Approbation for all that space of Time which cannot be proved concerning any thing that is a notorious Corruption Secondly That the gross Mistake of laying the Original of them so late is all along supported by perverting those places which speak of reducing some Countries which had been over-run by the Goths and Vandals Hunnes and Franks with other different sorts of People to one Form of Liturgy As if these were meant of the first imposing of Forms of Prayer in the Christian Church Whereas it is plain that some of these Countries needed a New Conversion and the various and different Inhabitants of other Provinces had brought in great variety of Rites which this Age strove to reduce to an Uniformity not by inventing a New Way but by following the Primitive Way of establishing One Liturgy for every Kingdom or Province Thirdly I must note That my Adversary frequently repents of this despicable Concession and after he hath granted the use of Liturgies in this Age he omits all those Authorities which clearly prove the continuance of this ancient Practice and with all his might strives to wrest those Passages which he doth produce in this Period as if they did not prove so much as he hath granted So that I must first supply the wilful Omissions of his Discourse by setting down the Evidence which he conceals and then rescue the Places he doth cite from his Misinterpretations And first we will see what the industrious Centuriators say of this Age They have as was shewed owned that Forms of Prayer were generally used in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries and in this they take notice That the Nicene Creed was repeated in their Divine Service that The Lords Prayer was sung by all the People together in the Greek Church That the People at Constantinople did frequently use Litanies That Antiphons were usually Sung in the Gallican Church That we may see by the Histories of this Age that solemn Masses had now filled all places That they had public Prayers in their Temples and sometimes celebrated Litanies in the Night And they add That they had many Forms of Prayers One of which they reckon to be That Litany used in the Eastern Church wherein the Peoples part was to Sing Lord have mercy upon us (b) Magdebâ— Cent. 6. cap. 6. pag. 330 c. ad pag. 339. This was their Opinion of the Way of Praying and Praising God which had begun in former Ages and was continued in this to be performed by Prescribed Forms Caesarius Arelat An. D. 503. § 1. The first eminent Writer of this Age is Caesarius Bishop of Arles in France who was present at most of those Gallican Councils which enjoyn an Uniformity in the Public Offices and settle one and the same Liturgy and thence we may conclude he was for the use of Forms of Prayer Which may appear also by his Homilies where he intimates That the whole Service for the Communion the Prayers Lessons c. took up an hour or two yet he reckons those are very Criminal who for their Souls good will not stay till the whole Office was compleated that is till they had received the final Blessing after the Lords Prayer with which as we have shewn in former Centuries the Communion-Service was concluded (c) Caesarii hom 8. edit a. Baluz pag. 60. Now since the Office ended exactly as it had done in former Ages we may from thence infer it was the same ancient Form And we will observe further that when the Admonition given by a single Bishop would not reform this vile Custom of the Peoples going out of the Church before the Prayers were fully ended The Councils of this time began to make Canons to forbid the People to depart from the Divine Service before the Blessing was pronounced (d) Concil 1. Aurel. Can. 28. An. 507. Bin. Tom. 2. par 1. pag. 562. item Concil 3. Aurel. Can. 28. An. 540. ibid. par 2. p. 29. Which Blessing was an ancient and well known Form as also was the whole Office For this same Caesarius very clearly witnesseth in another place That the Preface Lift up your Hearts c. was still used in the Communion Office a Form which had been in all Churches down from the days of S. Cyprian and probably long before (e) Caesar hom 14. vid. Bona rer Liturg. pag. 552. and yet continued without any variation § 2. But because we have mentioned some Gallican Councils Concil Agatheus A.D. 506. we must here observe that after the Kings of France had received the Faith That Church was every where restored to that good Order and Regularity from which under Pagan Princes and in difficult Times it had fallen and this was the occasion of the many Councils held about this Time and of those Canons that do labour to reduce all the Gallican Church to one Order of Service So in the Council of Agatho of which Caesarius was President one of the Canons is in these Words Since it is convenient that the Order of the Church be equally kept by all We Ordain as it is every where That after the Antiphons the Collects shall be said in order by the Bishops or Priests And that the Morning and Evening Hymns shall be sung every day and in the conclusion of the Mattins Vespers and Masses the Sentences out of the Psalms shall be read And the People after the Common Prayer shall be dâ—smissed in the Evening with the Bishops Benediction (e) Et quia convenit Ordinem Ecclesiae ab omnibus aequaliter custudiri c. Concil Agath Can. 30. Bin. Tom. II. par I. pag. 556 Before which Blessing the People are forbid to go out of the Church (f) Ibid. Can. 47. Here then we see there is an Order of the Church that is as the word then signified A Liturgy enjoyned to be observed by all in that Province as it seems it was now by other Councils setled every where Which Liturgy consisted of the Antiphons and Collects every one set in its proper place as also of Morning and Evening Hymns and Prayers together with the Communion-Service then called the Mass and the Responsory reading of the Psalms with a common or general Prayer for all Estates of Men and all was concluded with the Bishops Benediction Now it is certain that these Antiphons Collects Hymns and this General Prayer were Forms and the Canon supposes them all written down at large in that Order they were to be used by all Bishops and Priests and this is plainly a prescribed Liturgy But my Adversary who cites this Canon at large after he had falsified the Words of it (g) Disc of Lit. pag. 174. where he set down Collationes for Collectiones and leaves out per ordinem attempts to pervert the Sense and would perswade us it amounts to no more than a Rubric or Directory which is a gross and I doubt a wilful Mistake For though we should grant That the
Hereticks And so much was he in love with Forms that he made such for private and extraordinary occasions For when any came to him under outward afflictions and desired his Prayers he used this Form Lord thou knowest what is best for our Souls and therefore when we ask for such things as our necessity compels us to desire do thou only grant that which conduces to our Spiritual welfare therefore if our humble Prayer be expedient then let it be heard so that thy Will may happily be Accomplished (p) Vita Fulgent cap. 25. pag. 30. Another Form frequently repeated by this holy Bishop in his last Sickness was this O Lord give me patience here and thy Pardon at my End (q) Ibid. cap. 30. pag. 93. And the Writer of his Life remarks that these Prayers of his were graciously heard and answered by Almighty God who it seems is well pleased with Forms that are said with true Devotion and if he accept them we may justly despise the Censures of ignorant and prejudiced Men. I must not conclude this Period till I observe that there is in the Works of this Fulgentius a Book dedicated to him by Peter the Deacon which this holy Bishop highly commends wherein as we shewed before it is affirmed That the Liturgy of S. Basil was generally used in the Eastern Church and of so great Authority was it accounted that he cites a passage out of it against the Hereticks (r) In libel Petr Diac. de incarn grat Jesu Chr. inter op Fulg. Moreover in that same Book is quoted also that same Prayer for all Estates of Men as an Argument to confirm the Catholic Faith which we produced at Large before out of S. Augustin and Pope Celestine (s) Ibid. cap 8. pag 281. See Cent. 5. §. and since so many Fathers produce it in dispute it is Evident it was a part of the Churches Liturgy and had been so for many Ages otherwise it had been to no purpose to bring it for Evidence against the Enemies of the Catholic Faith And this may suffice to shew the continuance of Liturgy in the African Church in the time of Fulgentius Concil Valentin Ann. Dom. 524. § 4. To return into the West there is a Canon made at the Council of Valentia in Spain Which saith Before the Catechumens go out and the Office of the Faithful begin let the Epistle and Gospel be Read and the Sermon be Preached because by hearing of these many had been converted to the Faith (t) Concil Valent Can. 1. Bin. Tom. II. par 1. pag. 629. By which wee see the Offices of the Catechumens and the Faithful yet remained in two distinct Forms as they had been in the Primitive Ages but this Canon made way for joyning those Offices and admitting all sorts of People to the whole Service excepting only the holy Cummunion so that after this we rarely hear of dismissing the Catechumens or of keeping Mysteries secret because these parts of the World were now generally become professed Christians In France a little before this Sigismund one of their Kings had instituted a Society of Monks to sing the Daily Office (u) Gregor Turon lib 3. cap. 5. pag. 95. vid. Cointe Annal An. 522. Now that Office which is Sung by each side of a Choir can be no other than a prescribed Form And we shall shew presently that the Monks of France had a peculiar Office made up of ancient Forms of Praise and Prayer In the mean time we shall look upon the Canons of the Council of Vaison Concil Vasent 3. Ann. 529. by which we shall see that Liturgick Forms were used at this time also in all the Churches of the World and believed to have descended down to them from the most ancient Times For the Bishops in this Council say That since it was the custom in the East at Rome and in all Italy to repeat the Kyrie Eleeson Lord have Mercy upon us Therefore in all our Churches this holy Custom shall be introduced to say it in the Morning Prayer at the Communion and at Evening Prayer (w) ut in omnibus Ecclesiis nostris ista consuetudo sanct ad Matutinum Missas ad Vesperam Deo propitiante intromittatur Concil Vas Can. Bin. Tom. II. par 1. pag. 641. The Form was ancient and used in all the Primitive Litanies but in these Churches they had not begun to repeat these Words in the Daily Offices at the three great Hours of Prayer But since it was become a Custom in all other Countries so to use this holy Form they now prescribe it shall be so used in their Churches as it is still in our Liturgy immediately before the Lords Prayer Again the same Council ordains That the Communion Service shall never be said without the Hymn of Holy Holy Holy that is the Trisagion which though it was prescribed by their Liturgy before yet some in the time of Lent and in private Communions had thought fit to omit it (x) Ibid. Can. 4. so that the variations which Bishops had made from the old way were regulated by the Councils of this Age. The next Canon affirms That at Rome in the East in Africa and Italy they had for preventing Heresie added to the Gloria Patri these Words As it was in the beginning c. Wherefore they ordain that this Hymn shall be repeated with that addition in their Churches (y) Ibid. Can. 5. p. 642. The Form with this enlargment also had been long in use in other Churches but this Addition was first Established in France after its second Conversion by this Canon And we gather from hence that in this Age there is not only an assurance that every Nation had a Liturgy but that the lesser Churches laboured to imitate the greater and more famous Churches in order to the making as great an Uniformity as was possible in all the Liturgies then in the World And we shall finally note from this Councils Orders about these ancient Forms that private Bishops themselves in this Age were not allowed to correct or alter any thing relating to the Liturgy Nothing less than a Council might presume to make Orders in those Cases Wherefore we cannot imagin that Liturgies were lately set up in the end of the last Age or the beginning of this as my Adversary affirms much less can we think that private Ministers had leave to vary the Offices as they pleased Benedictus Monach. An. Dom. 529. § 5. About this time Flourished Benedict the Father of that numerous Order of Monks who within an Age or two had filled all the Western World and he writ his Rule not as my Adversary pretends in the middle (z) Disc of Lit. p. 178. but towards the beginning of the Sixth Age viz. Ann. Dom. 530. (a) Vid. Dr. Cave Cartoph Eccles p. 109. Which Rule is still extant (b) Vid. Cointe Annal. Eccles An. 536. And as to
