book before us in the recital of a common and usual Form Lastly I hope it is needless to repeat what was shewed before viz. That Origen's Phrases of Praising God as well as we are able (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. in Cels l. 8. pag. 402. and Praying to him with all the might we have (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. ib. pag. 386. See the Discourse of Liturg
Extempore more than the other and it being very fit one part of the public Service should be like the other But our Adversary asks Why this Bishop did not alter the Liturgy also (y) Discourse of Liturgy p. 26. And though I am not bound to answer all his random Questions and suppositions grounded upon this Negative that Eusebius doth not say He did alter the Liturgy Yet I shall Reply That Hymns are more proper than Prayers are to set out and magnifie our Saviour's Divinity and so were much more offensive to this Heretick than the Prayers which were only addressed to the Father in the Name of Christ as our Mediator which the Arians allowed him to be And therefore Paulus began to reject the Hymns but probably he might have proceeded further if he had not been so early discovered and expelled before he could make any more Alterations Nor is it unlikely that the Liturgy was so ancient at Antioch being extant in Ignatius's Time that he durst not venture upon that at first I shall add no more in this Century but to observe That in the Epistle of Dionysius of Alexandria recorded by Eusebius it appears to have been the general usage of the Church for every one of the People to say Amen when they heard the Priest offer them the Sacrament and say The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ c. (z) Euseb hist Eccles lib. 6. cap. 35. p. 180. Which was a Form so universally used in all Churches of the World that we may conclude it was enjoyned by all Liturgies otherwise it had been impossible that all Christians should have so exactly agreed in that Form at that place and on that occasion We proceed now to Times of greater Light and more clear Evidence CHAP. IV. Of Liturgies in the Fourth Century § 1. THat the Use of Forms and stated Liturgies did not begin in the end of the Fifth nor in the entrance of the Sixth Century is very plain from the preceding Testimonies which sufficiently confute our Adversaries Assertion Yet if we had no Evidence of setled Forms of Prayer before this Age it had been enough to justifie our use of them because this is the first Century wherein the miraculous Gifts were ceased and the Church was setled under Christian Magistrates Wherefore since we plead for the use of a prescribed Liturgy in an established Church it is as much Antiquity as our Cause needs to shew we have Precedents for it from this Age that is as soon as the Primitive Churches Circumstances and ours did agree Now the Centuriators tell us that upon the Settlement of the Church The Bishops appointed Prayers for all things necessary for the happy state of the Empire for the Emperours for the safety of the Church for public Peace and for the Vnconverted (a) Episcopipreces Sacras ordinarunt pro omnibus rebus necessariis c. Magd. Cent. 4. §. 7. pag. 498. Now if the Bishops appointed such Prayers doubtless the Inferiour Clergy did use them and that shews there was a prescribed Liturgy Yet our Adversary strives by all kinds of Artifice to hide this plain Truth and the first Authors he produces in this Century are Arnobius and Lactantius to prove the Christians looked up to Heaven when they prayed (b) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 9. Which we freely grant but reject his consequence of their having no Written Forms since Experience shews that both Priest and People by frequent use of our Common Prayer may and do often look up to Heaven when they pray by this Form And as for one of these very Fathers ARNOBIUS An. Dom. 303. viz. ARNO BIVS though he writ against the Gentiles a little before the Settlement of the Church and therefore speaks very cautiously of the Christian Rites (c) Ita de Eucharistid loquitur viz. ut ad illud quod dabitur possint esse paratae Arnob. lib. 2. pag. 65. yet there are some Intimations in him of the use of Forms We adore saith he him that is higher than all and pray to him by a Venerable Service we supplicate him with Daily Prayers and vocally call on him for that which we need To venerate this supreme King is the end and design of these Divine Offices To him according to custom we all prostrate our selves adoring him with our joynt Prayers and requesting of him things just honest and fit for his holy Ears (d) Hic propositus terminus divinorum Officiorum hic finis est Huic omnes ex more prosternimur hunc Collatis Precibus adoramus c. Id. lib. 1. pag. 13 14 15. Now this Venerable Service of Daily Prayers vocally performed in Divine Offices wherein all the Christians joyned and bore a part can be no other than stated Forms known before to the Congregation and unless the Ministers and People had used such Forms Arnobius could not be sure they should always ask things fit for Gods holy Ears The same Author in another place evidently points to that Litany which Tertullian had briefly described in his Apology saying In our Conventicle we Invocate the Supreme God praying for Peace and Pardon to all Men For the Magistrates the Armies for the Emperours for our Friends and our Enemies for those that are alive and those that are dying (e) Arnob. adv gent. lib. 4. pag. 152. which are the very Heads that other Fathers set down when they do not design to quote the Words of their Litany but only to describe it in a public Discourse Constantin M. An. Dom. 312. § 2. The first Christian Emperour Constantine the Great who now established by Secular Laws the true Worship of God is our next Evidence for the use of prescribed Forms For Eusebius who was an Eye and Ear witness of those Transactions which he relates concerning him gives us an Account That he ordered his Palace after the manner of a Church and that when the Christians were assembled he would begin to take the Books into his hands either for explaining the Holy Scripture or repeating the prescribed Prayers in his Royal Family (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb vit Const l. 4 c. 17. p. 395. He also relates That he made a Form of Prayer for his Guards which they were to use every Sunday (g) Id. ib. c. 18. and he taught them to recite this Prayer with hands lifted up to Heaven and with the Eyes of their Minds lifted up still higher even to the King of Heaven (h) Id. ib. c. 19. The very Words of which Form Eusebius sets down (i) Id. ib. c. 20. and commends the pious Emperour because he was a Teacher of the Words of Prayer (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb de laud. Constantin p. 465. Now we learn from hence First That repeating Prayers out of a Book was the usage of Christians in the Church because when this was done in Constantine's Family it made his Court to resemble a Church
short account of the general Litany made by the Deacon for the whole World and every part of it for Priests and Princes for the Bishop and the Emperor and the Peace of all (b) Id. ibid. and also the Form of the Bishops Blessing and of the final Prayer (c) Id. ibid. pag. 45 probably to be used in ordinary Assemblies In these Constitutions we find private Christians enjoyned to say the Lords Prayer as a Form thrice in a Day (d) Ibid. lib. 7. cap. 25. and we have Forms drawn up for their use both before and after the Sacrament (e) Ibid. cap. 26.27 and upon divers other occasions (f) Ibid. cap. 34 35 c. There is also an Office of Baptism with Forms of Renunciation of the Devil and confessing the Faith as also a Form for Consecrating the Water c. (g) Ibid. cap. 41 42 43. An Office for the Ordination of a Bishop (h) Lib. 8. cap. 3. and also for the Ordaining Priests and Deacons c. (i) Ibid. cap. 24 25. But most particularly there is the Office at the Communion with all those Forms used at those most Solemn Assemblies (k) Ibid. lib. 8. 〈…〉 5. ad 〈…〉 That is to say The Litany said by the Deacon for the Catechumens the Faithful answering to each Petition Domine miserere with the Bishops Prayer for them The like Litany and prescribed Prayers for those that were possessed those who were to be Baptized and for the Penitents And after these were all gon out there is also prescribed a Litany by the Deacon and a Prayer by the Bishop for the Faithful After which follows Forms prescribed for the Salutation the first Benediction the offering of their Gifts the invitation the Preface Lift up your Hearts c. The Hymn called Trisagion to be sung by all the People And also a Form for consecrating the Elements An intercession for all Estates of Men The order for receiving and saying Amen when they do receive The singing of the xxxiv Psalm O tast and see how Gracious the Lord is Finally there is a public Form of Prayer after the Communion and the concluding Benediction with many other Forms on other less Solemn occasions Particularly there are Forms for Morning and Evening Prayer as our Adversary confesseth (l) Disc of Liturg. pag. 162. Marg. Now if all this will not amount to a Liturgy then there is no such thing in the World and if it be a Liturgy then prescribed Forms must needs be used when this Author writ yea and long before otherwise he could not have pretended that the Apostles were Authors of these Forms his very pretending that shews that those of that Age had lost the memory of the first composers of these Forms and this Author took advantage from their Immemorial use to ascribe them to the Apostles Now our Adversary being aware of this though he dare not deny these Constitutions to be good Evidence for that time wherein they were written yet labours to disparage and baffle this clear Witness by several Crafty Cavils and Objections First He thrusts this Writer down above one whole Century and pretends he lived in the end of the Fifth or the begining of the Sixth Age (m) Disc of Liturg. p. 110 111. But this is most notoriosly false as may be proved First Because the Fathers of the Fourth Century cite it as a known Book in this Age. Secondly Because the matter of these Forms are exactly agreeable to the Doctrin and Practice of the Third and Fourth Centuries For the first point Athanasius reckons this Book which he calls the Doctrin of the Apostles among those which the Fathers allowed â—o be Read in the Church therefore it was extant long before his time (n) Athan. Epistol ad Ammam Monach Eusebius also computes it among those Writings which though they were not Canonical Scripture yet were approved by the Ancients and distinguishes it from the Books which the Hereticks had Forged (o) Euseb Hist