Hebrew Greek and Latin made all to his praise c. And conformable to this is the Decree of the Council of Lateran under Innocent III. Anno 1215. that because in many parts within the same City and Diocess there are many people of different manners and Rites mixed together but of one Faith We therefore command that the Bishops of such Cities or Diocesses provide fit Men who shall celebrate Divine Offices according to the diversity of Tongues and Rites and administer the Sacraments This may be further confirmed by the very Offices of the Church of Rome but this is sufficient to shew that the Church of Rome hath departed from Scripture Antiquity and it self when it doth require that Divine Service be performed in a Tongue unknown to the people and that it was never the opinion of the Fathers nor any Church nor even of the Church of Rome that it is most expedient to have it so performed So little was it then thought that religious things the less they are understood the more they would be admired and that to preserve a reverence for them and the people from dangerous errors it is requisite to keep them from being understood So little was it pleaded that there are any Tongues sacred in themselves and that as the three upon the Cross of Christ are to be preferred before others and to exclude the rest so the Latin as next to the head of Christ is the most venerable of the three So little was it then thought that there is a certain kind of Divinity in Latin and something more of Majesty and fitter to stir up Devotion than in other Tongues So little were they afraid that Latin would be lost if the Service were not kept in it or however so little evident is it that they valued the preservation of that Tongue above the Edification of the Church Lastly So little did they think of the expedience of having the Service in one common Tongue as Latin That Christians wherever they travel may find the self same Service and Priests may officiate in it as at home As if for the sake of the few that travel the many that stay at home should be left destitute and for one Mans convenience 10000. be exposed to eternal perdition These are Arguments coined on purpose to defend the Cause and so are peculiar to the Church that needs them II. Let us consider Whether from the time of its having been a Rite it hath been the Rite of every Church To this I shall only produce their own Confessions for it is acknowledged that the Armenians Aegyptians Habassines Muscovites and Sclavonians have their Service in a Tongue known to the people And their giving them the hard Names of Hereticks Schismaticks and Barbarous will not save the Council from being fallible when it saith It is the rite of every Church But were there no such Churches in the World that herein practised contrary to the Church of Rome yet it would no more justifie her than it can make that good which is evil that expedient which is mischievous to the Church of God or reconcile one part of the Council to the other that when it hath declared The Mass contains great instruction for the people yet adds That it is expedient and an approved Rite that it be not celebrated in the Vulgar Tongue But say they this is granted If there were no interpretation but that is provided for by the Council for it is ordered That lest Christs sheep should hunger all that have the care of Souls shall frequently expound c. And that we are now to consider SECT IV. Whether the Provision made by the Council of Trent for having some part of the Mass expounded be sufficient to countervail the mischief of having the whole celebrated in a Tongue not understood of the people and to excuse the Church of Rome in the injunction of it This is the last refuge they betake themselves to confessing that without an Interpretation S. Paul is against them but with this they plead he is for them But what shall we then think of the case in their Church at a time when as the people could not understand so the Priests could not interpret and wanted both the gift and had not acquired so much as the art of it What shall we think of their case and their Church that hath neither provided nor doth use such an Interpretation as the Apostle speaks of but what differs as much from it in respect of the light it gives to the people as both that and the Tongue they use do in the way by which they are obtained If it were a translation what a ludicrous thing would it be for a Church in its constant Service to take suppose the Lord's Prayer in pieces and first pronounce it in Latin and then in English But as they do not permit their Offices not the Horae B. Virginis Breviary or Mass Book to be translated into a Vulgar Tongue So the verbal translation of it during the celebration of Mass was never thought of by the Council but was thereby condemned as the cause and seedplot of many errors as we are informed in a Letter wrote upon the occasion of Voisin's translation by the whole Clergy of France to Pope Alexander the Seventh And whatsoever the Exposition did refer to let it be what it will yet it was not to the devotional Part as Sanders declares who after he had pleaded that an Unknown Tongue with interpretation was the perfect fulfilling of S. Pauls advice perceiving a difficulty behind throws all off with this If the Interpretation of Prayers be laid aside for a season it is however not to be thought that it is to be omitted for ever c. So that at most no more was intended than a short exposition of some doctrinal Point or Ceremony which might as well be called an Exposition of the Breviary or any other Book containing much the same things as the Missal And it is probable that so much as this also was never intended which if ever is very rarely practised amongst them Insomuch as Ledesma saith That the sence of the Council was That the people should be instructed only by Sermons Indeed they would rather have this go for an Argument than dispute it They do as the Irish by their Bogs run over it lightly for fear if they tread too hard it will not support their cause but stifle it And therefore they wheel off again and then tell us That it being a known set Form in one set Language those that are ignorant of it at first need not continue so but by due attention and diligence may arrive to a sufficient knowledge As if the poor people are inexcusable if they do not arrive to a sufficient knowledge of the Tongue which must be learned before the things without other helps than their own attention and diligence when the Priests and
the other is understood by none Now in all this they say little or nothing to the purpose For if they plead for their Latin Service as Greek was in Galatia and Latin in Africa who is their Adversary For these Tongues were as I have shewed in those and the like places as well or little less spoken and understood than the Vulgar and Mother Tongues And the Protestants do not think it unlawful to have the common Service in a Tongue which is commonly understood though it be not the Vulgar Tongue of the Nation especially in Maritim and Provincial Countries where there is a concourse of diverse Nations and where either these several Languages are understood or there is a compound Language that serves for all as the Lingua Franca before spoken of But if they plead for Latin as it is now when a Dead and Learned Tongue that is where it is not known at all as in the West-Indies where yet it is as much used by those of the Roman communion in Mass as in Europe or where it is not known to the Vulgar people as it is with us and every where else then they speak to the purpose for that the Reformed do oppose but then the way of arguing hitherto taken notice of is of no use to them in the World and is no more to the purpose than if they would undertake to prove that there is at this day a famous University at Athens and that Latin is the Vulgar