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
express mention is made of prescribed and known Forms then setled in the Spanish Church that it is impossible to deny or evade so manifest a Truth To which may further be added his Epistle to Ludifredus Bishop of Corduba about the several Ecclesiastical Officers and their Duties wherein he mentions The known Forms of Lauds and Responsals the Office of Prayers and reciting of the Names the giving of Peace and indeed all other Parts of Liturgy so that nothing is more clear than that he hath respect to the prescribed Forms then in use (l) Isidor Ep. ad Ludifred pag. 615. And the like Reference he makes to the particular Offices and Forms used by the Monks in their private Oratories within their Monasteries where they also prayed by Forms (m) Idem in reg Monach. cap. 6. de Offic. pag. 701. So that it is impossible there should be any thing more evident than that a Liturgy and prescribed Forms of Prayer and Praise were used in this Country of Spain in Isidore's Time who was Bishop of Sevil Thirty three years together and the most learned Man that can be found in the Western Church in this Age. § 2. Concil Toletan 4. An. Dom. 633. This very Isidore was President of the Fourth Council of Toledo called by King Sisenandus wherein there were Sixty two Bishops and seven more subscribed by Proxy being Summoned out of all the Provinces in France and Spain then subject to the Gothic Kings who had much enlarged their Empire since the Mozarabic Office was first composed Wherefore many of the Canons of this Council were made to settle the use of that one Liturgy every where in Sisenandus his Dominions for it seems before this National Council it was not universally received or at least not used without some variety but here the Second Canon saith We Decree that as we Bishops are joyned in the Vnity of the Catholic Faith So will we do nothing differently or dissonantly in the Sacraments of the Church lest any difference of ours among the Ignorant and Carnal should give suspicion of Schism and the variety of several Churches prove a Scandal to many Therefore one Order of Praying and Singing shall be observed by us through all Spain and France one manner of Communion Service one manner of Morning and Evening Prayer nor will we who are Vnited in one Faith and one Kingdom have any longer divers Ecclesiastical Customs For the ancient Canons also Decree this That every Country shall have the same way of Singing and Ministring (n) Unus igitur ordo Orandi atque psallendi nobis per omnem Hispaniam atque Galliam Conservetur Unus modus in Missarum solennitatibus Unus in vespertinis matutinisque officiis nec diversa sit ultra in nobis Ecclesiastica consuetudo qui in una fide continemur Regno hoc enim antiqui Canones decreverunt ut unaquaeque Provincia psallendi ministrandi parem consuetudinem contineat Concil Tolet. 4. Can. 2. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. p. 345. From which Canon we may Observe First That the different ways of celebrating Divine Service was looked on as a Corruption broken in upon them contrary to the ancient Canons that is those of Laodicea Milevis Vannes Pamiers Gyrone and others cited before Secondly That these differences were occasioned by the Bishops having been formerly of different Opinions in matters of Faith and lived under different Kings but being now all of one Faith and under one Prince it was necessary to have one Form of Service Thirdly That these Differences were Scandalous to the Bishops and an Offence to the People while they did continue Fourthly Therefore they settle one Form of Morning and Evening Prayers and one Form of Communion-Service throughout all the Dominions of Sisenandus who Ruled all Spain and in some Parts of France lately gained by his Ancestors they now will have but one Order that is One Liturgy as that Word signifies without the least difference And since Isidore had so lately corrected and compleated Leander's Office and was President here we may conclude that this Canon was to settle that very Liturgy And because some Bishops might be so much in love with their former ways of Service that without the Authority of so great a Council they would not change them there follow divers Canons to forbid the Particulars wherein they differed and to settle those prescribed in the Mozarabic Office of which being many I will only repeat the Heads which are these The 5th Canon forbids the Trine Immersion in Baptism and orders it to be done but once The 6th enjoyns all to observe the Office for Good-Friday The 8th orders that on Easter-Even there shall be Tapers Consecrated in the Churches of France as had been anciently done in the Churches of Spain The 9th Canon Commands the Lords Prayer to be said every day and not only on Sundays The 10th forbids the singing Allelujah in Lent since the Vniversal Church omitted it in that time of Fasting The 11th enjoyns the singing Glory be to thee O God after the Gospel according to the Old Canons and not after the Epistle as some used The 12th condemns those who rejected all Hymns not found in Scripture and orders the use of those made by S. Ambrose S. Hilary and other Ecclesiastical Doctors The 13th Censures those who would not sing the Benedicite or Song of the Three Children in the Communion-Office on Sundays and Festival-days being an Hymn used all over the Catholic Church The 14th directs the Singing of Glory and Honour be to the Father c. exactly as it yet prescribed in the Mozarabic Liturgy and in no other And the 15th is about the Gloria after the Responsals that it be always used alike The 16th asserts the Revelations of S. John to be Canonical and orders them to be read between Easter and Pentecost The 17th orders the Benediction of the People as well as the Lords Prayer to be used before the distribution of the Sacrament (o) Concil Tolet 4. Can 5. Can. 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag 346 347 c. An Usage which as we noted before is also peculiar to the Mozarabic Liturgy Now from these Canons we may gather First what were the Particulars wherein the several Diocesses had differed viz. not that some of them had no Liturgy and others had but that whereas all of them used prescribed Forms there was some variety in the use of some of the particular Parts of Liturgy at least in the Order or the Time of using them but as for my Adversary's pretended Liberty for Private Ministers to vary daily these Offices here is nothing can be meant of that it was several Diocesses which differed not by reason of Extempore or Arbitrary Prayers but only about some Liturgic Forms or the manner of using them Every Bishop and Diocess had an Order and Now they Decree there shall be but
Bishops at all But only that there were no precedence of one Bishop before another on the account of the Dignity of their Sees but that their Honour might be only according to their desert and vertue (z) Nazianz. Crat. â—8 And in his Rhetorical way of praising Athanasius he plays the Orator in seting out the Character of an evil Bishop and then shews how unlike Athanasius was to such (a) Nazianz. Crat. 21. in land Athan. But no man can think that a true description of all the Bishops of that Age is to be taken from such an occasional strain of Rhetorick Pag. 187. S. Jerom in his Cell held Correspondence with and paid Respect to all the eminent Bishops of the World and was far from thinking the whole Order was degenerated into Tyranny S Chrysostom doth not say He was afraid of all the Bishops or of the Bishops in general as he pretends but only of those who opposed him which were in number but 36 And at that very time he had far more Bishops for him but his Enemies oppressed him by the favour of the Court (b) Chrysost Ep 13. Tom. 7. pag 95. See his Life in Dr. Câ—ve p. 485 And Arcadius the Emperour was very angry by the Information which some banished Monks had given him when he saith those hard Words of Theophilus of Alexandria and his Party (c) Georg. Al. vit Chrysost c. â—9 Tom. 8. pag. 212. who had done many evil Things but this must not be applied as the Character of all Bishops in that Age And it is of those Bishops only that Isidore speaks which as appears by his very words here cited refer only to some of the Bishops of that Country For all under Theophilus his Jurisdiction did neither joyn with him nor follow his Exampâ—e (d) Isid Pel. lib 2. ep 125. and which was ciâ—ed â—e â—â—e lib. 5. ep 21. And how disingenuous is it to say no worse from his complaint of a Few to affirm That Episcopacy it self was become a tyrannical Licentiousness yâ—a and was turned into Tyranny Besides he cannot find one Complaint that imposing Liturgies was then called or accounted any part of Tyranny none accused any Bishops for that which is the only Point we now dispute about Pag 188. After a long description of evil Bishops and Clergy in general he comes in a Marginal Note to own that Isidore confesseth there were some Bishops in that Country and at that time who lived up to the Apostolical Character So that still he cannot conclude from hence the whole Church was degenerated And his next Quotation relates only to the Tyranny of Theophilus and his Party at Alexandria yet Isidore saith that then in that Church there were famous Doctors and approved Disciples (e) Isid Pel. lib. 5. ep 126. which my Adversary omits and here again quotes divers Epistles which he had cited before (f) Id lib. 3. â—p 223. lib. 5 ep 21 c. and at last quotes an Epistle wherein Isidore only reproves one single Clergy-man (g) Id. lib. 4. ep 229. yet all these his careless Reader is to believe are good Evidence to prove the whole Church was then depraved In the same Page Socrates blames no more but two Bishops and that too in his Partiality for the Novatians And the Canon of Ephesus is a very good Law made to prevent one Bishops usurping over another as is also that of Chalcedon (h) Concil Eph. Can. 8. Bever Tom. I. p. 104. Item Concil Chal. Can. 12. ibid. pag. 