lib. Cap. 19. pag. 71. S. Cyril in the middle of this Century cites that passage about the Phaenix out of it and ascribes â—t by name to Clemens (p) Cyril Catech 18. p. 213. Collat. cum Constit Clem. lib. 5. cap. 8. which he would not have don if it had not been then accounted an approved Book and well known to those of his Age. Epiphanius quotes it very often in his Book against Heresies by the express name of the Apostolical Constitutions as an Author of eminent Credit and whose Testimony was sufficient as to what was a Primitive usage (q) Epiphan Panar lib. 1. Tom. 3. Haer. 45 Lib. 3. Tom. 1. Haer. 75. and he gives this Character of them That many doubted of them but did not reject them For saith he all regular Order is contained in them and there is nothing contrary either to Faith or Worship or to the Rule of Church Government (r) Epiphan Ibid. lib. 3. Tom. 1. Haer. 70. that is they contain all necessary directions as to Doctrin Divine Offices and Discipline Now if this Book had this Reputation in this Fourth Century we must believe it was written sooner and we may well allow it as good Evidence for Matter of Fact at least in this Age where we are content to place it and we hope our Adversaries will not be able to except against our modest assignation of the Constitutions to the later part of this Century because Mr. Cook thinks their true Author was Contemporary with S. Basil who died An. 378 (s) Discou se of Lâ—turg p. 110. Maâ—g And Monsieur Dailé reckons these Constitutions among the most ancient Books which are Apocryphal and confesseth They were published soon after the year of Christ 330 and therefore he cites them as good Evidence for the Usages of this Century and the former (t) Dâ—â—le p aefat ad l â—run de Relig. â—â—â—tus obj â—o pâ—oâ—eâ—nem for which reason he must allow them to be a sufficient Witness for the use of Forms and Liturgy in these two Ages And truly Secondly We may prove this Book to be at least thus ancient by the Matter of it which is Primitive pure and pious and the Forms are taken out of Scripture or the Writings of the most genuine Fathers and are proper to the several occasions and agreeable to the Opinion and Practice of these Ages being free from those grosser Corruptions of the later Times such as Invocation of the Virgin Mary the Saints and Angels Adoration of Images Crosses and Relicks the Sacrifice Propitiatory of the Mass the Popes Infallibility and Supremacy with such like Yea this Liturgy being allowed to have been used in this Century and not mentioning any of these things is a good proof That they are all notorious Corruptions and Innovations there is nothing but some Charitable Prayers for the Dead without any respect to Purgatory which can be excepted against in
these Offices because we see in Arnobius and others that this Usage was crept into the Christian Worship at least as early as the beginning of this Century Wherefore we conclude that these Constitutions and the Forms contained therein are a clear and convincing Evidence that a prescribed Liturgy was used in this Age. But Secondly our Adversary goes on to raise other Scruples For he tells us out of this Author that they were so strict in concealing their Mysteries that if a Catechumen by chance had been present they immediately Baptized him (p) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 43. Marg. I Answer It is very pleasant for him to cite a Book wherein all these Mysteries are written down at large to prove there were no Mysteries written down in that Age and it is very weak or something worse to say they concealed them from the Faithful because they kept them secret from the Catechumens He knew very well that in â—â—is Age they did write down their Offices but charged the Priests and Faithful to keep these Words and Writings from the Unbaptized Another Objection is That the Creed set down in the Constitutions is not the same with the Apostles Creed therefore there was no certain Form of Creed (w) Discourse of Liturg. p. 103. I Reply The Creed here set down was the Form then used in that Church of which this Author was a Member probably of Antioch And as new Heresies arose it was necessary for all Churches to make larger Paraphrases upon some Articles of the old Creed to secure all that were admitted into the Church against those Heresies But still this Creed thus Paraphrased was a Form prescribed to all that were Baptized in that Diocess and that is enough to prove there were Forms used in every Church nor do I see any thing that he can infer from hence but that since the Apostles made that Creed which goes by their Name and yet this Creed differs from it therefore the Apostles did not make these Constitutions themselves which we freely confess Like this is his Objection about the Form of renouncing the Devil in Baptism which is not set down in the same Words in these Constitutions as it is in other Fathers (x) Discourse of Liturg. p. 106. I Reply This was the Form at Antioch that in S. Cyril was the Form at Jerusalem that in S. Chrysostom the Form at Constantinople and the difference between them is so very small that it shews they all were taken from one Original and all Churches had Forms of this Renunciation yet in several Diocesses they had some diversity in expressing it but this doth not prove either that they had no Forms nor that any Inferiour Minister was left at liberty to express it as he pleased these being obliged to keep to the Form prescribed in their own Church I shall only desire the Reader to observe that in that large Margin where he hath heaped up variety of Forms of Renouncing the Devil one half of them are not the Words of any Churches Form but only short and occasional descriptions of it in lax Discourses and so are not to be urged as various Forms Lastly He picks up several Phrases dispersed up and down the Constitutions pretending that the Priest was at liberty to say those or such like Prayers and Praises (y) Discourse of Liturg. p. 110 111. But first He falsly expounds most of these Phrases for when that Author saith The Priest must pray or say thus or must say these Words or those which follow (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Constit Apostol l. 7. cap. 43 45. l. 8. c. 29 c. and then immediately subjoyns a Form it is clear to all that the Priest is to say that Form and no other And the same sense may very well be put upon those other Phrases of the Priests saying such a kind of Prayer or the Bishops giving such a kind of Blessing (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Constit ibid. l. 7. cap. 45. lib. 8. cap. 16. viz. that these Phrases do intend no more than that they shall Pray and Bless in this wise or after this sort For it must be granted that we have a prescribed Form for the absolving of the Sick from which no Minister may vary and yet the Rubric before it saith The Priest shall absolve him after this sort (b) Rubric in Office for Visiting the Sick Wherefore the Author never meant by these Phrases to leave the Priest to say what Prayers he pleased in an Extempore way and indeed when he hath set down a Form a Prayer made Extempore is not such a like Prayer nor a Prayer after that sort But suppose we should grant which I do not think we need yield that these Phrases do signifie their making any other Form like this still this obliges them to Forms and being these Phrases are but four times in all that large Book of Offices it was no great matter to leave the Bishop especially at liberty to change the Form three or four times in so great variety of Prayers Praises and Benedictions And if all the rest were fixed and stated Forms from which none might vary that is enough to prove my Position and this Objection can no more weaken it than a Mans alledging that Canon of Praying before Sermon in this Form or to this effect (c) Book of Canons and that Rubric which bids us exhort the sick Man after this Form or other like (d) Rubric in Office for Visit Sick would prove there was no prescribed Liturgy in the Church of England because some liberty is left in a few Cases yet this is the most that can be made of this Toping Argument though we grant all he can desire I conclude therefore that there was prescribed Forms and a Liturgy used before the Middle of this Fourth Century and that these Forms in the Constitutions were the Liturgy of some eminent Eastern Church § 8. We have no less Authority than S. Hierom to prove that Hilary S. Hilary Bish of Poictiers An. Dom. 360. Bishop of Poictiers Made one Book of Hymns and another of Mysteries (e) Hieron Catalog Script pag 378. that is he composed a Liturgy and since he had lived in the East where Liturgies now were commonly used we may reasonably believe he brought the same Usage into the Gallican Church For he saith That those without may hear the Voice of the People Praying and singing Hymns within the Church and may perceive their making Responses to the devout Confessions in the Offices of the Divine Sacraments (f) Et inter divinorum quoque Sacramentorum officia responsionem devotae contessionis accipiat Hilar. Com. in Psal 65. Which shews they had an Office for the Holy Communion wherein the People bore a part as they did also in the Hymns and other Prayers for all which there were Forms appointed And these Forms