Tongue now at Rome because these were so formerly So that if we will know where the Controversie lies and what is contended for and against we must restore things to their proper places and I think all may be brought to an Issue by putting and resolving this plain Question viz. SECT II. Qu. Whether it be lawful and expedient to use such a Tongue in the publick Worship of God as is not vulgarly or commonly understood by the people according to the way at this day required and practised in the Church of Rome If we would enquire into the lawfulness of such things as appertain to Divine Worship we must apply our selves to the Holy Scripture being in matters of that nature to determine of Right and Wrong Lawful and Unlawful according to the Directions Commands and Prohibitions of it If we would be satisfied about their Expedience we must consider the Nature Ends and Use of what we enquire about This therefore is a proper method for the Resolution of the foregoing Question But because the Apostle in his Discourse upon this Subject 1. Cor. 14. doth argue from the ends and use of the several Offices belonging to Divine Worship and because the like Order may give some light and force to what follows I shall first of all I. Treat of the Ends for which Divine Worship and the several Offices of it were instituted II. Consider whether those Ends may be attained when the Worship is performed in a Tongue not understood III. Whether the Worship so performed as to leave those ends unattainable will be accepted by God IV. I shall consider the Apostle's Discourse upon this Argument and whether it can be reasonably concluded from thence That Divine Worship so administred as not to be understood of the people is unlawful I. In the first of these the Masters of Controversie in the Romish Church do proceed with great tenderness and no little obscurity For would we know what the Worship is they would have in an Unknown Tongue they answer it is the publick only they defend For as for private saith one It is lawful for every one to offer his lesser Prayers to God in what Tongue soever he pleaseth And saith another All Catholicks are taught to say their private Prayers in their Mother Tongue As if it were possible to assign such a vast difference betwixt them when the Dispositions Reasons and Ends required and intended are the same that what is lawful expedient and necessary in the one is unlawful inexpedient and unnecessary in the other Or as if the saying private Prayers in Latin was never heard of practised or encouraged in their Church Again Would we understand to what purposes the Divine Offices do serve and whether the Edification Instruction and Consolation of the people be not some of those Ends. Bellarmin answers 1. That the principal end of Divine Offices is not the instruction or consolation of the people but a Worship due to God from the Church As if there were no regard to be had to the special ends of those Offices such as the Instruction and Consolation of the people Or as if God could be honoured by that Worship where those ends are not regarded 2. The Rhemists add That Prayers are not made to teach make learned or increase knowledge though by occasion they sometimes instruct but their especial use is to offer our Hearts desires and Wants to God c. As if there were no Offices in God's Worship appointed for Instruction and increase of Knowledge and which are performed in an Unknown Tongue amongst them as well as Prayer Or as if their Adversaries did either deny it to be the special use of Prayer To offer our Hearts c. to God Or did affirm that the special use of it is To teach make learned and increase knowledge as they with others do falsly suggest and would fain have believed But to set this in a better light and that we may understand what are the Ends and Uses for which Divine Worship was appointed and after what manner they are to be respected It is to be observed 1. That Divine Worship in its first notion respects God as its Object and so the end of it in general is the giving Honour to him by suitable Thoughts Words and Actions 2. That he hath appointed several wayes and Offices by which he will be so honoured and in which as the Honour doth terminate in him so there redounds from thence benefit to the Church 3. That the Benefits redound to the Church according to the nature of those Offices and the special Ends they were designed unto As the Word of God is for our instruction and comfort c. The Lord's Supper for the encrease of Faith in God and love to him through Jesus Christ The Praising of God is to raise our Affections and to make us more sensible of his goodness and to quicken us in our duty The especial use of Prayer that I may use the Words forecited is to offer up our Hearts Wants and Desires to God and that by conversing with him we may be the more ardently excited to the love and adoration of him as the Trent Catechism doth express it 4. That those Offices are to be performed so as may effectually answer those Ends and as we may receive the benefits they were appointed for From whence it follows 5. That if the Offices of Divine Worship are to be performed by Words those Words and that
thus distinguish have not ventured to tell us where the Apostle doth treat of the one and where of the other And it is evident that he applies his Argument of Edification to the whole and then proceeds from one Office to another from Prophesying to Praying and Singing if not also to the Lords Supper Now where the End is common to all without distinction the means conducing to that End are in all alike to be observed And if in those lesser Assemblies when they expounded prayed or sung they were to use a Tongue known to the Assembly because without so doing the Ends of their so assembling would have been defeated then certainly it was if not more yet at least as necessary that the same order be observed when the whole Church came together into one place Quest What was the Service used in those Assemblies and that was forbidden to be celebrated in an Unknown Tongue Some of the Church of Rome will understand it only of preaching and those that do grant it to respect Prayers yet will have it understood of such Prayers as were inspired But what though the Prayers were inspired when they were to be uttered in a Tongue known to the Church and were not to be used if they were not for the Edification of the Church as they were not if not understood And is not the Reason as full against Prayers not inspired when they are not understood The Question is not about Prayers inspired or not inspired but known and unknown according to which all the Offices of the Church are to be tryed as to their lawfulness and expedience But let the Prayers be as they will yet say they The Apostle treats of them occasionally only Supposing this so to be yet that is not to the purpose for the Question is not whether the Apostle treats so expresly of Prayer as of prophesying as whether the prohibition of an Unknown Tongue and the Argument taken from the End of Divine Offices lie not as expresly against praying as prophesying in that way And whether the Words If I pray in an Vnknown Tongue my Spirit prayeth but my understanding remaineth unfruitful c. v. 14 16. are not as plain as he that speaketh or prophesyeth in an Vnknown Tongue speaketh not unto Men c. If the Prohibition be the same and the reason of the prohibition be the same in both then it is not the being expresly or occasionally handled that can make so vast a difference as that the former shall be lawful and the latter unlawful Quest 4. How far is the Apostle's prohibition to be extended This will be determined partly from what hath been before said and partly from the current of the Apostle's Discourse who as he lays down that general Rule Let all things be done to Edifying so upon that principle