126. Now though this shew there were some Bishops then who aimed at evil Things as there ever was and ever will be yet the Major part of them in two General Councils who carried the Vote for these Canons disliked the thing and took care to prevent it So that these Laws shew the greatest part of the Bishops were free from these Faults and laboured to reform the rest and can this be a Proof of the Degeneracy of the whole Church Pag. 189. What he observes concerning the Popes who begun to aim at the Supremacy about the Year 400 or soon after is true in Fact but this only shews the corruption of one See and he knows the greatest part of the Christian World in that Age and in divers succeeding opposed these Attempts which shews the Church was not degenerated And besides this is nothing to the Point of Liturgies because the very Popes Two hundred years after this did not pretend to shew their Supremacy by imposing their Liturgy on distant Churches as we have seen in Pope Gregory's Epistle to Augustin the Monk and the Bishops of Lesser Sees who did not pretend to this Supremacy yet imposed their own Churches Liturgy on their own Members He adds to this a pious Sentence or two out of S. Chrysostom which are only general Complaints in popular Discourses But since this Supremacy began to be aimed at in the Time of Chrysostom I wonder why he should say That a Sentence of his levelled against it was forgot in his own Time since it was more likely that it was never known to those at Rome who were designing then to be Supream Pag. 190. Prosper whom he cites for the evil Practices of Inferiour Bishops declares he speaks only of some Bishops and the Words are the Complaint of a very Pious Bishop of that Age (i) Prosper de vâ—â—â—â—tempt cap 21. Which Complaint Prosper answers very well in the next Chapter (k) Ib. cap. 22. and a little alter he hath a lovely description of such as were good Bishops (l) Ib. câ—p 25. and finally he adds And even at this time there is no doubt but there are many among us full of all those good Episcopal Qualities which you have truly described (m) Prosâ— ibid 〈◊〉 2. cap 2. 3 Now is it not a vile Artifice of my Adversary to cite the Complaint only as a general Character of all the Clergy of that Age and not to mention those many Commendations of the better sort of them though the same Author in the same place mentions both as also to talk of the suitableness of Liturgies to such Pastors Since according to him that way of Worship did not come in till almost 60 Years after when all these Pastors were dead and by his Computation these Men all prayed Arbitrarily or Extempore Pag. 191 192. He next goes about to set out the lamentable Insufficiency of those who ministred by Liturgies as he reckons in the Year 500 by the Testimonies of S. Basil S. Ambrose and Nazianzen who all died above an Hundred years before that time And S Ambrose only speaks of some few Simoniacks who in his Time were a disgrace to their Order (n) Ambr. de Sacerd. dig c. 5. Nazianzen is only giving a Rhetorical Character of a Bad Bishop to set off the glory of Athanasius as we noted but now (o) Naz. Orat. 24. p. 378. And in the next
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-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
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
out the main Words the same Liturgy and only Reads it That supplications ought always to be Celebrated at the Ninth hour and in the Evening (w) Caranz in the Disc of Liturg. p. 162. But not trusting to any of these shifts he spends five or six Pages together in Labouring to pervert the Sense of it and I must beg the Readers patience while I follow him His first device is that The same Liturgy of Prayers may signify only the same Prayers used often but the Words not prescribed or imposed on them by others I Reply the Words of the Canon are not used often but the same Liturgy of Prayers to be used always So that if he grant us as here he seems to do that they were the same Prayers then it will follow that the Synod imposed and prescribed them to be used always And there is nothing in the Canon to import that these Prayers were of their own composing no such Word as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or de pectore yea we see Balsamon and Zonaras say this Canon expresly forbids such Prayers and yet if the Priests of that Age had made them the Council enjoyns them never to make any more but always to use the same Prayers but if they had been at Liberty to make new Forms these could not be called the same Prayers But Secondly He shews all his learning to prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not then signify a Book or Model of prescribed Forms of Prayer But he might have spared all those Quotations which are brought to make out that it signifies The Administration of a public Function or Office since we grant that is the general signification of this Word But we are to consider it only as it is applied to Prayers and Praises and then I affirm it signifies a Form of Prayer Thus Causabon tells us that beside the general Notion of a public Function it also signifies The prescribed Order for Celebrating divine Offices of which kind are those published under the Titles of Peter James Andrew Basil and Chrysostom partly true and partly false The Latins call it The Order or Office the Greeks sometimes the Method c. (x) Causab exercit in Baron xvi p. 384. And since it doth signify a prescribed Order sometimes we may reasonably judge it doth so in this Council because we see the Hymns which were a great part of the public Service were written Forms as the xvth Canon cited before shews and because Liturgies were then very usual in the Eastern Church where this Council was held And we can prove 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was used for a prescribed Form of Service not only after this Council but before it So when Flavianus sung Davids Psalms alternately at Antioch before this Council the Bishop desired That the same Liturgy might be used in the Church (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tâ—eoâ—â—ret lib. 2. cap. 2. which may fitly be interpreted that they would bring those Psalters so distinguished for alternate Singing and use them in the Church And in the Council of Sardica An. 347. a Bishop coming to a strange City is ordered To assemble and perform his Liturgy there (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Con. Sard. Can. 12. Here saith Balsamon Liturgy is not put for Prayers And Zonaras saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to send up the accustomed Hymns to God (a) Balsam Zonar in Loc. Bever Tom. 1. pag. 500. Our Adversary also grants that the Heathens had written Forms and prayed out of a Book yet Julian calls the Times when they officiated in their Temples by these Forms The time of their performing Liturgies And when their course was expired that he calls The time when they were not using Liturgy in the Temples (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Julian ep Fragm pag 552. So we may explain Nazianzen whose Father as we shall prove prayed by a Form that he was very ill when he came to Church and was often cured only by saying his Liturgy (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naz. Orat. 19. pag. 313. and thus we must explain Synesius where he saith Andronicus made him so unfit to pray that he was forced to omit the Liturgy of the Altar (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes epist 57. pag 193. that is the Communion Office which was usually performed there In the Acts of the Council of Ephesus An. 431 we read of The Morning and Evening Liturgy which can be meant of nothing else but the Forms of Prayer appointed for public Assemblies in the Morning and Evening (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Ephes Bâ—n Tom. 1. par 2. So also in an ancient Ecclesiastical Historian a Bishop beginning the Prayers is said To begin his Liturgy (f) Theâ—dor Lect. pag. 188. And in Theodoret That place of S. Paul's Epistles viz. The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ c. (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodorâ—t p. 128. epist 46. vâ—xit An. 423. is said to be The Preface of the Mystical Liturgy and accordingly we find it in the Apostolical Constitutions placed just in the beginning of the Communion-Service or in Theodoret's Phrase of the Liturgy for the Sacrament I confess I cannot but wonder at my Adversaries citing Justinian also as if Liturgy in him did not signifie a Form of Prayer though all men know the Greek Church had a Form of Liturgy in his time and the very places cited by him have that signification As when he allows the Nuns one grave old Man to make the necessary Responses and One Priest to perform the Liturgy and give them the Holy Communion (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God no â— tit 3. de Episc Câ—â—r L. 44. So also to sing the Night the Morning and Evening Prayers and Hymns which were in prescribed Forms then is called the performing the Divine Liturgies (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. L. 43. And this is distin guished in another Law from private Devotions where he permits men to have a place in their Houses for Prayers Provided they do none of those things there which the holy Liturgy doth prescribe (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Authent coll 5 tit 13. Nov. 58. where the Holy Liturgy can mean nothing else but the Book or Office wherein the Forms of administring the Holy Sacraments was contained and therefore my politick Adversary only names this place but durst not cite it at large But those places which he doth quote may properly enough be so expounded For to exclude a Clerk from the Liturgy (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cod. lib. 1. tit 4. L. 33. is to suspend him from saying the Public or Common Prayer And the penalty upon those who disturb Mysteries or Liturgy (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Authent coll 9. tit 6. Nov. 123. cap. 31. is no doubt to be inflicted upon those who disturb a Priest in administring