were used Morning and Evening for he tells us That the day began with Prayer and was closed up with Hymns (g) Idem in Psal 64. and blames those whose Lips murmured they knew not what and while their Thoughts roved and their Mind was busied about other things did not attend to the Office which they were reciting These and many other passages in him make it plain that the Gallican Church had Forms and a Liturgy in this Age. Yea it will appear That all Christian Churches had so if we consider the Method that Julian the Apostate Julian the Apostate An. Dom. 361. took to establish Paganism which was to accommodate it as much as possible to Christianity the Rites of which he saw were then very popular and taking And therefore he devised to make a Form of Prayers in parts for the Heathen Worship to set up Schools and Lectures of Philosophy and to enjoyn Penances to Offenders Which things saith Nazianzen are clearly agreeable to our good Order (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazian in Jul. Orat. 3 p. 102. And Sozomen relating the same thing saith That Julian designed to adorn his Gentile Temples with the Order of Christian-Worship and therefore among other things He appointed prescribed Prayers upon Set-days and Hours (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zoz hist lib. 5. cap. 15. From whence it is as clear as the Sun That in Julian's Time the Christians generally used a Form of Prayer in parts so that the People could make their Responses and that they had proper Forms appointed for certain Days yea for the several Hours of Prayer in every Day and this was so grateful to the People of that Age that this ingenious Apostate in one of his Epistles yet extant advises his Pagan Priests to Pray thrice a day if possible or however Morning and Evening both in private and public and to learn the Hymns of the Gods which were made in older and in later Times adding that there was a Liturgy for these Priests and a Law directing them what to do in their Temples from which they might not vary (k) Julian Fragment Epistol in oper pag 552. So that he had actually brought the Christian Orders into the Service of the Heathen Gods and because Christians had Responses in their Prayers and sung their Hymns alternately so did he appoint the Pagans to pray and sing by such like Forms § 9. The next place must be assigned to the Council of Laodicea The Council of Laodicea An. Dom. 365. which is one of the earliest Synods after the setling of Christianity and its Canons have always been received by the Catholic Church And here we have many convincing proofs that the Christians then had written and prescribed Forms of Prayer and Praise and used a Liturgy in the Service of God First we find an order that the Hereticks who returned to the Church should learn the Creeds (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Laod. Can. 7. Bever Tom. 1. pag. 455. probably the Apostles and the Nicene Creed However they must be Set Forms or otherwise how could Men learn them Secondly In this Council we meet with Canonical Singers who sang out of written Books and none but they are allowed to Sing in the Church (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Can. 15. p. 459. that is as Balsamon well Notes to begin the Hymns for the People were always allowed to follow them and Sing with and after them Now if they had Forms of Praise written in a Book why might they not have their Prayers written also in a Book T is certain they had no great esteem for Extempore composures nor for variety of Forms neither because they forbid the Reading of Psalms composed by private Men in the Church (n) Ibid. Can. â—â— p 480. And enjoyn the use of the same Office for the Evening Prayer at whatever hour of the Afternoon it was said which is the true meaning of that famous Canon about which our Adversary raiseth so much dust The Words of it are these That the very same Liturgy of Prayers ought to be used always both at three in the Afternoon and in the Evening (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 18. Bev. Tom. 1. p. 461. that is saith Balsamon they forbid Men to reject the Prayers which the Fathers had appointed for three in the Afternoon and to make new Prayers of their own on pretence they used them at the time of the Evening Hymns And Zonaras saith The Council rejects new Prayers and allows none but such as had been approved in a Synod nor would they permit Men to use Prayers of their own making in public but the same Prayers which had been delivered down to them were to be said in every Assembly (p) Balsam Zonar apud Beveâ—eg ibid. To which I will only add this That the whole day being divided by the hours of Prayer as it had formerly been among the Jews the Morning hour took in the time from Six till Nine The Noon-hour of Prayer was said any time between Nine and Three and The Evening-hour Prayer might be said between Three in the Afternoon and Six at Night soon after which was the time for Singing those Hymns at the first lighting of Candles and it seems some put these two last Offices together and having said the usual Forms for Evening Prayer at Three of the Clock when they were to Sing the Evening Hymns at Candles lighting Composed new Forms of Evening Prayer and used them in the Church which the Synod forbids and enjoyns the same Liturgy or Forms of Prayer which had been used in the Afternoon to be repeated over again with the Hymns in the Evening Now this Canon made in the Eastern Church where Liturgies were then commonly used must be expounded of a Set and prescribed Form and therefore divers of the Presbyterian persuasion have confessed that Liturgies have been used for at least 1300 years (q) See Falkner's Vindic. of Liturg. pag. 140. And Smectymnuus derives the use of them from this Canon and believes the sense of it to be that none should vary but always use the same Form (r) Smectym Answer to remonstr p. 7. But our Adversary resolves right or wrong that Liturgies shall not be grounded upon this Canon Wherefore first he Assigns a date to the Council later than he ought for he saith it was in the latter end of the fourth Century (s) Disc of Lituâ—g p. 61. whereas it was held soon after the middle of it Secondly He reserves this Canon to the latter end of his Book not daring to produce it till he had prepossessed his Reader with a false Notion That there were no Liturgies in this Age (t) Ibid. p. 155. Then he recites the Words of it wrong putting the Evening before the Ninth hour (u) Ibid p. 156. And in another place he brings in Caranzas false Translation of this Canon who leaves
one thing in this Canon which makes it more than probable that the Prayers for the Faithful were Forms and that is the Reason why as this Canon speaks they dismissed the Catechumens which seems to be for fear by daily hearing these Forms they should remember the Phrases of these Mysteries and discover them to profane and common Ears For if these Prayers had been Extempore and the Phrases varied every day as my Adversary pretends the Catechumens might safely have stayed there it being impossible they should so learn or remember those various Expressions as to relate them to any body after they were gone home Finally Why should we not believe this Order was the Method of the public Forms of Prayer there being the same Order exactly observed in all those Ancient Forms which are extant at this day and not one word that intimates any such thing as an Extempore Prayer or frequent variation of the Forms either in this Council or in any Father or Council about this time And this may suffice for these Canons which after all his shuffling Objections are good Evidence for a stated Liturgy in this Age. Optatus Milev An. Dom. 368. § 10. Optatus Milevitanus though he writ on a different Subject yet he hath divers Expressions which suppose and imply that there was in his time a Liturgy used in Africa For he mentions the Peoples joyning with the Priest in the Divine Service and blames the Donatists for shutting the mouths of all Christian Nations and forcing all the People to be silent (u) Optat. Milev lib. 2. pag. 47. which shews they used alternate Singing and Responses among the Orthodox and that Method cannot be but by Form Yea he declares there were some certain Words so established and enjoyned by Law in the celebration of the Sacrament that the Donatists themselves could not pass them by (w) Illud legitimum in Sacramentorum mysterio praeterire non posse Id. ibid. pag. 53. and from their using these Words he draws an Argument against their Schism which he could not have done if they had not been fixed and a Set Form My Adversary mistakes this passage and fancies that Optatus refers to the Prayer of Consecration which could never be omitted (x) Discourse of Liturgy p. 61. but the holy Father explains himself in the same Page and shews us that he means the Prayer For the Holy Catholic Church You say saith Optatus that you offer for that One Church which is diffused over the whole World (y) Offerre vos dicitis pro una Ecclesia quae sit in toto terrarum orbe diffusa Optat. ibid. Thus he saith the Orthodox prayed and this was so established that the Donatists in this exceeding our Dissenters that they had not thrown off the Churches Forms could not omit it And thus the Learned Fr. Baldwin expounds it He means saith he that Solemn Form of the Canonical Prayer in which it is said We offer unto thee this Sacrifice for that One Church which is diffused over all the World (z) Fr. Bald. notis in Optat. pag. 185. Which Words also are in the Mystical Prayer set down by the Author of the Apostostolical Constitutions (a) Constit Apostol lib. 8. cap. 13. cap 18. and are found with little variation in that very Prayer in all the ancient Liturgies Now by Legitimum Optatus cannot mean that these Words were enjoyned by the Law of Christ because this Form being not enjoyned by any Scripture therefore it must signifie a Form enjoyned by the Laws of the Church which in that Age did so strictly enjoyn this very Prayer that it seems None might omit or pass it by And there is another Form of Ecclesiastical Appointment in the same Author brought in with the same Preface You cannot omit saith he again to the Donatists that which is established by Law for certainly you say Peace be with you (b) Et non potuistis praetermittere quod legittimum est utique dixistis Pax vabiscum ic lib. 3. pag. 73. Now this was the Form of Episcopal Benediction we have it in all old Liturgies and it is plain by Optatus his raising an Argument from these Words That the African Church had them in their Liturgy which was so firmly established that none could omit any part of it No not so much as alter the order For Optatus again saith After you have absolved the Penitents presently you turn to the Altar and cannot omit the Lords Prayer (c) Mox ad altare conversi Dominicam Orationem praetermittere non potestis Idem lib. 2. pag. 57. So that the very order of repeating the Lord's Prayer at the Altar in the beginning of the Prayers for the Faithful which was but of Ecclesiastical Institution could not be changed Moreover we find in Optatus That there was a Rumor spread upon the coming of some from the Emperour that Alterations would be made in the Communion Service which startled the People but they were quieted again when they saw The Solemn Custom and wonted Rite observed and discerned that nothing was changed added or diminished in the Divine Sacrifice (d) Cum viderent in divinis Sacrificiis nec mutatum quicquam nec additum nec ablasum Id. lib. 3. pag. 75. From whence it appears there was a known Form for the Communion an Office so well understood by the People that they could perceive when it was altered in any particular So that doubtless those Christians were not used to variety of Phrases nor accustomed to the Extempore Man's Fancy to celebrate in a longer or shorter Form as he pleased Again he repeats the very Form of Exorcising those who came to be Baptized (e) Maledicte exi foras Optat. lib. 4. pag. 79. and the Form of the Responses when they renounced the Devil and repeated their Creed at Baptism (f) Id. lib. 5. pag 86 89. And when we put all this together concerning known Forms of Words which could not be altered nor omitted and were enjoyned by Law we may conclude they had a written Liturgy in Africa in his time And it is very probable that this Book of Prayers was one of those Books in the Plural Number which the Donatists as he complains took away from the Holy Altar from whence the Peoples Prayers were wont to be sent up to God (g) Idem lib. 7. pag. 98. And since they had a written Form as the Fore-cited passages shew it is probable that the Liturgy as well as the Bible was then lying upon the Altar Epiphanius An. Dom 369. § 11. We can expect no great account of the Sacred Forms in Epiphanius since he is so very nice in speaking of Mysteries that he will not repeat the Words of our Saviour's Institution but thus expresses them He took these things and giving Thanks said This is that of mine c. (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eâ—â—phan in Anâ—orat p. 432. And he reckons it