he prohibits the use of an Unknown Tongue as inconsistent with it Verse 14. If I pray in an Vnknown Tongue my Spirit prayeth but my understanding remaineth unfruitful Where he doth not speak of a better and worse and prefer that which is understood before that which is not as they would have it but he speaks of a good and bad and so doth absolutely condemn an Unknown Tongue for the unprofitableness of it For saith he My Spirit prayeth not the Affection but the Spirit in the gift of an Unknown Tongue as many of the Antients and some of themselves expound it But my understanding remaineth unfruitful to my self that is if I do not understand it and to others if they do not understand me as the Apostle doth explain it Verse 16. So that from the whole we may with good Reason conclude That the administration of Divine Service in an Unknown Tongue is as unlawful as express Scripture can make it And that after all their attempts to decline pervert and overthrow it the fourteenth Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians remains in full force against the Opinion and Practice of the Church of Rome and is a sufficient Reason on their part to keep the Scriptures in an Unknown Tongue as long as their Service is contrary to the Scripture celebrated constantly in it SECT III. I shall enquire Whether the celebrating Divine Service in a Tongue not understood of the people hath been the antient Rite of every Church I. I shall consider whether it hath been an antient Rite II. Whether from the time of its having been a Rite it hath been the Rite and Custom of every Church Both of these are affirmed by the Council of Trent Qu. I. Whether it hath been an antient Rite Antient is a Term of an uncertain date and seems to have been chosen by the Council upon mature deliberation lest peradventure if it had been determined it might have been so late as to be of no authority in it self or so early as for want of truth it might have given a foul shock to its own Authority But however because nothing can be antienter than what is first let us consider how Service was administred in Apostolical times and so downwards as much before the Council as any thing can be reasonably said to be antient by it I have already accounted for the Apostle's sence in this matter which Cassander calls after S. Chrysostome in loc an Apostolical Command for Service in a Tongue understood of the people And if we take a step lower and so proceed we shall find an uncontroulable Evidence for it both as to the Judgment and Practice of the Church In the first place setting aside the pretended Liturgies of S. James and S. Clement which are however plainly for it as is acknowledged is Justin Martyr that flourished about 150 years after Christ who relates That after the Bishop had concluded his Prayer and giving of Thanks all the people did assent to it with an Amen Which they could not have done as the Apostle and Fathers affirm unless they understood what was prayed for To this purpose doth Clemens Alexandrinus also write who lived toward the close of the second Century Origen who lived about the middle of the third Century saith The Greek Christians in their Prayers used the Graecian and the Romans used the Roman Words and each prays and praises God in his own Tongue And the Lord of all Tongues doth hear those that pray to him in all Tongues c. S. Cyprian at the same time doth say That the Mind in Prayer doth think of nothing else but what is prayed for And therefore the Priest before Prayer doth prepare the Minds of the Brethren by saying Lift up your Hearts that when the people doth answer We lift them up unto the Lord they may be admonished that they ought to think of nothing but the Lord. For not the sound of the Voice but the Mind must pray to the Lord. Dionysius Alexandrinus that lived in the same Age in a Letter to Xystus Bishop of Rome doth write of a
A DISCOURSE Concerning the CELEBRATION OF DIVINE SERVICE IN AN Unknown Tongue LONDON Printed for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in S. Paul's Church-Yard M DC LXXXV ADVERTISEMENT CArdinal Hosius Sanders Epist Cler. Gall. Extract ex Regist Fac. Par. Procez c. quoted in this Tract by the page refer to a Book called Collectio quorundam gravium Authorum qui Sacrae Scripturae aut divinorum officiorum in vulgarem Linguam Translationes damnarunt c. printed at Paris 1661. The Quotation page 2. though out of Sixtus Senens are the Words of Ambrosius Compsae who severely condemning Cajetan for the aforesaid Saying It is better c. gives this as a Reason that that Opinion primò à Diabolo inventa est ERRATA PAg. 1. Marg. lin 3. for 1 read 2. p. 8. l. 20. r. were often p. 21. marg dele In Genes Lit. L. c. 8. in Ps 99 p. 25. l. 26. dele little p. 28. l. 1. after together r. for Conjuration p. 45. marg l. 9. dele i. p. 48. l. 26. r. Sfentopulcer A DISCOURSE CONCERNING THE CELEBRATION OF Divine Service IN AN Unknown Tongue UPon this Argument the Church of England doth fully declare it self in these Words It is a thing plainly repugnant to the Word of God and the Custome of the Primitive Church to have publick Prayers in the Church or to minister the Sacraments in a Tongue not understood of the people But if we consult the Doctors of the Church of Rome about it we shall find them as in most other points differing extreamly amongst themselves Mercer a very learned person and Professor of Hebrew at Paris is so free as to say Temerè fecerunt c. They amongst us have done rashly that brought in the Custome of praying in an Vnknown Tongue which very often neither they themselves nor our people understand And Cardinal Cajetan saith Melius est c. It is better for our Church that the publick Prayers in the Congregation be said in a Tongue common to the Priests and people and not in Latin Others of them are of another Mind and say that the having Divine Service in a Tongue known to the people is new and prophane and the Doctrine requiring it Diaboli calliditatem sapit smells of the craft of the Devil And that the Church in making use of the Latin Tongue therein received it by inspiration from the Holy-Ghost as a late Author saith With what consistence soever the former sort may speak to Truth and Reason yet I am sure the later speak with consistence enough to the Opinion Declarations and Practice of their Church as is evident from the Council of Trent the present Standard of the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which I find thus Englished to my Hands by a noted person of their Church Though the Mass contain great instruction for Gods faithful people yet it seemed not expedient to the Fathers of the Council that it should be celebrated every where in the Vulgar Tongue Wherefore retaining in all Churches the antient Rite or rather in all places the antient Rite of every Church approved by the Holy Roman Church the Mother and Mistress of all Churches lest Christs Sheep should hunger and the Children asking Bread none should be found to break it to them the Holy Synod commands Pastors and all that have care of Souls that during the celebration of Mass they should frequently either by themselves or others expound some part of those things which are read in it and among other things let them explain the Mystery of the most Holy Sacrifice the Words are Some Mystery of this Holy Sacrifice especially on Sundays and Feasts And they conclude If any one shall say that Mass ought to be celebrated only in the Vulgar Tongue let him be Anathema To this I shall add for a conclusion the Judgment of the late Pope Alexander the Seventh in a Brief he sent to the Clergy of France about a Translation of the Missal into that Language at that time newly published in which he saith that Some Sons of Perdition had arrived to that madness as to Translate and Publish it c. A Novelty we abhor and detest as the Seed-plot