Token of his living in this Age that he will not plainly write down any one Form Yet we may see clearly that they had a certain prescribed Form both for the Administring of Baptism and of the Lords Supper First By his writing a Commentary and Contemplations upon these Mysterious Administrations which had they been performed in the Extempore way he could not have done Secondly Because he assures us that not only the Psalms were sung alternately (q) Dionys de Eccles Hierar cap. 3. §. 2. pag. 283. but that the Congregation did always joyn with the Priest in Singing the Hymns in Baptism and the Eucharist (r) Ibid. cap. 2. §. 4. pag. 252. cap. 3. §. 2. p. 284. So that these must be Forms yea his Scholiast thinks that Dionysius plainly enough declares the Song of Miriam to have been the first Hymn at Baptism and the xxix Psalm the Second which are both Forms of Praise (s) Schol. Maximi pag. 267. and so is the xxxiv Psalm O tast and see how gracious the Lord is which he intimates was sung after the Eucharist (t) Dionys Eccl. Hier. cap. 3. §. 15. pag. 301. and it is very observable that the Liturgy in the Constitution prescribes that very Psalm as an Hymn in that very place (u) Constit Apostol lib. 8. cap. 20. Thirdly And not only in that instance but in all the whole proceeding of these Mysteries this Pseudo-Dionysius doth so exactly follow the Order and Method yea and allude so often to the Phrases of the ancient Liturgies especially that of Antioch which was near to Laodicea where Apollinaris lived contained in the Constitutions that there is no doubt but he had this very Liturgy in his Eye when he writ these Commentaries I could prove this by innumerable particulars if it were worth while but I shall refer it to the Reader to compare these Books of Dionysius with the Liturgy in the Apostolical Constitution and he will be convinced that he commented upon that very Liturgy as plainly as he in his Mystical way can be expected to do Lastly There are many Forms of Prayer supposed to be well known to the Faithful all along these Discourses as also Forms of renouncing the Devil professing the Faith c. He mentions also the Bishops Praying for peace to all and then their giving each other the kiss of charity (w) Compare Dionys Eccles hier cap. 3. pag. 284. with Constit Apostol lib. 8. cap. 15. And calls the Prayer for Commemoration of all the Faithful departed the Reading of the Holy Dypticks which we know was a Custom mentioned in the Council of Laodicea And he saith the Priest having confessed his unworthiness to Celebrate then goes on to Cry out to Christ Thou hast Commanded us to do this in Remembrance of Thee which is part of the Form of Consecration (x) Dionys Eccles Hier. cap. 3. §. 12. pag. 298 299. Which being put together is as much Evidence as we can desire or expect from so Mysterious a Writer that there was a prescribed Liturgy in this Age known to the Faithful and of daily use § 17. I proceed to S. Ambrose S. Ambrose An. Dom. 374. who confirms the same Truth and we learn from him That there was in his Time Forms both of Praise and Prayer The first our Adversary grants in saying He imitated S. Basil 's way of singing Psalms and Hymns by turns and brought this Custom into the Church of Milan from whence it spread almost over all the Western Church (y) Discourse of Liturg. p. 167. and there are great and very ancient Authors who testifie the same thing (z) Aug. confes lib. 9. cap. 7. Paulin. vit Ambros p. 79. 〈◊〉 ipse Ambro◠Com. in Luc. cap. 15. Tom. 3. p. 169. Now we have shewed that Alternate Singing can no way be performed but by a known Form and therefore S. Ambrose his Flock who no question sang with the Spirit and with fervent Devotion yet sang by Forms Yea S. Ambrose himself takes notice That the Music in the Parable of the Prodigal signifies The whole Churches singing together and the People of different Ages and Qualities like the several Strings of an Instrument with one accord answer at the Psalm and say Amen (a) Ambros Com. in Luc. ut supr He also saith He was accused for deceiving the People by his Hymns in Verse and he owns that he made such Hymns and taught them to the People who now could every day praise the Trinity with their Mouths and with Verses glorifie the Father Son and Holy Ghost (b) Idem Cbacione de Basilicis non tradend Tom. 4. pag. 104. Which cannot be meant of the Gloria Patri c. That was an ancienter Hymn and did not consist of more than one Response so that probably it may be meant of the Te Deum which though our Adversary will have to be a later Composure (c) Discourse of Liturg. p. 167 168. yet the Matter of it is so excellent and so void of any mixture of the later Corruptions that it is not unworthy of so great an Author nor of so pure an Age The Chronicle of Dacius one of S. Ambrose's Successors saith He Composed it (d) Chron. Dacii Med. lib. 1. cap. 10. and though some Manuscripts ascribe it to one Abundius who was Bishop of Coma An. Dom. 450. that is about 70 years after the Death of S. Ambrose and another Copy calls it The Hymn of Nicetius who was Bishop of Triers An. Dom. 530. that may arise from such Manuscripts as were for the use of these two Churches which probably might ascribe this Hymn to one of their own Bishops who first brought it into their Service This is certain That S. Benedict mentions it in his Rule which was writ Anno 530 (e) Regula D. Bened. cap. 11. and the Council of Toledo in the next Age approves the Hymn made by S. Ambrose as being fit to be sung in the Church (f) Concil Tolet Can. 12. Anno 633. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 349. which can be no other than this Te Deum which hath been reputed to be his by All Churches ever since This I thought fit to say concerning this pious and excellent Hymn which probably was made by S. Ambrose but however that be it is certain he made divers Forms of Praise which is that I am to prove And the like Evidence we have in him concerning the use of Forms of Prayer For he calls that place of S. Paul 1 Tim. ii 1 2. The Ecclesiastical Rule delivered by the Master of the Gentiles which all our Priests use For they supplicate for all Men and pray for the Kings of the World that the Nations may be subject unto them so that they Reigning in peace we may serve our God in tranquility of mind and quietness And he goes on to describe the Prayers for those in Authority for
1. r. Roman Bishop p. 28. l. 19. r. generally p. 31. marg l. 2. r. Ecclesiâ p. 37. l. 25. r. Table-Book p. 41. marg l. 4. r. Eccles p. 46. l. 1. r. Babylas p. 54. l. 27. dele all p. 68. marg l. 21. r. Barnes p. 136. l. 27. r. have been p. 141. l. 6. r. faithful deceased p. 166. l. 7. dele Jew r. few Bishops ibid. l. 10. r. reckons ibid. l. 11. r. contained p. 176. l. 10. r. to the French p. 193. l. 2. r. ancient PART II. CHAP. I. Of LITVRGIES in the Fifth Century AFTER so full and clear Evidence for LITURGIES in the former Ages wherein the Church was so Pure and the Fathers so very Eminent the main Point as to their Antiquity is gained and if my Adversary could prove there were no prescribed Forms in this Century it would only follow that the Primitive way was changed for a new sort of Liberty and then Extempore Praying or such a freedom as he pleads for would be an Innovation which crept into the Church in an Age of which he gives the worst Character imaginable (a) 〈◊〉 of Liâ—â— pag. 1â—â— But it is as certain that the use of Liturgies continued in this Century as it is that they had their Original in the Foregoing Ages and therefore though all his odious Representations of the corrupt state of the Church in this Time were true yet that could not blemish their continuing to use those holy Forms which they received from their Forefathers if they added any of the Corruptions of the Age to them they are blame-worthy for that and we do not defend them therein but the Method it self of Praying by prescribed Forms about which we dispute is ancient and therefore not liable to any Exceptions from those Additions all which also are now put out of our Churches Forms and so we are not to excuse or answer for them Now that this Century followed the former in the use of Liturgick Forms is plain from the Centuriators who as was shewed not only own That Forms of Prayer were prescribed in the Third and Fourth Ages but declare concerning this Fifth Century that The Bishops ordained holy Prayers for all things necessary (b) Magdeb. Cent. â— cap 7. pag. 742. And that there was frequent use of Litanies and Supplications in this time (c) Ibid. cap. 6. pag. 651. And what these Litanies were Du Plessis one often cited by my Adversary doth inform us The form and manner saith he of Litanies was this They contrived and drew into certain Articles the public Necessities and Calamities that did press or threaten them unto every one whereof as it was uttered by the Priest or Bishop which went before them the People answered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord have mercy on us or Lord hear us (d) Mornay of the Mass lib. 1. chap. 7. pag. 54 55. So that they had Forms of Prayers and Litanies not invented by private Ministers but ordered by the Bishops even as we have proved they had also in former Ages But because my Adversary labours hard to find out some passages in the Writers of this Century which give countenance to his arbitrary and unprescribed way I will consider all that he produces in the Order of Time and as I go on take notice of such other Testimonies as are omitted by him and do assure us of the continuance of Liturgies in this Century also Innocent l. Ep. Rom. An. Dom. 402. § I. Pope Innocent the First begins this Age in whom we cannot expect much Evidence in our Question because he hath nothing extant but only some few Epistles which treat of different Subjects Yet first he argues against the Pelagian Doctrin of our not needing the assistance of Gods Grace from that old Roman Form taken out of the Psalms which still is the beginning of their Mass Deus in adjutorium c. The Priest saying O God make speed to save us O Lord make haste to help us Now saith he Pelagius and Celestius would set aside this whole Response out of the Psalms and abdicating this Doctrin hope to perswade some that we neither want nor ought to seek the help of God whereas all the Saints bear witness that they can do nothing without it (e) seposita omni responsiâ—re Psalmorum aliquid abdicatâ doctrinâ suasuros se aliquibus esse confidunt nos Adjutorium Dei nec debere quaerere nec egere c. Innoc. ep 24. B n. Tom. 1. par l pag. 622. Where we see he argues from this Form used in the Liturgy by all the Saints or holy Men against the false Doctrin of these Hereticks which shews it was a known and usual Response in that Age. The same Author though he was shie in writing Mysteries in a Letter yet plainly enough describes The Prayer for all Estates of Men in which the Names of the Offerers were recited and God was desired to accept their Alms and Oblations as also those Prefaces of which we spake before (f) Prius ergo oblationes sunt commendandae ac tunc eorum nomina quorum sunt oblationes edicenda ut inter sacra mysteria nominentur non inter alia quae ante praemittimus Id. Ep. 1. cap. 2. ibid. pag. 609. And which is most considerable in the Preface of the same Epistle to Decentius Bishop of Eugubium Innocent declares (g) Si instituta Ecclesiastica ut sunt à beatis Apostolis tradita integra vellent servare Domini sacerdotes nulla diversitas nulla varietas in ipsis ordinibus consecrationibus haberetur Sed dum unusquisque non quod traditum est sed quod sibi visum fuerit hoc estimat esse tenendum inde diversa in diversis locis vel Ecclesiis teneri aut celebrari videntur Id. ibid. That if those Ecclesiastical Institutions which the Apostles delivered had been kept intire by the Bishops we should not have had any diversity or variety in the order of Worship or Consecration But while every one thinks he must hold not that which was delivered but which best pleases him thence we see divers ways of celebration are used in divers Churches Now from hence we note First That this Pope believed there was one way of Worship and Consecration that is one Form of Prayer and administring the Sacrament setled by the Apostles at first and delivered to all the Churches they planted Secondly That the variety which then appeared not in the same Church but in divers Churches was an Innovation proceeding from several Bishops called here Sâ—cerdotes who forsook that one Original Rule and followed their own Devices Thirdly That this variety was not a liberty taken by private Ministers in the same Church but by divers Bishops in their several Diocesses Fourthly That this diversity as Innocent there adds was a scandal to the People who not knowing that human Presumption had corrupted the ancient Traditions fancied either there was no good