when we consider the exact agreement betwixt this and the ancient Litanies this eminent Instance out of the genuine Works of so great a Bishop in these early Times wherein we see he refers his Friend to known and public Offices both proves those parts of the ancient Litanies to have been Primitive and shews that there was a Litany in S. Basil's time Thirdly There are many Evidences that he approved of Forms of Prayer for he commends the way of praying by conjoyned Voices in Responses where he saith That a Prayer wherein there are not conjoyned Voices is not half so strong as otherwise it would be (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil Ep. 68. pag. 856. So that he thought Forms of Prayer in which the People joyned their Responses to the Priests Words were the most effectual way of praying and he saith Their bearing a part or share in any Prayer made it far more profitable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas Ep. 392. pag. 1174. Therefore he esteemed this way of praying which can only be performed in prescribed Forms would be soonest heard by Almighty God And for this Reason he made a Canon or Form of Prayer for his Monks charging them whensoever they prayed to use their Voices and also to continue until the last Prayer of the Canon (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas asciet Tom. 2. p. 243 244. and he orders them to reject those thoughts whith took off their Minds from the Canon of Prayer that is the prescribed Form which was to be the Canon or Rule by which he appointed they should always pray And so great a lover he was of Forms that he ordered those Monks should be rejected who would not learn the Psalms by Heart (e) Basil regul brev pag. 549. which no question were to be some of their Forms of Prayer and Praises We will conclude with one Observation viz. That our Adversary grants there was an Hymn for Candle-lighting in S. Basil's time (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Disc of Liturg p. 361. but he omits that the Father there saith It was a certain Form of Words used by the People so long before his time that he knew not which of the Ancients composed it but yet none blamed the People for using this old Form which was Let us praise the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit of God (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil de Sp. Sancto cap. 29. pag. 220. All which Passages do abundantly prove the Use of Forms in S. Basil's Time but this Author concealing most of these and misrepresenting the rest hath sought out some other places of S. Basil by which he would confute this our Assertion § 14. Which Objections we will first fairly produce and then plainly answer Objection first S. Basil saith he was against writing down Mysteries and so could not be for written Forms and this he proves by his Epistle to Meletius wherein S. Basil saith he will not fully write his Message having a trusty Messenger who might relate it (h) Disc of Liturg. p. 37. I reply This was only private business to a friend and no way concerns Divine Offices wherefore the Allegation is impertinent Secondly He cites his Book de Spiritu Sancto where he saith The words of Consecration upon the taking up of the Eucharistical Bread and the Cup of Blessing which of the Saints hath left in writing We are not content with that which is Recorded in the Apostle and Gospels but we say other things before and after as having great efficacy in the Mystery taking these things from unwritten Tradition (i) Basil de Sp. Sancto cap. 27. Tom. 2. p. 210. 211. And hence he infers that there were no written Forms in S. Basil's time yea he calls this direct Evidence that there could be no such Forms in writing and repeats this fraudulent Argument four several times according to his custom when he thinks he hath gotten a considerable testimony (k) Dâ—sâ— of Lituâ—g p. 38. pag. 73. pag. 7â— pag. 109. wherefore I shall answer it fully And First it doth not well become our Adversary who gives such Odious names to those who cite any spurious Writings to lay such mighty stress upon a Tract which he himself suspects to be none of S. Basils works (l) Ibid p. 110. and which all those Authors whom he cites to prove his Liturgy to be Forged do generally reject as a Forged piece (m) Eraâ—m praes ad suam veâ—s istius libri loci censura p. 121. Riveâ—i censur p. 305. Scultet medul pag. 1054. Ush e Dailè in isto Authore pag. 110. it is no great proof of his own sincerity to fetch his topping Argument and urge it over and over till the repetition become Nauseous out of a Tract that he believed to be suspicious at least But Secondly I will take no advantage from hence for after all I see no Reason to deny the piece to be Genuin but let it be as he pleases it maks nothing for his purpose For S. Basil doth not affirm that these Eucharistical Prayers were not written in his time but that they were derived from an unwritten Tradition Now this sufficiently proves that anciently they were Forms because it is impossible for an Extempore Prayer that is to be daily or often varied to be conveied down from our Fore-Fathers by Tradition whatever is so delivered must be a Form of words either written or learned by heart and so taught by the Elder to the younger Priests Wherefore even in this Sense these additional Prayers in the Sacramental Administrations were Forms made by the most Primitive Fathers and taught to their Successors and so conveyed down by oral Tradition But Thirdly this is his Fallacious perverting of S. Basils Words and not the true Sense of them For the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwritten Traditions here spoken of by S. Basil are not things which never were written down by the Fathers as he falsly pretends Because both he and divers of the Ancients had written about many of the Rites and Usages which he there calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwrirten Traditions an Hundred times As for instance about the hours of Prayer turning to the East when they prayed and about the Prefaces before the Eucharist c. But S. Basil only saith these things were not written in Scripture they were not enjoyned there those Saints or holy Men viz. the Apostles and Evangelists had not left Orders in Scripture for these Rites and Forms which must be his meaning because he goes on and saith We are not content with that which is Recorded in the Apostles and the Gospels That is besides the words of institution there were Forms of Prayer and Praise before and after in the Sacraments delivered down from the Primitive Fathers which he doth not say were never writ down by them but were not writ in Scripture For S. Basil calls the Scripture by
against this evident Truth And the first is a manifest Falshood viz. That no ancient Author mentions it (d) Disâ—ourse of Litu g. p. 162 c. For we have seen many of the Ancients do attest it Secondly He saith Many Words Rites and Persons are spoken of in it which cannot belong to S. Basil 's time To which I Answer That the Modern Copies now extant have many late Corruptions in them and we do not defend any one of these but if these be cast out there remains many primitive pious and excellent Forms of Prayer and Praise which are very agreeable to the genuine Works and to the uncorrupted Age of S. Basil and these are all the Passages in it that we defend and account to have been the Composure of S. Basil And if there were but Five Pages of this kind that suffices to make out my Position viz. That S. Basil made a Liturgy and that these Forms of Prayer were generally used in public in his time but the Reader who will peruse this Liturgy will find the far greatest part of it to be holy pure and primitive Forms and the Prayers Responses Hymns and Doxologies most of them both for Matter and Style agreeable to this Age and attested by the Writings of the Fathers both of this and former Centuries As to the Persons mentioned in this Liturgy who lived after S. Basil their Names were taken out of Modern Manuscripts Copied from some Liturgy which was in use in those later Ages wherein such Persons lived But though these Names were not in S. Basil's Original yet they do no more prove He never made the Original Liturgy ascribed to him or that he made no Liturgy than our praying for the present King and Queen or our having Offices for the Fifth of November and the 30th of January prove That the Main substance of the Common-Prayer-Book was not Composed in the Time of King Edward the Sixth and Queen Elizabeth So that I cannot but blush at such Learned Men as for want of better urge such trifling Sophistry for Arguments Thirdly My Adversary objects That divers Learned Protestants count this Liturgy spurious To which I Answer That Many also count the main of it to be genuine but all Learned Protestants except my Adversary do grant enough for my purpose viz. That S. Basil did make a Liturgy which sufficiently proves the Use of Liturgies in This Age. Du Plessis himself out of whom my Adversary steals most of his Arguments confesseth There is some appearance and likelyhood that Basil and Chrysostom did ordain a prescript Form of the Administration in their Diocesses (e) Mornay of the Mass Book I. Chap. 6. pag. 50. The Learned Rivet will not affirm that it is wholly spurious though he think as we do that many things were added to it and some things altered afterward (f) Riveti censur pag. 310. And Causabon as we noted before accounts these Liturgies partly false and partly true (g) Causab exercit in Baron xvi p. 384. with these also the Famous Salmasius though no great Friend to ancient Forms doth agree (h) Salmas contra Grot. op posthum pag. 254. Bishop Bilson cites many Passages out of them and justifies them to be authentic so far as they agree to the