of disobedience rashness sedition and schism and of many other evils and therefore that French Missal or what shall hereafter be published in any other manner we condemn reprobate and forbid From all which we may perceive what an evident repugnancy there is betwixt the Doctrine of the Church of England and that of Rome in the matter before us And therefore for the better understanding the Case and discerning which is in the Right and which in the Wrong I shall discourse of it in the following order First I shall consider the Phrase an Vnknown Tongue Secondly I shall enquire into the lawfulness and expediency of celebrating Divine Service in a Tongue not understood by the People For so much is affirmed by the Council of Trent and denied by the Church of England Thirdly I shall enquire whether the celebrating Service in a Tongue not understood by the people hath been the antient custome of every Church For so much also is affirmed by that Council and denyed by the Church of England Fourthly I shall consider whether the Provision made by the foresaid Council of having Some part of the Mass expounded be sufficient to countervail the mischief of having the whole in a Tongue not understood by the people and to excuse that Church in their injunction of it Fifthly I shall enquire whether upon the whole the publick Service of God ought not to be celebrated in a Tongue vulgarly understood Which Proposition whosoever holds is anathematized by the foresaid Council And yet is owned by the Church of England SECT I. Of the Phrase Service in an Unknown Tongue Toward the fixing the sence of this Phrase we are to observe I. That there is the Vulgar Tongue of a Country which is universally understood by the Natives of what rank or quality soever Such was the Latin Tongue formerly in Rome such now is English with us Before we dismiss this it is to be further considered 1. That there are different Dialects or wayes of expressing and pronouncing the same Tongue which differences of Words or pronunciation do not so alter the Tongue but that throughout under all these variations it agrees in much more than it differs so that he that speaks the one is generally understood by him that useth the other Such anciently were the different Dialects of the Greek Tongue well known to the learned And such are the Northern Southern and Western wayes of speaking amongst our selves in this Nation 2. Where there are these different Dialects there generally is one way of speaking which either from the eloquence or fashionableness of it so far prevails as to be the Standard of the Tongue and to be used in Writing Books Letters c. and is understood
by all Such I conceive was anciently that which is called the common Dialect in Greek And of the like kind is that which is spoken in and about the Court and by Scholars and persons of a liberal education amongst us and elsewhere 3. If a Tongue in process of time by a mixture of other Nations or by the removal of a people from one Country to another or by any other cause comes to be so altered as the Mother and Original Tongue is not to be understood as Ledesma saith it is in Spain then it is no longer a Vulgar Tongue but is to be reckoned amongst the unknown II. There is a common Tongue which though not the Mother or National Tongue is however with that commonly and generally understood Thus it was antiently in many places with the Greek and Latin The former of which was once the common Tongue of a great part of the then known World and continued so to be from the time of Cicero to that of S. Jerom for the space that is of 400. if not 500. Years Insomuch that not only the Scriptures were read in Greek in the publick Congregations from Aegypt to Constantinople as S. Jerom informs us but the Christians also had their Worship as is confessed and the Fathers preached to them in that Language So did S. Chrysostome S. Basil S. Cyril and S. Athanasius in their several Sees of Antioch Caesarea Jerusalem and Alexandria And the Latin was so well known understood and commonly spoken together with the Vulgar Tongue in diverse Countries through the industry of the Romans in their several Provinces that the Vulgar was scarcely more Thus we find it in the Proconsular Africa where though less accurately spoken than at Rome it was so well understood that S. Austin saith he learned that Language of his Nurse and at play and did write as well as preach in it for the use of the Vulgar And calls it our Speech whereas the Punick was the Vulgar Tongue of that Country And such a common Tongue is French in Flanders Lingua Franca in the Streights and English in some parts of Wales III. There is a Learned Tongue which though common amongst the Learned yet they being few in comparison of the Vulgar that understand it not it cannot be called a common Tongue Such are Greek and Latin now IV. There is a Tongue understood and spoken by none in a Nation or so few as are next to none and which if used in Divine Offices would be wholly unintelligible Such are Persick and Indian with us The use of all this niceness is partly to clear the state of the Question and partly to prevent many of the Objections which the case is cumbred with And without the observing of which the Dispute will be turned from the point that is controverted to that which is not As it happens for the most part among those of the Church of Rome that undertake the management of this Cause who do either distinguish where they are not to distinguish or do not distinguish where they should distinguish For sometimes they oppose the Dialects of a Tongue to that Tongue of which they are the Dialects At other times they oppose the common Tongue to the Vulgar Sometimes they confound the Learned Tongue with the common And then again oppose the learned and utterly unknown as if these two were of as different kinds as known and unknown To give an instance of each of these Do they undertake to shew how unfit and unreasonable it is to translate the Service or Scriptures into a Vulgar Tongue they endeavour to make it out by shewing how unfit it is to think of Translating and how unreasonable it is to expect they should be translated into the several Dialects of each Tongue Would they farther shew that the Divine Offices c. were not of old so translated they attempt to prove it from their not having been translated into different Dialects As if the Dialects of a Tongue differed as much from each other and all from the main Tongue of a Nation as a learned Tongue differs from the Vulgar Which is to speak charitably for want of observing that the Dialects are but several modes of speaking the same Tongue and that ordinarily there is some common Standard which as I have said over-rules the rest and is a guide common to all As here in England notwithstanding there be several Dialects and that there is one in Scotland differs much from them all yet there is but one Translation of the Bible and one Service for the use of the whole and that is fully if not equally understood by all Furthermore would they prove that anciently the Christian Churches used not a Vulgar Tongue in Divine Service they presently multiply Authorities to shew that in many places they used Greek and Latin and that Greek and Latin were oftentimes not the Vulgar Tongues where they were so used As if the common Tongue for such were those two in elder times where they were not the Vulgar was opposed to the Vulgar as much as unknown is to known and each was inconsistent with the other Thus they tell us from S. Jerom That the Vulgar Tongue in Galatia was in effect the same with that of the Treviri in Germany And yet there and in the neighbouring Countries they had the Scriptures if not their Divine Service in Greek Not observing that Greek was the common Tongue of those parts and that both that and a Vulgar were there freely and