agreement among the Churches or that the Apostles and Apostolical Men set up this variety Fifthly For remedy hereof he advises all those Churches which had their Original from Rome to follow those Customs which S. Peter had delivered to that Church and were kept there ever since Which place so clear for the Antiquity and Necessity of Uniformity our Adversary cites over and over and spends many Pages to shew that this very Epistle proves there were no Forms prescribed at Rome in those days (h) Disc of Liturgies p. 40 41. pag. 78 79 80 81 82. For saith he when the Bishop of Eugubium enquired of divers particulars concerning the Church-Service he doth not refer him to any written Orders but to what he had seen practised at Rome and he will not write down the Words used in the Office of Chrism calling the Words of Consecration Those things which he might not publish Adding That it was matter of enquiry then whether the Kiss of Peace should be given before or after the Consecration and whether the Names of the Offerers should be recited before or after the Prayer over the Oblation Concluding from these passages That there could be then no setled Order or Form at Rome and that which Innocent would have fixed was no more than a Rubric or Direction and this for Imitation not for strict Conformity so that in Innocents Time every one in Italy Consecrated as he thought fit This is the sum of his Inference In Answer to which I must observe First That those particulars which the Bishop of Eugubium enquired about and for which Innocent refers him to what he had seen used at Rome were Rites and Ceremonies as appears by the several Matters treated of in this Epistle viz. Cap. 1. Of the Kiss of Peace Cap. 2. Of reciting the Offerers Names Cap. 3. Of the Anointing the Baptized Cap. 4. Of the Saturday Fast Cap. 5. Of the Leavened Bread Cap. 6 7. Whether a Priest might lay Hands on the Possessed and the Penitents Cap. 8. Whether he might not Anoint the Sick Now these things being all external Rites which he might see and hear at Rome and so commit to his Memory the Method used there it was not necessary to refer him to the Roman Liturgy nor doth it follow there was no such Liturgy for the Prayers themselves because when the Pope was ask'd about the Rites and Customs of Rome he doth not as my Adversary saith refer him thither for satisfaction in these Matters Yet Secondly this very Epistle makes it plain they had certain Forms at Rome for their several Offices for when he speaks of Anointing the Baptized he saith Verba verò dicere non possum ne magis prodere videar quam ad consultationem respondere Ibid. Cap. 3. I cannot tell you the words lest I betray the Church under pretence of answering your Question And so about the Forms used in the Communion-Office he thus expresseth himself Post omnia quae aperire non debeo c. The Kiss of Peace comes after those things which I must not publish And a little after Quae scribi sui non erat Those things which it is not lawful for me to write down Ib. Cap. 8. All which places necessarily suppose they had certain and fixed Words which were capable of being written down but since in that Age divers as he notes out of Chamier pag. 41. Marg. were not initiated some being then Pagans and others as yet but Catechumens Innocent would not set down the Forms in a Letter which might be intercepted or fall into the hands of such as ought not to know these Sacred Mysteries But now if at Rome every Priest had prayed Extempore and not only differed from others but daily varied from himself then Innocent could not have discoursed at this rate but must have said As for the Words I cannot write them down not because it is unlawful but because it is impossible for you know every Priest varies them daily as he pleases Wherefore this Notion of keeping the Words secret which was strictly observed in that Age proves they were stated Forms capable of being writ down and learned by Unbelievers if they had been published to them And nothing can be weaker to say no worse than to argue as he doth Innocent would not write the Forms in a Letter which might miscarry therefore they were not written down in Books closely kept by the Bishops and Priests at Rome Thirdly For his Objection That it was matter of Enquiry then what place in the Eucharistical Office should be assigned to the Kiss of Peace and to the recital of the Offerers Names (i) Disc of â—it pag. 78. which he thinks could not be if there had been setled Forms at Rome It is very frivolous For the Bishop of Eugubium doth enquire of these Matters because he knew there was a certain Order at Rome and though he had seen it and perhaps knew it very well yet his Neighbouring Bishops having different ways as to the order of these He desires to have it under the Popes hand what was the Custom at Rome hoping by this to bring his Neighbouring Bishops to an Uniformity in these Matters For Eugubium was a small Bishopric under the immediate Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishops as he was a Metropolitan being but 70 Miles distant from Rome it self and he having no power over his Equals gets the Popes Letter under whose Jurisdiction all these Neighbour Bishops of his were thereby to unite them all by conforming to their Mother Church which as Innocentius affirms had one certain Form in these Offices received from S. Peter Fourthly Since this Bishop was so desirous to settle Uniformity even in these Ceremonies of far less concernment we may reasonably believe there was no difference in the Forms themselves that is in the Prayers used in all Divine Offices by these Bishops who lived so near to Rome because if they had varied in the substantial parts of the Office Decentius must have complained principally of that Variety and Innocents chief labour would have been to have agreed and setled that Matter it being ridiculous for them to be so earnest for Uniformity in Order and Ceremonies if these several Diocesses had differed in the main and had infinite variety in the Offices themselves so that both Innocent and Decentius being silent as to any such variety gives us Reason to believe they had all the same FORMS Fifthly What he saith of Innocents design being only to settle a Rubric is easily answered For the difference was only in Rubrics which my Adversary at last confesseth when he saith this Epistle is most concerned about Riâ—es and Order (k) Disc of Lit. pag. 83. he might have said as appears by the several Chapters before only concerned about Rites and Order the Preface alone excepted For there is not one Answer nor Question that supposes any difference in the Words or Forms of these Offices therefore it was
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
the same Offices together and when all orders and degrees of both Sexes unite their Affections for the same end (f) Id. Serm. 3. 〈◊〉 Sept. 〈◊〉 pag 240. These must be Prayers made â—â— such Forms as made up one Office wherein all the People could bear a part and all joyn in the Responses c. And these Forms thus unanimously recited he thinks must needs be very prevalent with Almighty God At the same Time lived Abbot Nilus Nilus Abbas An Dom. 440. who calls the public Prayers The fixed Laws of the Church (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nâ—â— â—â—â—aenes 10â— So that in his days doubtless they were not left arbitrary to the Fancy of every Man who was to Officiate He would have his Monks receive the Sacrament in the Church but if there was not any celebration of the Eucharist he allows them to depart after the singing of the Epistle and Gospel (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. 105. Bibl. Patr. edit Paris Tom. 2. p. 1172. Which shews they used at that Time to Sing those portions of Scripture in the Communion-Office and implies that the rest of that Service was agreeable to our Forms in other things as well as in the Epistles and Gospels but these Passages fell not under my Adversaries observation § 10. Socrates Sozomenus Theodoritus Histor Encles Cire Ann. 440. The Church Historians who writ after Eusebius within little more than one hundred year after the setling of Christianity viz. Socrates Sozomen and Theodoret are next to be considered And in them we find divers passages to confirm us that prescribed forms were used both in and long before their Times and this we shall make out by some instances both as to Praises and Prayers contenting our selves of many to select only a few Testimonies And First No sort of Prayer is more ancient nor more certainly a Form than the Litany Yet of this we have express Testimony in Socrates who relates the Story of that great Storm which happened at Constantinople when Theodosius the younger and the People were beholding the sports of the Hippodrome saying that the Emperor Commanded the People to give over their sport and to joyn all of them in one Common Litany to God adding that they obeyed him and all of them with great alacrity said the Litany and with agreeing Voices sent up Hymns to God So that the whole City was but as one Church and the Emperor began the Hymn himself After which devout recital of these Offices the Storm ceased (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 22. pag. 749. Where we see the Litany and Hymns were such known Forms that all the People on a sudden could say and sing their part of them which can be no Wonder because we have shewed before that in the elder Theodosius his time it was usual to repeat the Litany in procession at Constantinople in times of Common Danger Yea I doubt not but Litanies are mentioned by Eusebius as used in Constantine's Time For he saith the Bishops at Jerusalem offered up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Supplicatory Prayers For the Peace of the whole World For the Church of God For the Emperor himself and for his Children beloved of God (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb vit Constant lib. 4. cap. 45. p. 405. Which are almost the very Words of those ancient Litanick Forms yet extant in the Constitutions and alluded to by many of the ancient Fathers although Eusebius here rather describes than cites these ancient Forms Theodoret speaking of the same Emperor saith Constantine prepared a Chappel in his Camp where they might Sing Hymns to God and Pray and receive the Mysteries For there were Priests and Deacons following the Army who according to the Law of the Church performed the Order for these things (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. lib. 1. cap. 8. p. 205. In which passage we have express mention of an Order for Hymns for Prayers and for the Eucharist which was setled by the Law of the Church and this amounts to no less than a Common Prayer enjoyned by Law For this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Constitution or Order no doubt contained those prescribed Prayers which Socrates calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (m) Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 15. that is prescribed Forms of Prayer which we may learn from Sozomen also who speaking of Nectarius that from a Lay-man was suddenly advanced to be Bishop of Constantinople saith He was sent to Ciriacus an ancient Bishop of Adana that he might learn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Order of officiating used by the Bishops which plainly signifies learning his Book of offices (n) Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 10. p. 420. it being one