genuine Works of S. Basil and other Fathers of that Age (i) Bilson Christian Subject part 4. pag. 437. And to name no more Chemnitius saith He will not deny but Basil and Chrysostom did make some such form of Prayer but he saith That what we read now under their Names is not all genuine sincere nor certain (k) Chemnit exam Concil Trident. part 2. pag. 191. Which we freely grant because it follows that some of that which now goes under their Names is genuine sincere and certain Fourthly He urges the many Corruptions which are in the Modern Copies such as praying to Saints and the Blessed Virgin Prayers for the Dead c. to which we have given an Answer before and shall now only say That these are added to the old Form and a judicious Antiquary may easily distinguish these Novel Additions from the old Primitive Forms which are not to be cast away because some have added Corruptions to them We do not justifie but reject these Additions and there is enough besides to prove our Position therefore I will only add that in these Liturgies there are many Passages which condemn the present Doctrins of the Roman Church and it would be pity to cast away these because of some Dross mixed with them which when we have separated the pure Primitive Silver will remain I conclude therefore That S. Basil made a Liturgy and that the Christians in his Days used to pray by prescribed Forms § 16. The Books which pass under the name of Dionysius Areopagita Dionysius Areopag or rather Apollinaris Laod. An. Dom. 370. and especially that of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy have in them many Indications of a Liturgy but were writ in this Age as is supposed by Apollinaris Bishop of Laodicea who was a great Friend of S. Basil's and hath been noted not only for his High-flown Style but also for putting out Books under the names of the most Ancient Fathers (l) Dr. Caves Apostol life of Dionys Areop num 13. c. But whether he were the Author of them or no doubtless they must be ancienter than the sixth Century because many of the Rites here expounded were disused before that time and because there is express mention of them as cited by S. Cyril of Alexandria who lived in the beginning of the fifth Century (m) Liberati Brev. cap. 10. apud Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 182. Script An. 553. However Liberatus who Records this and allows Dionysius his Works to be good Evidence lived in the middle of the sixth Century and if these Books had been writ but little before it had been Ridiculous to have urged them for Evidence in dispute S. Gregory also the Great who lived in the same Century wherein Dailé pretends these Books were writ cites the celestial Hierarchy under the name of Dionysius Areopagita and calls him an Ancient and Venerable Writer (n) Greg. Mag. hom 34. in Evang. p. 138. yea in the very beginning of the sixth Century this Book is cited under the name of Dionysius by two Writers of the Greek Church (o) An. 527. Leont Byzant contr Nest lib. 2. Anastas Sinaita Anagog contempl in Hexam lib. 7. and Maximus writ Scholias upon these Books Anno Dom. 640. Wherefore this Author having such Credit and being mistaken for the true Dionysius in the fifth and sixth Ages could not live in later times than these wherein we now place him and we desire no more than our Adversary allows viz. that he may have Credit in reporting the usages of his own time p (m) Disc of Liturg. p. 39. Now though this Author is so very fearful of discovering Mysteries an evident
Diocesses which indeed shewed their want of Judgment but did not make the Baptism Null This is the true case From whence I observe First That no Argument can be drawn from hence for the inferior Clergies choosing their own Forms or being at liberty to Pray Extempore for if they Baptized any they were obliged to use the Forms which their own Bishop had chosen Secondly Let it be noted These Additional Prayers were Forms composed by others as S. Augustin plainly declares nor doth he censure these well-meaning Brethren of his for using Forms but for using silly or Heretical Forms which shews that the Churches way of Praying then even in occasional Offices such as Baptism was by Forms and had it been otherwise the putting these Forms to an Extempore Office had been like setting a piece of New Cloth into an Old Garment wherefore we may reasonably suppose the old Office which contained the Essentials of Baptism that is the Lords Prayer the Renunciation the asking them the Creed the Prayer of Consecration and the Hymns were all certain Forms but some Weak and Ignorant Bishops thought this not enough and would needs add new Composures to their ancient Office but they had so ill success in this attempt that I make no doubt this gave occasion to the African Church at this very time to Ordain that no more Prayers should be added to any part of the Liturgy which is the Sense of that Canon of Carthage as I will presently shew Thirdly I must remark also that the Gift of Prayer must have been ceased in Africa before this time because had there been such a Gift the Bishops must have had it and then neither would the Unskilful or Heretical have composed needless Forms nor these weak Bishops have wanted any sort of Forms their very chusing such composures shews they could not make Prayers Extempore Though they were Ignorant yet miraculous Gifts would have enabled these as well as those of greatest learning to make Orthodox Prayers on the sudden And if the Gift of Prayer was ceased as it was then and is much more so now it will follow they needed Forms as we also now generally do Lastly Let it be considered the Fact was irregular S. Augustin censures it and the Church saw the ill Consequences of it yea and made a Canon to restrain this mischievous liberty for the Future therefore this must not be urged for a precedent to us to leave Ministers at liberty either to Pray Extempore or choose their own Forms that were to make Faults and things of ill Consequence a pattern for our imitation Thirdly He objects that S. Augustin saith some Bishops and Ministers called upon God with Solecisms and Barbarisms and he Tauntingly asks if these Barbarisms were prescribed (s) Disc of Liturg. p. 51. again p. 132. But he forgets that the holy Father saith there None ought to deride them for this when he twice makes himself Merry with this Rare Argument The notorious Fallacy whereof will be exposed if we consider that he wilfully mistakes these Solecisms and Barbarisms for false Grammer and downright Non-sense that so he might fairly pretend that no Church could prescribe such Forms But S. Augustin explains his own meaning and discovers our Authors craft when he defines Solecism to be when we do not duly joyn Words that are rightly put together and a Barbarism to be the pronouncing a Word with other letters or another sound than the Latins used (t) Aug. de doctrin Christ lib. 2. cap. 1â— Tom. 3. pag. 7. and he instances in the Peoples singing Floriet for Florebit in the Latin Psalms Yea in the place cited by my Adversary he describes the Persons Guilty of these Solecisms and Barbarisms to be such as did not understand the Words they pronounced or could not rightly distinguish them (u) Aug. de Catec rudibus cap. 9. Tom. 4. pag. 218. Now this must refer to reading Prayers out of a Book which some of the Ignorant Africans could not do so acurately after the Roman mode but that as S. Augustin here observes Those who came from the Schools of Grammarians and Orators derided them for this false and harsh pronunciation of their Latin calling these mistakes Solecisms and Barbarisms But the devout Father excuses these Rustical Pastors and blames those who censured them because God minds the inward devotion more than the pronunciation So that upon the whole case we may determin That this instance is so far from proving Extempore Prayers were then used or that there was no written Liturgy that it first shews these could not be Extempore Prayers because such as could not pronounce Latin truly could certainly not Pray on the sudden in that Language Secondly It proves there was a Liturgy written in Latin so elegant that though the African Pastors and People too understood it yet by reason of their rough and harsh Dialect they could not Read and pronounce it so exactly as to please the learned Criticks However God did accept of these Forms thus Rustically pronounced when they were said with true Devotion So that when our Adversaries designed Sophistry is laid open this proves an Argument against himself Fourthly We are told out of S. Augustin that one of his Presbyters being desired in his absence to Pray in a House infested with evil Spirits Went and Celebrating the Sacrament there Prayed with all his Might that this Vexation might cease and by Gods mercy it ceased presently (w) Orans quantum potuit ut Cessaret illa Vexatio Deo protenus miserante Cessavit Aug. de Civ Dei lib. 22. cap. 8. Now from hence he draws two Inferences in two distant parts of his Book First That the Prayer for all Estates of Men at the Eucharist was not a Form (x) Disc of Liturg. p. 66. Secondly That there was no Form of Prayer for this occasion (y) Ibid. p. 121. And he twice Transcribes the passage at large supposing no doubt it is unanswerable But if the Reader look into his Quotation he will easily observe First That the Sacrament was over before this Prayer began and that this was not the Prayer for all Estates of Men beeause neither the House nor the Devil can be ranked under that head but it was a Prayer upon that particular occasion for he Prayed that God would cause that Vexation to cease I confess he puts a stop after Quantum potuit which makes it seem as if this Prayer was a part of the Eucharist but this pointing is false and his own invention For S. Augustin's Words shew that the Sacrament was first Celebrated and then came this Prayer wherein he desired as earnestly as he could that this Vexation might cease So that this passage is impertinently cited to prove that the Prayer for all Estates of Men in the Eucharist was not a Form Secondly If we grant that Quantum potuit signifies according to his Ability and intimates that he Prayed Extempore upon