generally spoken as Greek and Latin as well as the Gallick Tongues were so frequent in Massilia that it was called Trilinguis as S. Jerom shews in the same Dissertation of his So that these two the Common and Vulgar are so far from being inconsistent that notwithstanding the bold saying of our Country-man Sanders That the common people understand nothing but their Mother Tongue The experience of all Ages as well as our own shews that they are frequently met together But to proceed would they demonstrate that they do and may lawfully use the Latin now in Divine Service they attempt with great industry to prove that both that and the Greek were antiently used therein And so they confound the learned and the common Tongue and compare those times and places in which the Latin and Greek were commonly known and understood with our times and places in which neither of them are understood but by the Learned Lastly Would they shew that S. Paul in 1 Corinthians 14. doth not oppose Service in Latin they undertake to shew That he opposeth no other Service than what is altogether unknown and no Body understands as Persick and Arabick and that he doth not condemn a Learned Tongue thereby supposing the Learned Tongue and Tongue altogether unknown to be different in kind whereas they only differ so that the one is rarely understood and by very few in comparison and
we are in all our Tongues translations and English Prayers And we are told That the people know what is done in the general to wit That God is worshipped and honoured That the Priest prays to him That good things are asked of him for the people and thanks given to him that the memory of Christ and his Passion are celebrated and the Sacrifice offered to God This no Clown is ignorant of and this is enough This is somewhat like the course taken by Socrates that said He only pray'd in general because what particular things were good for him the Gods knew better than himself But whether this be done among them with as much reason and whether with any respect to our Religion and the several Offices of it is now to be consider'd For our satisfaction herein we may observe I. They grant That the people can and do understand no more by their Service than the general intent and Points of it II. That the people cannot apply these Generals to the particular Points of it So the Rhemists The simple people are not bound to know to what Petition their part pertaineth c. It is enough that the people can tell this holy Oraison the Pater noster to be appointed to call upon God c. III. That no more is necessary and though they are to ask special things of God yet it-is not needful to understand what or how or when or if at all they are specially prayed for For then they would understand the specials But now this state of the Case will not solve the Point For I. This is contrary to the Apostle who doth maintain That as the publick Service of God is to be ordered so as to be for the edification of the Church so the Church cannot be edified without the Offices are administred in a Tongue that shall as distinctly and particularly signifie and point to the thing thereby to be expressed as a Trumpet or the like Instrument doth give notice by a distinction of Sounds when to advance or retreat when to fight and when to forbear And that every person the unlearned as well as the learned may know how to apply his Amen thereunto but which he can no more do without understanding the Tongue than He can know what motion or posture he is to observe that hath the Trumpet sounding to him without any distinction and whose Sounds and Notes being confounded give no direction to those that are to be guided by it So Aquinas How shall he say Amen when he knows not what is pray'd for because he cannot understand Quid boni dicas nisi quod benedicas What good thou sayest except that thou dost bless II. The nature of the thing is against it For as the Offices are various and distinguished by their Ends and Uses and we cannot attain those Ends nor make use of those Offices without the understanding of those Ends and Uses So there are particular things respected in those Offices which unless we also respect we lose the benefit of them but that we cannot do without a particular knowledge of them As for example the Romish Catechism faith That Prayer is the Interpreter of the Soul and is directed to God or the Saints That therein Men do confess their sins and pray for the pardon of them that they beg for others and themselves things Temporal Spiritual and Eternal that therein also they give Thanks for whatever good they have received and do enjoy Now as these things are of different kinds so according to their kind they require different dispositions and so what are suitable to the one will not be suitable to the other But if the knowledge be only general that cannot produce special dispositions and he that ventures to be particular therein may rejoyce and give Thanks when he is to mourn and confess may mind Earthly things when the Prayer is for Heavenly may imprecate when he should bless and instead of Ora pro nobis may say Miserere nobis that is make a Saint to be God and apply that to the Officer of the Court of Heaven which he should address only to the Judge He may be all the while in a posture of contradiction to the Church and have his dispositions so little suited to the solemnities of it that the Priests may say to such with some little variation in the Words of the Gospel We have piped unto you and ye have mourned we have mourned unto you and ye have danced So that unless they will say There are no need of particular dispositions according to the kinds and special uses of the Offices of Religion they must say That Service in an Unknown Tongue is not for the edification of the Church So Aquinas again He who doth hear and not understand is not edified as far as he understands not although he undestand it in general III. If this were true That a confused general knowledge is sufficient yet this will not help them or justifie them in the use of an Unknown Tongue For even the general knowledge they pretend to doth not proceed from the Tongue for that they understand not but is obtained some other way that is by some actions and Postures some particular Words and Phrases some Ceremonies and Signals given in the administration of their Service And which would signifie as much for the most part without the Tongue and Words as with the Tongue that is not understood IV. I shall add That whereas they pretend experience in the case and which for the present we shall not so far question as utterly to deny but that there may be and is some Devotion amongst the ignorant sort of them yet so far as this Devotion of theirs is real it must be because of somewhat understood but so far as it is without Instruction so far unquestionably it proceeds only from the imagination and if it rises from no better or higher a cause whatsoever semblance it may have of Devotion yet it hath no right to that Character I shall make this clear by an instance or two Not many years since in a certain City of Brabant there was for ornament a large Statue erected at a Conduit near the Market-place to which the Country people as they passed to and fro did often pay their Devotions not discerning any difference betwixt that and an image of a Saint so much to the publick scandal that to prevent any such mistake for the future it was by command transformed into a little Boy with a change also of the posture Now if we would enquire into this Devotion it is much what the same we are discoursing of There wanted not an inward disposition that inclined the people to it there wanted not outward expressions for they bowed before it kissed the Feet of it said their Pater nosters c. before it and all with as much Devotion as if it had been the Image of S. Roch or S.