Requisite in a Bishop to be very exact in that point As for those short Prayers which the Monks of Egypt used mentioned in my Adversary it is Evident they were Forms though he is not willing to confess so much (o) Sozomen p. 397. in the Disc of Liturg. pag. 75. For that place of Sozomen which he cites concerning Paulus who said 300 Prayers in a day and was forced to use 300 little Stones for Beads Foreheads saith his frontless Editor to count them by is taken from Palladius who writ Anno Dom. 401. and tells us that he had 300 prescribed Prayers (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pallad Hist Lausiac cap. 23. and because they were short Forms committed to Memory Paulus was constrained to use these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 little Stones that so he might know when he had repeated them all And since we have mentioned Palladius who wrote at the very begining of this Century we may Note here that he also affirms Maâ—arius another Monk said an hundred prescribed Prayers every day (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pallad ib. cap. 24. And another called from his Charity Eleemon used to go to the Church to say the accustomed Prayers (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. c. 115. By which we may see that the ancient Monks who lived before this Century began of whom Palladius Writes were accustomed to Forms of Prayer both in their Cells and in the Churches when they went thither nor can I find in any of these Historians an account of any that pretended to Pray in public in the Extempore way by the Spirit except those Hereticks called Euchites and Enthusiasts upon whom Theodoret is so severe as to say he believes they were inspired by the Devil (s) Theodoret. lib. 4. cap 10. pag. 116. And this may suffice for the Prayers Secondly As to the Praises the last cited Author assures us there was a known Form of Gloria Patria at Antioch concluding as it doth now World without end and this as early as the time of Leontius who because he altered the ancient Form repeated it with a low Voice but was soon discovered by the People who were well acquainted with the
Orthodox way of saying that Hymn (t) Theodoret. lib. 2. cap. 24. Sozomen also relates how the Arians in S. Chrysostoms time at Constantinople being divided into two Companies Sung Hymns after the manner oâ— Antiphones adding such Responses to them as favoured their Heresy (u) Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 8. I confess the Hymns themselves were corrupted but as they were Forms and sung alternately they were agreeable to the Churches method of praising God and therefore in that they were imitated by S. Chrysostom For thus the same Historian tells us Those Christians Sang their Hymns by way of Antiphone who Translated the Bones of Bubylas the Martyr in the time of Julian (w) Sozomen lib. 5. cap. 18. And another saith The holy Virgins Sang the Psalms in that manner even in defiance of that Apostate (x) Theodoret. lib. 3. cap. 17. So also Theodosius the Younger and his Sisters arose early to recite the Morning Hymns alternately (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 22. Now these Antiphones which were thus Sung alternately could be no other than prescribed Forms of Praise and so was that usual Hymn collected out of those Psalms beginning with Hallelujah from whence it had the name of The Hallelujah and was Sung both in the Eastern and Western Churches so frequently that a Pagan Philosopher knew it to be a sign the Christian Worship would be set up in Serapis Temple when in the middle of the night he heard that Hymn Sung there no persons visible being in the Temple (z) Vide Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 15. pag. 426. We may also here remember what hath been said of the Trisagion which was so known a Form in the time of Anastasius the Emperor that there was a dangerous Sedition at Constantinople upon his attempting to add a few Words to it (a) Evagr. lib. 3. cap. 44. which is sufficient to satisfie us that Forms of Praise as well as Prayer were then generally used in the Christian Churches But my Adversary who overlooks all this Evidence hath picked up some few passages out of these Historians to make out his imaginary liberty of Praying First He notes out of Socrates That Athanasius Commanded the Deacon to publish the Prayer or to bid it but to Read the Psalm (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. lib. 2. c. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodo lib. 2. cap. 13. Disc of Lit. pag. 8. From whence he infers that the Prayers then could not be Forms Read out of a Book But this inference is easily bafled by observing the true meaning of these Phrases to publish or bid the Prayer Which is meant of the Preface to that ancient Litanick Form repeated of old by the Deacon And before he began He summoned the People to be ready with their Responses after every Period by Crying out aloud Let us Pray or Let us Pray earnestly Which Form is found in the beginning of the Greek Litanies to this very day So that this Phrase supposes a Form in which all the People bore a part and was Read or repeated by heart by the Deacon no matter whether And it was not only a Form it self but the Preface to a known Form nor is the repeating of the Prayer called publishing or bidding it but the preparation for it and the notice which the Deacon gave of it with a loud Voice Wherefore this Phrase confutes his Opinion and confirms ours Secondly He twice quotes Socrates as saying That generally in all places and among all sorts of Worshipers there cannot be found two agreeing to use the same Prayers (c) Disc of Liturg p. 89. 133. And by this he would prove that all Ministers might Pray as they pleased and that there was no agreement in using the same Prayers in any place But I will first set down the Words both of Socrates and Sozomen and then explain them The former saith And generally you cannot find two agreeing together in all places and in all the kinds of Worship as to their Prayers (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scorat lib. 5. cap. 21. The latter tells us It cannot be found that the same Prayers Psalms or Lessons were used by all at the same time (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 19. cited Disc of Lit. pag. 9. Now both these Historians are speaking not of single Congregations but of several Nations and several Diocesses among which there was not indeed so exact an agreement but that you might find some difference in some Offices Which signifies no more but only that in the Order of placing the several Parts of Worship and in the very Words of the Prayers different Countries differed so far that they could not be said to agree in all things but both the Histâ—rians suppose that in many things they did agree And Socrates gives the reason of this variety saying The cause of which diversity as I judge hath been the Bishops who in several Ages have presided over their several Churches from wâ—om their Successors did receâ—ve this variety and Writ it down for a Law to those who should come after them (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—crat ut supr pag. 698. So that these differences were not Arbitrary Variations of private Pastors proceeding from Extempore Gifts as my Adversary fallaciously pretends they were such Varieties as were Written down and prescribed by ancient Bishops in their several Diocesses as a Law and Rule for the Worship of that Diocess Which plainly shews that though there was not the same Liturgy used all the World over yet that every Country had one Liturgy which was a Law and Rule to Guide them received from their Primitive Bishops who had long before this Age introduced some things into the Liturgies for their own Churches and those under their Jurisdiction and by that means it came to pass that the Liturgies did not agree so exactly as to use the same Psalms Prayers and Lessons however not in the same Order in all places Which cleer and genuine Sense of these Authors is so far from justifying his Notion of variety of Arbitrary Prayers in single Congregations that it proves there were prescribed Liturgies every where differing only in some few things which were differently Writ down and enjoyned by the ancient Bishops who had formerly presided over these several Churches Had Socrates and Sâ—zomen been of my Adversaries side they must have told us in short that there could be no agreement in Prayers any where bâ—cause all Ministers were at liberty to Pray as they pleased Had that been the custom these Historians need not have set it down as a Memorable thing That no places agreed in all points for the Wonder would have been if they had agreed in any thing Nor could Socrates have ascribed the variety to the Orders of divers ancient Bishops he must according to my Adversaries Notion have ascribed it to the Various Gifts and Elocution of every
several Minister but it is plain that Fancy of Ministers exercising such Gifts in public Prayers was not so much as thought of in that Age it is a Novel invention of Modern Enthusiasts and utterly unknown to these ancient Times Thirdly He cites Socrates about the Prayers used at the time of Candles lighting (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 21. which he saith were accomodated to the Season (h) Disc of Lit. pag. 161. But I must ask who it was that suited these Prayers to the Season Was it private Ministers by their Gifts who daily varied them If not it is nothing to his purpose For if they were fixed written Forms fitted by the Bishops of several Countries and prescribed to those under their charge for constant use then they justisie prescribed Forms which will be plain enough when we consider what Socrates saith of these Evening Prayers in this very place cited viz. That in Greece Jerusalem and Thessaly the Prayers at Candle-lighting were made after the same manner which was used by the Novatians at Constantinople So that this passage if my Adversary durst have produced it a large shews First that the three several Provinces did all Pray alike at this hour of Prayer and all of them followed the way of the Nâ—vatians at Constantinople Now if the Novatians there had daily varied these Prayers Extempore No Provinces nor places could have exactly used the same Prayers as they did and every one of these places must have differed from another So that when so many distant Churches agreed in the same way and made the same Prayers no doubt they all Prayed by prescribed Forms And this is all that is needful to say as to these Historians Concil Vinet Ann Dom. 453. § 11. Though there passed neer an hundred years between the Council of Laodicea and this of Vanues yet my Adversary was so unfortunate that he could find nothing for Liturgies in all this space of Time for he tells us the next Authority he meets with after the Council of Laodicea is the Synod at Vannes (i) Disc of Lit. pag 173. which he labours both to disparage and pervert because it hath a Canon for uniformity in the Liturgy But we will first cite the Words of it at large and explain the sense of it And then Answer all his Allegations The Words are these We also think it fit that at least within our Province there should be one usage for holy Offices and for the Order of Singing That as we hold one Faith in the confession of the Trinity so we may hold also one Rule in our Offices lest by various usages our Administrations be thought to differ in some