they also are now directed to the Father which Method none but Hereticks can be supposed to alter and lest any should bring in any Heretical Forms into these Offices the Council supposing still the Public Forms were thus made orders all Prayers at the Altar should be directed to the Father which is as much as to bind them to the old Forms I need only here observe the Reason why the public Prayers at the Altar were all to be directed to the Father which is because Jesus Christ is there set forth as the Propitiation for our Sins and our only Advocate it is by him and his Redemption there represented that we hope to engage the Father to hear us By Him therefore and not To Him these Prayers must be made Here we declare we only rely on his Interest and Intercession and by reason of His Death here represented the Sacrament hath been ever esteemed the most effectual way of prevailing with God the Father to whom therefore here our Prayers are most properly addressed And so they were then as I could prove if it were needful by many Passages of the Orthodox Fathers So that this Clause also supposes the public Forms were rightly drawn up and forbids any alteration to be made in them in this Point wherein some had been culpable by writing out Heretical Forms and prescribing them ignorantly to their own Diocesses As for the last Clause our Adversary reads it falsly the Words are (g) Quicunque sibi preces aliunde describit Vera Lectio Canonis At ille legit Quascunque sibi preces aliquis describit Confer Bin. ut supr cum libro isto pag. 44. Whoever writes out any Prayers from any other place for himself But he perverts it thus What-Prayers-soever any shall Copy out for himself where note he leaves out the main Word Aliunde From any other place which plainly refers to a public and prescribed Liturgy he that writ out any Prayers from thence need not shew them to any but whoever he were Bishop or private Man that writ out Prayers from any other Form he was not to use them in public or private till they had been viewed and judged of by the most able Bishops Whence we may justly infer First That there was a Written Liturgy throughly Orthodox out of which if any Man writ out any Forms he was sure they were right and need not shew them to any but boldly use them either in public or private Secondly That some itched after other Forms then as now also many do to restrain which dangerous humor this Council first obliges those who did this whatever they were to shew these Forms taken from other places to the more Judicious and within a few years another Council allowed no Prayers to be brought in but such as had been allowed by a Synod Thirdly That all this Clause may very well be referred to private Prayers because it is very probable that some for their private Devotions collected Forms out of the Liturgy Others transcribed them from some New Compositions but the Hereticks had been so busie that the liberty of using these was not to be allowed till some Judicious Men had viewed and approved them Lastly We may observe That this Clause wholly relates to Written Forms it supposes the Persons here spoken of did never pray otherwise than by Written Forms whether it be explained of public or private Prayers this is certain they writ them out of Forms and after they had Copied them out used them as such So that this utterly confutes my Adversary and shews That the general use of Africa was to pray by Forms This very plainly proves the Gift of Prayer was now ceased there and manifests their Folly who pretend in our days that it is a general Gift This shews that none did pretend to Extempore Prayer but all either writ out Forms from the public Liturgy or from some other place wherefore our Adversary had a singular assurance when he produced this Passage against Written Forms These were certainly Written Forms And he had best ask how these African Christians could look up to Heaven or mind God alone in Prayer when they were bound to look on their Books into which these Forms were transcribed or enquire how their Mysteries could be concealed being written down This Matter of Fact baffles all his far fetch'd Objections and let him interpret the whole Canon as he please it will shew the use of Written Forms and manifest the mischief of leaving Men at liberty to choose Forms for themselves even in his own way of expounding this shews so many ill Consequences of varying from the stated and established Forms that following Councils were forced to enjoyn them more strictly than ever And his Friends Smectymnuus were so honest to confess That as the Laodicean Canon Ordained None should vary but always use the same Form so the Carthaginian Canon further limited the Form (h) Smectymn Answer to Remonstr pag. 7. So that in their Opinion this Canon is an Evidence of the use of limited and prescribed Forms and a Restraint upon such as would vary from them § 24. Council of Africa Can 70. coâ— temp The same also is the Sense of that 70th Canon in the African Collection the true Reading of which in all the eminent Editors of it is This Concerning the Prayers which ought to be said at the Altar it seemeth good that those Prayers which have been heretofore Confirmed in the Council whether Prefaces Commendations or Impositions of Hands shall be used by all and by no means at no time shall any Prayers against the Faith be brought in but let those Prayers be said which have been Collected by the more Discreet (i) Can. Aâ—ric apud Bin. 103. Tom. 1. par 1. pag. 780. ita in Justel Cod. Tom. 1. p 385. in Beveridge dicitur Can. 106. Concil Carthag Tom. 1. pag 640. My Adversary could raise no Arguments from this Canon till he had falsified the Reading of it (k) Discourse of Liturg. p. 48 c. And therefore First He leaves out the first Words Concerning the Prayers which ought to be said at the Altar which though some Copies make the Title of the Canon yet none but my Adversary wholly omit them and Dr. Beveridge proves they are really a part of the Canon it self as even the next Words which depend on these do shew Concerning the Prayers c. It also seems good c. Secondly My Adversary translates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latin Preces quae probatae fuerint The Prayers which shall be allowed in a Council nay He argues from his own false Translation that these could not be a Liturgy established because they were not yet approved (l) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 53. Whereas every Man may see that both the Greek and Latin Words are of the Preterperfect-Tense and not the Future wherefore they refer to the time perfectly past And so S. Paul uses this very
of it sent to this Bishop is called An Order of Prayer Which therefore doth not signifie a bare Rubric for Method but a Book containing the Prefaces Hymns and Prayers themselves And thus it is used in the Life of S. Laetus a Monk who about this Time was ordained Deacon and He in a short time learned the Psalter and all that the Ecclesiast cal Order required so as to be more perfect in them than many were who had been longer used to them (s) Cointè Annal Eâ—â—les â—raâ—â— An 533. pag 413. This Ecclesiastical Order was a Book as well as the Psalter and this ingemous Monk got to say the very Words of them both by Heart But to return to Pope Vigilius He was so tenacious of Forms that he warns Etherius not to permit one Syllable to be altered in the Gloria Patri Which the Catholics by ancient Custom use to say after the Ps â—ms thus Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost but some Heretics a little before presumed to leave out the last and saying it thus and to the Son the Holy Ghost which he coâ—demus as an Heretical Variation (t) Vâ—â— Ep. 2. ibid. pag 4. But it had been impossible to secure the Orthodox Forms if my Adversaries pretended liberty of varying the Words of their Prayers and Praises had then been allowed in the Church Nay if that had been permitted in former Ages there would have been no certain Primitive Forms left by which they could have corrected these Heretical Innovations § 8. In the East we have further Evidence of the continuance of Liturgick Forms Concil Mopsevest An. D. 550 for in the Council of Mopsvestia the Fathers there assembled pray for the Emperour in that ancient and generally received Form O Lord save the Emperour And hear him whensoever he calls upon thee (u) Salvum fac Domine Imperatorem exaudi eum quacunque die te invocaverit Vid. Synod Quint. collat 5. apud Bin. Tom. II. par 2. pag. 83. Anastasius Sinaita Patriar Antioch An. Dom. 560. But soon after this we have sufficient Proof that the whole Liturgy transcribed in the Apostolical Constitutions and shewed to have been the Antiochian Office some Ages before was still in use there For Anastasius who had been a Monk of Mount Sinai being now Patriarch of Antioch hath some Homilies owned to be genuine still extant wherein he refers to and expounds the Words and Actions prescribed by that ancient Liturgy As first He bids them mind the Deacons Voice when he crieth Stand with reverence stand with fear bow down your Heads And again The Priest saith he engages you to attend when he bids you Lift up your Hearts And what do you Answer Do you not Reply We lift them up unto the Lord Adding That the Peoples joyning their part to the Priests made the Prayers to be more effectual He goes on to tell them The Angels minister at the holy Liturgy The Cherubins stand round about and with sweet Voices sing the Trisagion Holy Holy Holy and the Seraphins bow and adore He mentions also the Lords Prayer as being daily repeated by all in the Communion-Office and Comments upon that ancient Form Give holy things to those that are holy (w) Arastas Sin Orat de sacr Synaxt in Auctario Bib. Pati Tom. 2. col 9 10. Now these Passages and in this Order may be seen in divers ancient Liturgies particularly in that which is set down in the Constitutions which shews that the same Forms were used at Antioch in this Age which had been used there in divers of the fore-going Centuries And though in these Homilies he doth transcribe no more of them but only such parts of the Liturgy as were proper to move the People to come to the Communion with Devotion and Reverence Charity and holy Resolutions yet by those which he occasionally mentions and by the Order of them we may discern the ancient Forms were still in use there with little or no Variation § 9. By this Time divers Parts of Spain had embraced the Catholic Faith Concil Bracar I. An. Dom. 563. and therefore now the Orthodox Bishops met in a Council at Braga and after they had caused the Book of ancient Canons to be publicly read before them they gather out of them some that were of present use and revive them by a fresh imposing them The first thing they labour to regulate is that variety of Forms and different ways of Divine Service which the mixture of divers Nations and Opinions had produced among them therefore the first Canon is That one and the same Order of Singing shall be kept in Morning and Evening Prayer and that no different Customs either of private Men or of Monasteries shall be mixed with the Ecclesiastical Rule (x) Ut unus atque idem Psallendi ordo in Matutinis vel Vespertinis officiis teneatur non diversae ac privatae neque Monasteriorum consuetudines cum Ecclesiasticâ regulà sint permixtae Concil Brac. Can 1. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 211. The Morning and Evening Offices consisted chiefly of Psalms and Hymns with some proper Collects and were all or the most part of them chanted and sung which cannot be in a public Congregation unless the Form and Words be known before Wherefore for these Mattens and Vespers they had established One Order Besides these there was the Communion-Office before Noon and for that they had also a Prescribed Form which they call here The Ecclesiastical Rule and since some private Persons presumed to alter this and others followed some of the Forms prescribed by the Rules of certain Monasteries they utterly reject these Variations and bind them all to the public Liturgy This is the plain sense of the Canon and therefore Ordo Psallendi and Ecclesiastica Regula must be more than a Rubric for these confined them to Sing the Mattens and Vespers in the same words and to celebrate the Communion-Service by such a certain Rule as admitted of no Variation And the following Canons make this still more plain The Second is That on the Vigils of Feasts and at the Communion all shall read the same and not different Lessons in the Church The Third orders That Bishops and Priests shall use the same Form of Saluting the People viz. The Lord be with you To which they shall Answer And with thy Spirit even as the whole East hath retained it from the Apostles and not as the Priscillianists have altered it The Fourth Canon is That the Communion-Office shall by all be celebrated by that same Order which Profuturus formerly Bishop of this Church received in Writing from the Apostolical See The Fifth enjoyns That none pass by that Order of Baptizing which the Church of Braga anciently used and which to avoid all doubts concerning the same Profuturus had received in Writing from the See of S. Peter (y) Concil Bracar l. Can. 2
spoil his Cause § 6. After his Finally Page 22th I thought he had done Arguing but as if he knew not how to make an end and could not stop in his full Career we heave Further after that Finally And now he goes on If there were such Liturgies how comes it to pass we meet with no Intelligence of any changing them or alterations made in them (i) 〈…〉 Lit. pag. 25. But as if he had forgot his own Argument he immediately tells us he had met with Intelligence That Paulus Samosatenus cast out from the Church of Antioch those Hymns or Psalms which were used to be sung there in honour of Christ he might have added and made new Forms of his own Now this made a very great change in the Liturgy there because wc may remember the whole Christian Worship in Pliny is described by Singing Hymns to Christ as God so that some think the greatest part of these Primitive Liturgies consisted in these Hymns and therefore his casting out all these was chaning more than half the Liturgy And since these Hymns were written Forms it is very probable the Prayers were suitable to them and were Forms also Again my Adversary meets with more Intelligence viz. that the Arians altered the Gloria Patri the Form of Baptism and the Universally received Confession of Faith (k) Disc of Lit. pag. 26. Are not all these ancient Forms and parts of Liturgy And did not the Orthodox Fathers blame the Arians for these bold attempts Moreover in the next Page he finds that the Eutychians attempted to add two or three words to the Trisagion an ancient and known Form and a part of the Prmitive Liturgy which the People were so unwilling to have altered that the very attempting it made a Tumult at Constantinople and a Noise throughout the World Why then doth he pretend he meets with no Intelligence His Fallacy is this he supposes a Liturgy containing nothing but Forms of Prayer which is a meer Chimaera a thing that never was in those Ages and because there is no mention of altering this Liturgy but most of the Instances happen to be in Hymns and Forms of Praise he supposes that they never changed the Liturgy that is as he expounds it the Prayers But in this he is mistaken too For the Reader may remember how stifly the Clergy and People of Naeocaesarea opposed the making any change in their old Liturgy drawn up by Gregory Thaumuturgus He hath owned that Epiphanius his changing the Form by which they usually prayed for the Bishop before Sermon made a very great Noise And I have told him that it is remembred how S. Basil changed and altered divers things in S. James his Liturgy even in the Prayers I have shewed that Theodorus of Mopsevestia rejected both those Liturgies and made a new Office for the Communion filled with Blasphemies instead of Prayers and this in the beginning of the Fifth Century So there were changes and alterations both in Prayers and Praises and that sufficiently proves they had prescribed Forms For Extempore and Arbitrary Prayers are daily varied yea they are nothing else but change and variety so that it is impossible for any to observe any alterations in them If the change be a thing taken notice of and opposed or censured it must be the change or alteration of a known Form and since such changes are noted and were observed in those Ages it evidently follows they did use Forms and no Extempore Prayers or Praises And we may note by the way that the Arians and other Hereticks did allow Christ to be our Mediator and made Prayers to God the Father in his Name which was the way of all ancient Liturgies so that they had not so much Quarrel to that part of Liturgy which was Petitionary or Deprecatory as they had to the Laudatory parts where they set out our Saviour in the glory of his Divinity and paid direct Worship to him and for this reason we meet with more attempts upon the Praises than the Prayers As for Maldonate's Saying That such as changed Religion did also change the Prayers and every Heresie invented its own Prayers which my Adversary cites pag. 25. He speaks only by guess for if ever any old Heresie had any peculiar Forms of Prayer the Fathers long since burnt and destroyed them in a pious Zeal against their Errors So that there are no Footsteps of them remaining no nor any mention of the thing that I can now remember excepting the afore-mentioned Instance of that Heretick Theodorus of Mopsevestia who made a New Liturgy And the Arian Goths who as we have shewed had so corrupted the Primitive Orthodox Liturgy that Leander and Isidore had very great Trouble to Correct those Errors and bring the People to change their Heretical for Orthodox Forms But both the Nestorian and Arian Liturgies are long since abolished and no Memory remains of them but only that once there were such things To conclude There is intelligence of many Alterations made or attempted to be made either in whole Liturgies or in eminent parts of them even in the first Four or Five Centuries and those Changes were noted opposed and censured Which shews their Service could not be then in the Extempore or Arbitrary way because none could blame any Man for changing Prayers and Praises if the Church gave Liberty to every Minister to vary every day if he pleased as my Adversary vainly supposes This observation of and opposition to Changes is an undeniable Proof of known and prescribed Forms that had been long and constantly used § 7. Though all these Arguments have been against Liturgies in general and not one of them particular yet he begins afresh with In general and so falls to his topping Reason against Liturgies viz. That they took themselves obliged to conceal the Symbols Rites and Prayers used in these Administrations from the sight of the Vninitiated and therefore to be sure did not commit them to Writing (l) Disc of Lit. p. 28. c. Now this Argument I have often considered and sufficiently confuted in the First Part under the Heads of those several Fathers especially S. Basil whom he brings to make out this gilded Sophistry and therefore I will be the briefer in exposing it We grant the Premisses and he need not have stuffed so many Pages to prove it but he himself sufficiently confutes the Conclusion For after he hath spent much time to prove That the Heathens concealed their Mysteries and Religious Administrations as well as the Christians (m) Disc of Lit. pag. 30 31. And said expresly concerning the Greeks and Romans That they would not commit them to Writing (n) Ibid. p. 32. At another place needing a good Memory he saith That Among the Greeks Prayers were read out of a Book (o) Disc of Lit. p. 122. and That the Persian Magi read their Prayers out of a Book (p) Ibid. p. 123. That the Romans besides
Extempore Way there ought to have been an express abrogation of the Old Way and a positive institution of the New one left upon Record either in the Gospels or Epistles But it is so far from that that we can prove our Lord and his Apostles allowed made and used Forms of Prayer For according to the custom of the great Rabbies of that Age Jesus taught his Disciples a divine Form of Prayer to be added to their other Forms as the peculiar mark of their being his Scholars (n) Dr Lightf Vol. 2. p. 158. And it is observed by learned Men that Christ took every sentence of this Form out of the Jewish Prayers then in use (o) Idem Exp. in Math. vi 9. Grotii Com. in locum So far saith Grotius was the Lord of the Church from all affectation of unnecessary Innovation And we may note that when they desired he would teach them to pray that was a proper occasion to have reformed the old method of praying by Forms if Christ had intended such a thing but instead of any such intimation he gives them a new Form and copies the several Petitions out of the Jewish Liturgy shewing thereby his approbation of praying to God in a prescribed Form Which is also manifest from our Lords Hymn which he and his Apostles sang together after his last Supper p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Math. xxvi 30. and if this were not the Paschal Hymn as the best Authors think (q) Du-Plessis of the Mass lib. I. chap. I. pag. 4. yet it could not be an Extempore Psalm as Grotius fancies because the Apostles sang with him and so must know the words of it before (q) Vid. Bez. not in Matth. xxvi 30. Again His Prayer in the Garden which was offered up as S. Paul notes (r) Hebr. v. 7. with extraordinary Devotion was a Form because he thrice repeated the very same Words (s) Math. xxvi 44. and by the way this shews the folly of those who pretend None can pray devoutly unless they vary the phrase every time they pray To proceed It is very probable that our Saviour used a Form of Prayer on the Cross extracted out of the XXIIth Psalm which begins My God my God why hast thou forsaken me (t) Math. xxvii 46. yet he had the same Spirit in the highest Manner by which