unlawful And that is the thing I shall now particularly enquire into by considering IV. Whether from the Apostle's Discourse upon this Argument it can be reasonably concluded That Divine Service so administred as not to be understood of the people is unlawful In the Apostle's Discourse upon this Argument 1 Cor. 14. there are two things agreed in betwixt the contending parties I. That the Service of God is so to be ordered as may be for the edification of the Church v. 4 5 12. And that what is inconsistent with the general much more the universal Edification of it is not to be allowed II. That an Unknown Tongue in such Assemblies and Offices as the Apostle speaks of is inconsistent with and cannot be for the publick Edification v. 2 6 9 11 14 16. But though it be thus far agreed yet they afterwards divide upon it from the Protestants For 1. Some of the Church of Rome do say That it is evident from this place of Scripture that a Vulgar and Known Tongue was not used in those days in Publick Worship 2. That if so be such was then used yet the Apostle doth not forbid the use of an Unknown Tongue in it The first do wholly found what they have to say upon Verse 16. How shall he that occupieth the room of the Vnlearned or Idiot say Amen at thy giving of Thanks This shews say they that such giving of Thanks was not accustomed to be made in the Vulgar Tongue for had the Service been in the Vulgar there needed no Man to have supplyed the place of the Idiot This at first sight may seem a pretty Argument to one that understands no more than Latin and English but the mischief of it is that it 's not true Of this mind is Bellarmin c. who saith 1. That the Greek Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the use of that Tongue doth not signifie one that is in the stead of an Idiot or unlearned but thereby are meant all rude unlearned Men. So Chrysostom and Theophylact expound it c. 2. There was no such custom in Apostolical times and long after of one to answer in the place of the Vulgar but that the people were wont to answer as is evident from Justin Martyr c. After this Argument has been so clearly relinquished it might have been omitted by us had it not been re-assumed with no little assurance and triumph by others since Bellarmin's time II. Those among them that do quit this yet hold that the Apostle doth not forbid a Tongue so unknown as the Latin is now in Divine Worship And for this they offer several Arguments which will be all comprehended and I conceive cleared by considering 1. What is meant by the Unknown Tongue which the Apostle condemns 2. What by the Assemblies in which such an Unknown Tongue is forbid 3. What by the Service used in those Assemblies 4. How far the Apostle's Prohibition is to be extended Quest 1. As to the first They say That the Tongues condemned were miraculous and extraordinarily infused but what they plead for is acquired and learnt A. But supposing the Tongues were miraculous yet what is this to the case in Hand when they were not condemned for being miraculous for as such they were Gifts from God and Signs to Men but as they were abused and used neither to the Glory of God nor the Edification of the Church And by parity of reason every Unknown Tongue as well what is acquired as infused is condemned also The Miraculous Tongue was forbidden when it did not profit when it was a speaking to the air when he that spoke was a Barbarian to him that heard and when he that heard could not say Amen to him that spoke Verse 2 9 11 16. And if a Tongue acquired be as much unknown as a Tongue infused the Reasons being common to both the one is as much prohibited in those circumstances as the other Nay according to their way of arguing it will follow That if Tongues miraculously infused which were a sign to them that believed not might not be used in the Cases abovesaid then much less may such as are acquired by Education and other humane wayes But they say farther That the Apostle speaks of a Tongue which no one understands in the whole Church but not of that which is understood by some at least by him that officiates But for this they offer no manner of proof neither is there any For 1. the Apostle speaks of such a Tongue as is not for the Edification of the Church but if some only understand it those that do not understand are no more edified by the understanding of the rest than if none understood it 2. There are two sorts of persons concerned one that can say Amen and another that cannot whom the Apostle calls Vnlearned But the Unlearned are as well as he saith to be respected as the Learned and the Unlearned being ordinarily more than the Learned it must consequently be such a Tongue which all or the most did understand that he pleads for and such a Tongue which none or the fewest did understand that he pleads against Lastly They say The Apostle condemns a Barbarous Tongue but not that which is understood by Learned and Civil people in every great City as Hebrew Greek and Latin So the Rhemists And we are further told That all Tongues are Barbarous except those three But all this is spoken very precariously For the Apostle excepts no Tongue as a Tongue from being barbarous For that is barbarous with him that is not understood whether it be Hebrew or Arabick Greek or Scythian Latin or Dalmatick In this Sence Ovid took it speaking of himself in Exile amongst the Getae Barbarus hic ego sum quia non intelligor ulli I am here a Barbarian because I am not understood by any And in this sense it is here taken by ancient Expositors Thus S. Jerom Every Speech which is not understood is barbarous Thus S. Chrysostom and indeed several also amongst themselves So that upon the whole it is manifest that the Apostle means by an Unknown Tongue that which is not understood of the People Quest 2. What are the Assemblies in which the Apostle condemns the use of an Unknown Tongue The Champions of this Cause in the Church of Rome do alledge That much of the Chapter refers to Spiritual Conferences and collocutory Exercises then used in lesser Assemblies which they endeavour to prove more especially from the Directions given by the Apostle Verse 27 c. If we should grant that part of the Apostle's Discourse refers to such Conferences yet what is this to that part of it that treats of Publick Worship Or indeed what is it to the purpose at all when there were mostly the same Offices used in one as the other and the same End prescribed to the use of them in both Those that do