things (k) Rectum quoquâ— dâ—ciâ—â—◠〈◊〉 vâ—l in◠〈…〉 Sac◠〈…〉 â—rdo 〈…〉 Ut sicut 〈◊〉 câ—m Trinitatis câ—nfâ—ssion◠〈◊〉 teneâ—at◠〈◊〉 Ospâ—◠〈◊〉 reâ—ulâ—m tâ—neamâ—â— variatâ observâ—tione in alâ— no observatio nostra discrepare creaaâ—ur Concil Viâ—tet Can. 15. Bin. Tom 1. par 2. p. 422. This Canon is as plain an Injunction of one Liturgy as can be expressed one Custom in Administring the Sacraments and one Order of Singing Hymns Which is afterward called one Rule for the Offices which was to be observed by all the Clergy in this Province Again they compare this to one Creed Now the Creed was one known Written Form of Words in which they all confessed their Faith and they think it reasonable that their Prayers and Hymns should be so also that is performed by one prescribed Rule and in the same Forms Lastly The reason they give why they would have but one Form or Liturgy in all their Province is to prevent the Scandal and Offence which might be given by variety in these Offices as if there were no good agreement among these Bishops which might easily be believed if every Diocess varied in the manner of Worshiping God but if every private Minister at that time had daily varied his Prayers and Praises it had been very ridiculous in these Bishops to be affraid of seeming to differ in any thing And in vain had they setled an agreement in the Rubries if the substance and Words of the Prayers had been changed every day However my Adversary tries all his Art to undervalew and pervert this plain Decree For first he falsly thrusts this Council down to the latter end of the Fifth Century whereas it was held but three years after the midst of it Ann. Dom. 453 Then he saith this Canon was made only by Six Bishops in one Province where there were Fifteen or Seventeen and this not till the latter end of the Fifth Age when all things were grown very bad (l) Disc of Lit. pag. 176. To which I reply That this Council supposes there was an Order in every Diocess of this Province only whereas there was as Socrates observed in the East some difference between them they now reduce all to one Form those under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan of Tours of which Perpetuus was now the Bishop and came to Vannes with five of his Suffragans to ordain a Bishop there and being assembled they made this and oâ—her Canons and Writ to Victurius Biâ—hop of Mans and Thalassius Bishop of Anjou two absent Bishops of this Province to see this and the rest of these Canons observed in their Diocesses And in all probability these Eight were all the Bishops of that Province in those early Times for Miraeus reckons now in this Age but Eleven Bishops who are under the Metropolitan of Tours (m) Miraei notitia Episc lib. 4. p. 194. so that my Adversary is mistaken to say there were Fifteen or Seventeen And he is as grosly out in his calling this a late Decree For it must be considered that France was overrun by Barbarous and Pagan Nations within less than an hundred Years before so that it needed a new Conversion a little before this Century began and therefore Lidorius was the first setled Bishop of Tours who had a Church Builded there for Christian Worship and he died as Gregory Turonensis relates Ann. Dom. 370. that is only 80 Years before this Council S. Martin also the great Apostle of this part of France and Bishop of Tours died only 50 Years before this Câ—non was made and Perpetuus the President of this Council was the Fifth Bishop after â— Mâ—rtin (n) 〈…〉 §. 14. p. â—â— and hold this Synod at least 30 Years before the Conversion of Clâ—vis the first Christian King of France So that it is very frivolous to say no worse for my Adversary to call this a late Decree with respect to the whole Church Since as to this Province and with respect to France it is a very early Decree made soon after their Conversion to the Faith and considering each great City after the Barbarous inundation was Converted by a several Bishop it is no wonder if there were some variety in their Liturgies But we see
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
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
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
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
before (s) Usher Rel. of anc Irish Chap. 4. pag. 26. So that Bishop Vsher beleived that at first both Britons and Irish had one Form one Liturgy And the variety which my Adversary calls an ancient Liberty was an Innovation and a Corruption of the truly ancient way of Serving God by one and the same Liturgy And the Reader must have seen this to have been Bishop Vsher's Opinion if he had not cut off half his Discourse and begun in the midst of a Sentence But to make this still more Evident Bishop Vsher in another Tract produces a very ancient Manuscript called A Catalogue of the Irish Saints Wherein they are reckoned up in three Orders and the Chronology is so very exact that we may reasonably believe it was writ by a very good hand The words are these The first Order was that of Catholic Saints in the time of Patricius and they were famous Bishops full of the Holy Ghost in number 350 Founders of Churches having one Head even Christ and one Leader S. Patric one Mass and one manner of Celebration The Second Order were Catholic Presbyters among whom were few Bishops and many Priests 300 in number having one Head even our Lord they Celebrated divers Masses and had divers Rules The Third Order of Saints were Holy Presbyters and a few Jew Bishops 100 in number and they had divers Rules and Masses (t) Usherii Antiqu. Britan Eccles pag. 473 474. Then a little after he recokons the time that these Orders cotained The First which was most Holy continued from An. 433. to An. 534. The second which was Holy of Holies continued from 544. to 572. The 3d Order which was Holy continued from 598 to 665 (u) Vid. Ibid. pag. 490. Now by this account we see That the First and best Times from S. Patric had only one Form of Divine Service and thus it contiued for above 100 year from towards the midst of the Fifth Century that is from their first Conversion till toward the middle of the 6th Century And then about the time that Monkery came into request in the Western Church as Superstition encreased variety of Rules were made and in them were prescribed various Forms of Prayer and Divine Service or as they called it of Masses For as Bishop Vsher tells us The public Liturgy and Service of the Church was of old named the Mass even then also when Prayers were only said and so the Evening Mass signifies no more than that which we call Evening-Prayer (w) B. Usher Rel. of anc Irish Chap. 4. pag. 26. So then when Variety was brought in it was not as he falsly pretends a liberty to pray Arbitrarily it was various Forms prescribed in each Diocess or Monastery And every Clerk and Monk was bound to the Form of his own Diocess or Monastery and so were Strangers too when they came among them which occasioned Gillibert to complain That it was Indecent and Schismatical to see a very Learned Man of one Order to be like a private Lay man when he came to the Church of another Order (x) Gillibert in Usher Relig. anc Irish pag. 24. That is because he could not make Responses nor Vocally joyn in their strange Form Wherefore when Superstition had destroyed their Ancient and Original Uniformity they had no Liberty but were as much under Forms as ever only different Churches had divers Forms which I will make still more evident For Bishop Vsher expounding the aforesaid Passage of divers Masses and divers Rules shews it was meant of divers Forms and reckons up four several Rules written down by these Irish Saints all differing from each other (y) Uâ—â—er Antiq. Briâ— Eccles pag. 476. And two more one writ by Daganus approved of by Pope Gregory the Great Another made by Columbanus who flourished Anno Dom. 614. which is yet extant and differs in some things from the Rule of S. Benedict (z) Id. Ibid. pag. 476 477. of which Ordericus Vitalis saith That though his Scholars followed the Rule of S. Benedict yet they forsook not the Orders of their Master For from Columbanus they learned the Manner and Order of Divine-Service and a Form of Prayers for all Orders of Men that are in the Church of God (a) Orderie â—ital Hist Eccles lib. 8. ad An. 1094. So that this Learned Primate took all these Varieties to be various Forms of Prayer and my Adversary shamefully abuses his great Name to give colour to a false and groundless device of his own of Praying Arbitrarily and Extempore which he would dress up as one of the General Usages of the ancient Church whereas there is not one Syllable in Bishop Vsher tending to prove That the Irish retained this liberty of Praying for 1100 years and the Britons and Scots for a long time after Augustin This is his own Invention and is as false as his Reflections upon the present Church of England in that Page are malicious and without ground (b) Disc of Lit. pag. 89. As for the Britons he saith They were Enemies to the Roman use in the Eucharist in Gildas 's time but he produces an Author there which saith They followed the Asian Manner in Preaching Baptizing and celebrating Easter (c) Ibid. pag. 88. Spelm. Concil Tom. I. pag. 107. Now the Asian and Eastern Churches had Forms of celebrating the Eucharist and Baptizing in the Fourth Age as we shewed before out of the Apostolical Constitutions and many other Authors therefore if they followed the Eastern Manner then they had Forms for the Eucharist and Baptism and though they had no Uniformity with Rome yet if they followed the Asian Manner he hath no Reason to assert That they were averse to and unacquainted with any Vniformity and that they had no prescribed Liturgies for such Vniformity long after A pitiful piece of Sophistry to conclude from their not receiving the Roman Liturgy and agreeing to be Uniform with them to infer that the Britons had no Uniformity or Liturgy at all If we may believe Bishop Vsher Saint Patric was the Apostle both of the Irish and Welsh and brought the same Liturgy into Wales that he brought into Ireland and therefore he saith of the Britons That their Form of Liturgy was the same with that which was received by their Neighbours the Gauls (d) Usher Rel. of anc Irish pag. 26. for which he cites the fore-mentioned Ancient Manuscript And if they had any variety among them it was a variety of Forms not his Arbitrary liberty For Baleus informs us That Kentigern who was Bishop of that Church which was afterward called S. Asaph Writ a Manual of his Ministrations (e) Balaeus de script Brit. mihi fol. 32. That is the Forms by which he celebrated Divine Service and Bishop Vsher shews That he and S. Columba meeting together their Disciples alternately sang Forms of Praises to God and the latter Company with Hallelujah (f) Usher