those Psalms were indited and therefore of pure choice used Forms even on extraordinary occasions The Apostles observed the Jewish hours of Prayer and worshiped God with them both in their Temple and their Synagogues but there is no account that they set up a New way of Praying or disliked the old and S. Augustine affirms that they used the Lords Prayer even after they had received the Spirit of God and repeated that Form every day even when they were in their greatest state of perfection (u) Aâ—g Hilar. Ep. 89. p. 82. G. And Beza whose Authority will sway much with our Adversaries tells us That S. Paul promised to come and settle Forms of Prayer at Corinth in the Church which he had planted there for when he expounds those words The rest will I set in order when I come he saith That is to settle those things which pertained to order as Place Time and FORMS OF PRAYER (w) Beza not minor in 1 Cor. xi 34. I only note he had this Exposition out of S. Augustine (x) Aug. Januar. Ep. 118. p. 116. c. who saith S. Paul intimates It was too long for an Epistle to set down that whole order of Celebration which the Vniversal Church observes so that he would leave that to be setled till he came And hence the Dutch Divines who writ to the Assembly at London in the Civil Wars say They dare not condemn all those godly Churches who from the Apostolical and Primitive times celebrated Gods public Worship by prescribed and certain Forms (y) Class Walach ap Falkn libert Eccles pag. 111. So that they also thought Forms were setled in some Churches even from the Apostles times which I could prove by many other Authorities but these may suffice § 3. There are some Objections against these Proofs from the New Testament dispersed up and down the discourse of Liturgies and other Writings of that party which I will here consider before I proceed First Our Adversary brings many Quotations to prove that the Ancients did not believe the Lords Prayer was intended for a Form but for a direction what things they should pray for (z) Discourse of Lit. p. 3 4. But all that heap of Authors which he cites affirm no more than that it was not only to be a Form but also a direction Which we freely grant for if it were intended at all to be used as a Form then Forms are agreeable to the Gospel way of Worship and the using it as a Form doth not hinder it from being a direction to draw up other Forms by for all Authentic Liturgies and ours especially are grounded on and drawn up by the Lord's Prayer The Collects for Grace being grounded on the three first Petitions The Prayers for all Earthly Blessings are grounded upon the Request for our daily Bread The Confessions and Litanies for pardon and deliverance from Sin and all other kinds of evil upon the three last Petitions and The Thanksgivings Hymns and Praises upon the Doxology So that I cannot but wonder at this Authors impertinent filling a whole Page with Quotations to prove it lawful to use other Words in Prayer while he is disputing against us who allow and use Liturgies which are other Words but such as are agreeable to it both as to the Form and Matter of them His business was to prove the Lord's Prayer was never intended by Christ nor used by the Church as a Form But almost every one of his Authors grant it was a Form even in the places he produces Saint Augustine and Saint Chrysostom do so in him and in an hundred places more as I shall shew when I come to them in Order Calvin in his Quotation calls it A Form dictated by Christ and elsewhere saith That holy Men daily repeat it by Christ's Command (a) Calv. Instit lib. 4. cap. 1. § 23. Maldonat only tells us We are not always bound to use these very Words Grotius owns it may profitably be repeated in those very Words Causabon in the place cited is not speaking of the Lord's Prayer (b) Causab exercit 14. num 14. p. 235. And it was hardily done to cite Mr. Mede for his Opinion who in the place which he cites doth not only prove the Lord's Prayer was a Form but also that the use of Forms under the Gospel is lawful and profitable (c) Mede Diatrib 1. on Math. vi 9. Jansenius doth not dislike the use of the Words of our Lord's Prayer as a Form but the minding only the Words and not the Sense he justly reproves I shall add
That his Friend Du-Plessis saith The Lord's Prayer was commended to the Apostles for their ordinary Prayer (d) Du-Plessis of the Mass Book I. chap. 1. pag. 9. I have been more particular in clearing this point that I may shew the Reader to how little purpose this Author usually fills his Margen and may now conclude That Christ did intend this Prayer for a Form and so it was used by the Church in all Ages Secondly We are often told of a Gift of Prayer which was in the Apostolick Church and this Gift enabling Persons as they suppose to express their wants in Extempore Phrases made Forms in that Age however useless I Answer That this Gift is not expresly mentioned in Scripture nor in any ancient Author but S. Chrysostom and he holds it was a Miraculous Gift peculiar to the Pastors of the Church and saith it was ceased long before his time so that in S. Chrysostom's Opinion our Dissenters Extempore Prayers cannot proceed from this Gift and it is plain they pervert all the places of Scripture which they produce to prove their claim to this Gift of Prayer Christ indeed saith When the Apostles Martyrs or Confessors were brought before their Enemies and Persecutors They need take no thought how or what they should speak for it should be given them in that hour what they should speak (e) Math. x. 19. But What is this saith a Learned Father to speaking before our Friends where premeditation is enjoyned (f) Isidor Peleus lib. 4. ep 218. or what reason is there to apply this to the Prayers we make to God to whom we must not say any thing which we have not well considered on before we speak it (g) Eccles v. 1 2. Secondly They alledge that place of S. Paul Rom. VIII 26. The Spirit also helpeth our infirmities for we know not what to pray for as we ought c But this place cannot be meant of the infirmity of wanting Words because it is here said The Spirit maketh intercession for us with groans which cannot be uttered and the Context shews that S. Paul is speaking of the infirmity of Impatience under present Afflictions and praying for immediate deliverance even when it is not pleasing to God nor profitable for us Now this Infirmity the Spirit helpeth and teacheth us to bear them patiently and submit to Gods Will yea to pray his Will may be done yet in the mean time the Spirit pleads with God to deliver us and that with inexpressible ardency So that this place is no ground for any to expect the extraordinary assistance of the Spirit to teach them new Words and Phrases in ordinary Cases and for their daily Prayers Thirdly They tell us S. Paul speaks of praying with the Spirit and praying with understanding (h) 1 Cor. xiv 15. I Answer He is discoursing of praying in an unknown Tongue which since none of our Adversaries can do now this place is nothing to their purpose and I much question whether they who pray Extempore can be said to pray with understanding as to their own particulars because they neither know before what they are to say nor can remember afterward what they have said However the strict Meaning of this place is no More but that if a Man who had the Gift of Tongues prayed in a Congregation which understood not the Language he prayed in he must Make the People understand the meaning of his Prayer or be silent but whether his Prayer were a Form or Extempore is not said in this place which refers to the Gift of Tongues and not to the Gift of Prayer But our Adversary hath a peculiar Notion of this Gift of Prayer viz. That it was an ordinary Gift common to all Christians and continuing to this day which he proves because all to whom the Apostles writ are exhorted to Pray in the Spirit (i) Ephes vi 18. and to pray in the Holy Ghost (k) Jude ver 20. by which he understands that they were all able to conceive their own Prayers and therefore he thinks if they made use of Prayers formed by others they did not exercise their own Gift nor pray as they were able (l) Discourse of Liturg. p. 128 129. To which I Reply That the absurd consequences of this Exposition ought to make our Author ashamed of it since it would follow from hence That no Man in their public Assemblies except the Minister did Pray in the Spirit because the Minister alone conceives the Prayer and though it be Extempore to him yet it is a Form to the whole Congregation who must pray in his Words and not exercise their own Gift of Praying by the Spirit in his Sense which is to invent the Words by the Spirit Rejecting therefore this absurd Exposition that leads to so ridiculous a Conclusion we shall note That praying with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit Ephes vi 18. signifies no more than praying fervently and heartily as loving in the Spirit (m) Coloss I. ver 8. is put for loving fervently ex animo from the Heart Thus Grotius expounds it Praying not only with the Voice but from the Heart (n) Grot. Com. in Ephes vi 18. And thus Praying in the Holy Ghost Jude ver 20. implies Praying with that devotion and fervency which we are moved to by the Holy Spirit but then this is no extraordinary Gift this is no more than what both Then and Now every good Man by the ordinary assistance of the Spirit might and may do even by a Form for he that repeats that so as to attend the Sense and heartily desires every Petition may be granted he prays by the Spirit or in the Spirit as these Scriptures exhort and thus the People as well as the Priest in public or private may and ought to pray in the Spirit Which shews that these places rightly expounded are nothing at all to our Dissenters pretended gift of Inventing new Words every time they Pray We will grant there was such a Gift in the Apostles times But we judge St. Chrysostom knew much better than they what it was and he thinks it was as Miraculous as the gift of Tongues with which St. Paul joyns it He saith it was given only to one and affirms it was ceased long before his time and seems to imply that the Forms which were made in his Days had their Original from the Prayers which were made at first by these inspired Men Whose Prayers thus conceived were written down and so preserved and used when the Gift it self failed And when we consider the agreeableness of all Ancient Liturgies in the Method and even in many of the Phrases and Forms and their neer Resemblance to each other we may Rationally believe they were all derived at first from that One Spirit which directed all Inspired Men in their new planted Churches to ask fit and proper things almost in the very same Words And thus the