person that having been baptized by Hereticks upon the hearing the Questions and Answers at the Baptism of the Orthodox questioned his own Baptism But saith he we would not rebaptize him because he had for a good while held Communion with us in the Eucharist and had been present at our giving of Thanks and answered Amen S. Basil who flourished about the year 370 putting the Question How the Spirit prays and the Mind is without Fruit answers It is meant of those that pray in a Tongue unknown to them that hear For when the Prayers are unknown to them that are present the mind is without Fruit to him that prays c. And as to the Practice of the Church in the publick Service he declares That the people had the Psalms Prophets and evangelical Commands And when the Tongue sings the Mind doth search out the sence of the things that are spoken And he relates how the Christians used to spend the Night in Prayers Confessions and Psalms one beginning and the rest following And that the noise of those that joyned in the Prayers was like that of the Waves breaking against the Shoar With him we have S. Ambrose agreeing that lived much about the same time who saith It is evident that the Mind is ignorant where the Tongue is not understood as some Latines that are wont to sing in Greek being delighted with the sound of the Words without understanding what they say And again the unskilful hearing what he doth not understand knows not the conclusion of the Prayer and doth not answer Amen that is it is true that the Blessing may be confirmed For by those is the confirmation of the Prayer fulfilled that do answer Amen c. And he doth shew what an honour is given to God what a reverence is derived upon our Religion and how far it excells the Pagan that he that hears understands and that nothing is in the dark And he saith This is a symphony when there is in the Church a concord of divers Ages and Vertues that the Psalm is answered and Amen said c. Toward the latter end of the same Century lived S. Chrysostome who saith That the people are much concerned in the Prayers that they are common to them and the Priest that in the Sacrament as the Priest prays for the people so the people for the Priest And that those Words and with thy Spirit signifie nothing else And what wonder is it That in the Prayers the people do talk with the Priest And elsewhere he saith That the Apostle shews that the people receive no little damage when they cannot say Amen To conclude Bellarmin saith That in the Liturgy which bears this Fathers name the parts sung by the Priest Deacon and People are most plainly distinguished To him let us add S. Jerom his cotemporary who declares that at the Funeral of Paula in Jerusalem the multitude did attend and sung their Psalms in Hebrew Greek Latin and Syriack according to the Nations they were of And we are further told That at Bethlem there resorted Gauls Britains Armenians Indians c. and there were almost as many Choirs of Singers as of Countries of a different Tongue but of one and the same Religion And the same Father tells us That at Rome the people sounded forth Amen like to the noise of Thunder Next let us consult S. Augustine of the same time who saith That no body is edified by what he doth not understand And That the reason why the Priest lifts up his Voice in the Church when he prayeth is not that God but the people may hear and understand and joyn with him And that whereas the Bishops and Ministers of the Church were sometimes guilty of using barbarous and absurd Words that they should correct it that the people may most plainly understand and say Amen And elsewhere as has been quoted before exhorts that they be not as Parrots and Pies that say they know not what Thus far our Authorities do proceed with little interruption For Bellarmin doth grant That not only in the times of the Apostles all the people were wont to answer in Divine Offices but that the same was a long time after observed both in the Eastern and Western Church as is evident from S. Chrysostome S. Jerom c. Now having derived the Title thus far for above 400 years we need not be much solicitous for what was introduced afterwards but yet for a farther confirmation I shall add some Testimonies of a later date Such is that known Edict of the Emperour Justinian who dyed Anno 565. in which it is thus enacted We command all Bishops and Priests to celebrate the holy Oblation and the Prayers in sacred Baptism not in a low but such a Voice as may be heard by the people that thereby their Hearts may be raised up with greater Devotion and Honour be given to God for so the Holy Apostle teacheth in the first to the Corinthians For if thou only bless with the Spirit c. To this I shall add that of Isidore Hispalensis that lived in the end of the fifth Century who saith That it behoveth that when it is sung in the Church that all do sing and when Prayers are offered that all do pray and when there is reading that all do read and silence being made that all hear This is also agreeable to the former Opinion of the Church of Rome it self and for proof of which what can we desire more than the Declarations of Popes and Councils and this we have For we read of a permission given by the Pope to the Moravians at the instance of Cyril who had converted them and other Nations of the Sclavonians to have Divine Service in their own Tongue and that he and the Conclave were induced to it when not a few did oppose it by a Voice from Heaven that said Let every Spirit praise the Lord aud every Tongue confess to him as Aeneas Sylvius afterward Pope relates And Pope John the VIII not long after in Anno 880. writes thus to Sfento opulcer a Prince of the Sclavonians We command that the Praises and Works of our Lord Christ be declared in the same Sclavonian Tongue For we are admonished by sacred Writ to praise the Lord not only in three but in all Tongues saying Praise the Lord all ye Nations praise him all the people And the Apostles filled with the Holy Ghost spake in all Tongues And S. Paul admonisheth Let every Tongue confess and in the first to the Corinthians he doth sufficiently and plainly admonish us that in speaking we should edifie the Church of God Neither doth it hinder the Faith or Doctrine to have the Mass sung or the Gospel and Lessons well translated read or other divine Offices sung in the same Sclavonian Tongue because he who made the three principal Tongues viz.
others are trained up to the knowledge and understanding of Latin by Rules Masters and frequent exercise Surely they had the Mass in Latin when the Learned themselves did not understand it as Valla saith They had the Mass in Latin when the greatest part of the people did not understand it as Faber relates They had the Mass in Latin when not only the people but the Priest and Deacons rarely understood what they prayed for as Billet c. confess And where was then their attention and diligence that to their lives end either daily rehearsed it or often heard it and yet never understood it And is it not so still when notwithstanding all the noise of Exposition Manuals and Primers c. for the use of the Vulgar yet setting aside some little Forms and the Ceremonies of it they are so ignorant of the Contents of the Missal or Mass Book that as to the matter of it they know it not from the Breviary nor would know it from the Alcoran if read in the same Tongue alike pronounced and the same falls and postures were used in the reading of it So that what more plain than the means they have provided is not sufficient for to instruct and edifie the people and that after all they do hold this instruction unnecessary and that the people are safe without it And this is the case for it is generally resolved by their Casuists both for Priest and People that they do their duty and merit when they say their Prayers though they do not understand so Eckius so Salmeron c. And if it were otherwise very few would do their duty when so very few do at all understand what they say as Cardinal Tolet doth determine So indulgent are they and very reasonable is it that they should be so that when they have put out the peoples Eyes they should take good care to make the way broad and smooth for them But in good earnest can we think this way as safe as it is broad and that there is no Ditch into which both Priest and People if alike blind may fall and perish And if there be must not the case of that people be very lamentable that are wholly left to the ability and sincerity of their Priest who if he wants the former may through ignorance turn the most solemn part of their Service as it happens into Nonsense or Blasphemy And if he wants the latter may use a Spell for Prayer and the antient charm of Abracadabra for Ave Maria as a learned person hath observed Nay instead of baptizing in the sacred Name of the Father c. he may do by the person as a Jew under the profession of a Priest is said to have done by a certain Prince in the last Age and baptize him in the horrid name of the Devil There is then nothing so absurd or wicked which according to the case may not be practised And neither Prayers be Prayers nor Sacraments Sacraments nor persons Christians as long as the Priest doth alone know or neither Priest nor People understand But supposing that there be no defect in either of these and that the whole Service is faithfully and understandingly performed yet if the Tongue in which it is performed be not understood of the people there can be no understanding of the sence contained in it and where the sence and matter is not understood there cannot be as I have shewed those dispositions of Soul that attention of Mind that Faith which gives the Amen to our Prayers c. and which renders the Service acceptable to God and beneficial to our selves and consequently a service so contrived as shall defeat those ends is one of the greatest mischiefs that can befal a Church and must render the Romish Church inexcusable in the injunction of it and justifie those that have reformed it SECT V. We are come to enquire Whether upon the whole the Service of God ought not to be celebrated in a Tongne vulgarly understood The Church of Rome doth anathematize and doom to Hell those that hold a Vulgar Tongue necessary in Divine Service and doth both absolutely forbid their own Missal to be so translated and persecute those that have so used it And yet they cannot dare not say it is unlawful in it self For it is better to have it in the Vulgar than not at all saith one It is matter of Discipline saith a second It hath been granted in some cases is acknowledged by others And it is most expedient to have it in the Vulgar saith a fourth And if so why this diligent care to prevent and suppress it Why this out-cry against it Why this Severity What need of such Decrees and Anathemas of Councils What need such Commands of the Popes for Princes to oppose it with all their force as that of Gregory VII to Vratislaus of Bohemia what reason is there for a general Convention of the Clergy of a Kingdom to proceed against a translation of their Missal When if we consult the ends for which the publick Service was instituted if we consult the reason of the thing if we consult Scripture or Fathers or the practice of the Church for about seven hundred Years together we shall find that it is not only expedient but necessary to have it in a Tongue understood of the people and that the Church of Rome that is so forward in its Anathema is under a precedent and greater one even that of the Apostle Whosoever shall preach any other Gospel let him be Anathema So that which is most to be respected the Anathema of Heaven or that of the Council the command of God or a Decree of a Pope the Church of God in its best times or the particular Church of Rome in latter Ages whether the edification of the Church of God or the will and interest of a corrupted Church is not difficult to conceive And therefore we may end as we began with the Church of England It is a thing plainly repugnant to the Word of God and the custome of the Primitive Church to have publick Prayers in the Church or to minister the Sacraments in a Tongue not understood of the people FINIS Article 24. Comment in Eccles 5. 1. In 1 Ep. Corinth c. 14. Stapleton Quaest quodl Quaest 2. Sixtus Senens Biblioth l. 6. annot 263. Portraiture of the Church of Jesus Christ c. 14. Conc. Trid. Sess 22. â— 8. S. C. Answ to Dr. Pierce c. 15. Retento ubique cujusque Ecclesiae an iquo â—itu Sanctissimi hujus sacrificii aliquod mysterium Canon 9. Collectio quorundam Author c. cum Dicretis c. 1661. De Script Div. Missae sacr celebr ling. vulg c. 20. â— 5. Ciâ— pro Archiâ— Hieroâ— Tom. 9. l. 2. prooem ad Galat. Tom. 3 praef l. in paâ—alip Ledesma c. 33. L. Valla Eleg. praef Ledesma c. 3. 2. 7. L. 1. confess c. 14. Retract l. 1.