Roman Forms afterward and therefore his pretended liberty of Praying Extempore in public or changing the public Forms at pleasure hath no Foundation among the French of those Ages and is grounded only upon false and wrested Quotations for in fact and reality there was no such liberty in the Gallican Church since the second famous Conversion of that People no nor before as far as we can find by those few Memoirs we have of those obscure Times Ecclesia Germonica ab An. Dom. 600. § 6. My Adversary is as much mistaken in the Proofs which he brings for his Imaginary liberty in Germany For he saith Long after Boniface had been stickling to reduce it to the Roman Vniformity the whole Country was so far from submitting to any one prescribed Order of Service that in one Diocess there were various Modes of Administring Which he proves by a Decretal and by a Passage in the Life of Bruno Archbishop of Colen in the Midst of the Tenth Age who was then to correct the diversity of Divine-Service in his Province (c) Disc of Lit. â—ag 13â— To shew the weakness and mistakes of which Argument and Instances let us Note That Germany as well as other of its Neighbouring Countries was early Converted to the Christian Faith for Irenaeus mentions the Churches founded in Germany which believed as other Orthodox Churches did (d) Iren. adv haer lib. 1. cap. 3. pag. 53. And in a Council held at Colen An. 347. Six of the German Bishops were present (e) Bin. Tom. I. par 1. pag. 460. And from their nearness to and Correspondence with the French we may conclude they used the same Method in Divine-Service which was used there But when the Northern Nations broke into these parts of Europe many of the Germans relapsed to Paganism yet not so generally but that some of them were still Christians and retained one Form of Divine-Service using it in their Mother-Tongue Now Boniface was sent thither in the Year 722 and though his Pretence was to convert Pagans yet his main business was to bring those who were already Christians to submit to the Roman Service in the Latin Tongue in this he was stoutly opposed by divers Bishops of Germany who would not part with their old way of Serving God but by the help of the Popes and the French Kings he was so successful in his Attempts That as his great Author saith he induced the People of Franconia Hessia Bavaria Saxony Frisia c. to receive the Roman Order oppressing such as did oppose him by Force But after this an holy Man named Methodius turned the Scripture into the Sclavonian Tongue and re-established the Ancient Service in all the Churches of this Language attempting also to do the same in Bavaria Austria Suevia c. Abolishing the Latin Mass and the Ceremonies of Rome (f) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap. 8. pag. 65. Or as the Centuriators relate it (g) Magdeb. Cent. 9. cap. 10. pag. 491. He began to persuade some That casting away the Latin Tongue they should celebrate Divine Service in the Vulgar Tongue for the edification of the Church and return to their former Vsage which they had before the Time of Charles the Great From which Relation and from the good Agreement between the Old Gallican and German Churches we may see there were Forms of Prayer before Boniface came into Germany and Methodius restored the use of those Forms and rejected the Roman Liturgy So that here were Forms used by all and no Side desired or expected any liberty from them None pleaded for Extempore Prayer the change being no more than exchanging one Liturgy for another And in this Boniface did prevail and Methodius did not prevail much in Germany being soon after banished from thence into Moravia where he died But my Adversary cites the Canon Law to prove there were afterwards various Modes of Administring in one Diocess Now this Decretal is generally ascribed to Pope Celestine the Third who died An. 1198. above 450 Years after Boniface and B. Bilson thinks it was made by Innocent the Third in his Lateran Council An. 1215. near 500 Years after The Words are these Because in many Parts there are in the same City and Diocesses mixt People of divers Languages having but one Faith and yet divers Rites and Manners We strictly Charge the Bishops of such Places to provide fit Men who according to the diversity of Rites and Tongues may celebrate Divine Offices and minister the Sacraments of the Church unto them (h) Decret lib. 1. Tit. 3 1. de Offic. Jud. cap. 14. mihi pag. 452. Now this Decretal only provides for such Cities wherein there were Merchants from all Nations of Christendom some of which suppose might be Greeks others Armenians others Sclavonians others Spaniards all which had different Forms of Liturgy and some of them in different Languages Now in this case they were to be allowed so many several Priests of their own to Officiate by their own Liturgy But this no more proves that Priests who Officiate to their own Nation then had a liberty to vary or that there were various Offices for People of the same Country than the allowing of French Dutch or Greek Churches to serve God after their several ways in London proves That the Clergy of London are not enjoyned to Read one Liturgy or that the Church of England hath divers Forms of Common-Prayer This Fallacy is so gross that to be imposed on by it would shew as little Judgment as the pressing it expresses of Modesty in him who would put such Shams upon this Age. His second Instance is about Bruno Bishop of Colen who as he cites the Relation not out of Rotgerus but out of the Centuriators Correcting the diversity of celebrating Divine Offices in his Province appointed there that the same Order should be every where observed (i) Diversitatem sacra peragendi in totâ sua Provinciâ corrigens ac ut eadem ubique esset ratio constituens Mag. Cent. x. pag. 608. But first he fraudulently leaves out the Word Totâ which signifies this Diversity was not in any one Diocess but in the Archbishop of Colens whole Province to whom all Germania Secunda of old was subject (k) Heylin Cosm lib. 2. pag. 47. And even at this day Miraeus doth reckon up five Diocesses beside that of Colen all under this great Metropolitan (l) Mirai notitiae Episcopat pag. 300. So that whereas in these several Diocesses there were some differences in the Divine-Service This famous Bishop reduced them all according to the Old Canons to that one Order which was used at Colen Now this makes nothing for that liberty of private Clergy-men to vary the Offices as they please which my Adversary pleads for especially if what Du-Plessis say of this Matter be true That Bruno then reformed the Order of the Mass in his Diocess he should say Province according to that
are full of Instances to shew That the Fathers used the Word Baptizo in all Three Persons I baptize thee Be thou baptized He is baptized and that they use Tingo Mergo and Mergito as well as Baptizo e Having borrowed all his Quotations by Whole-sale from Vossius and Vice comes (f) Voss Theses de Bapt. disp 2. pag. 372. â—â—câ—â—m de vâ—t Bapt. pag. 608. But indeed the Inference That therefore they took a Liberty to vary Christs Form is of his own inventing And it is like the rest of his Sophistry For the first Word viz. Baptize Christ doth not determine the Person in which it shall be used for he speaks not to one that he was Baptizing but to his Disciples and so expresses it by the Participle viz. Baptizing them c. upon which the Latin Churches used the First Person when they performed this Office I baptize thee the Greeks generally used the Third Person viz. M. or N. is Baptized as Theodorus notes but this was no altering Christ's Form for that very Author there tells us That the Water vanished out of the Font when an Arian Bishop altered the Gospel Form in Baptizing one Barbas (g) Theodor. Lect. collect pag. 187. Nor is this difference of the Greek and Latin Church any ground for the liberty which my Adversary pleads for viz. the liberty for private Ministers to vary the Forms of their own Church as they please For no Bishop or Priest in the Latin Church was allowed to use the Third Person nor did any in the Greek Church use the First so that every Clergy-man was bound to use the Forms prescribed in his own Country and the Church of England doth not impose any more Then as for his ridiculous ugring of the Fathers using Tingo Mergo c. for Baptizo we must note that not one of his Instances are any account of the words used in the Actual Administration of Baptism he cannot shew they used any word but Baptizo then But his Proofs are out of the Fathers occasional Discourses concerning Baptism which they describe in their own words and phrases as it happens even as we call this holy Action Christning or Sprinkling the Child as well as Baptizing in our ordinary Discourse But would any Man whose Head were right infer from thence That our Ministers in the Act of Baptizing took liberty to say I Christen thee or I Sprinkle thee c. I am ashamed to confute such mean Sophistry yet must add That our Lord neither spake Latin nor Greek but a Language which was Hebrew mixt with Syriack and it is strange when His Words are to be turned into any other Language in our common Discourse that we may not translate them by any significant Words But this Liberty in ordinary Converse or Writing is no manner of proof That the private Ministers of any Church may vary the Words used in their Offices when they Administer the Sacrament of Baptism But he goes on to prove this liberty of Variation by the Fathers sometimes saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so also In nomen or In nomine In or Into the Name of the Father c. (h) Disc of Lit. pag. 96. wherein the Fallacy is the same as before For his Authors cited are only discoursing of Baptism not citing or reporting the very Words which they used in Baptizing and therefore they take this liberty As if a Preacher or Catechist should in a Sermon or Exposition say Our Church Baptizes Men into the Faith of the Holy Trinity or in the Name of the Father the Creator the Son the Redeemer and the Holy Ghost the Sanctifier of all Men This would not prove that this Preacher or Catechist did not use the Words of the Churches Form when he actually Baptized nor shew that we have here no prescribed Form of Baptism This is meer trifling But his next Proof is disingenuous for he Argues That some Ancients thought they were not obliged to name the Persons of the Trinity for if it was done in the Name of Christ it was sufficient from whence he gathers That such Fathers would neither impose Forms of Prayer on others nor would observe what others had imposed on them (i) Disc of Lit. pag 97 98. Now here I must observe that he hath again taken all his Instances by which he proves this out of Vossius (k) Voss Thes de Baptism Disp 2. Thes 5. pag. 370 ad pag. 379. But that Learned Author was too generous to make any such false and frivolous Inference from those Premisses and doth not represent even the Premisses themselves as my Adversary doth for he tells us That Irenaeus is not speaking of Baptism in that place adâ— haer lib. 3 c. 20. which my Adversary cites and that Justin Martyr another of my Adversaries Witnesses pag. 99. is not repeating but only paraphrasing the Form of Baptism so that there are no Ancient Fathers who allow this but only S. Basil and S Ambrose who generally follows S. Basil in all things nor do they speak of any Church where such an Omission was permitted or where Men were left at liberty to Baptize in what words they pleased Only they put the case if a man were so Baptized in Christs name whether he ought to be Baptized again these two think he ought not because Factum valet quod fieri non debet But these two do not advise any so to Baptize nor doth it appear that ever they took this Liberty they only Argue for the validity of such a Baptism though it was done irregularly Therefore these Fathers and such later Men as followed them were not for any Mans having liberty to alter the Form of Baptism or the Prayers of the Church as my Adversary pretends Besides Vossius there declares which my Adversary conceals that more and greater Fathers held that this alteration of the Form made the Baptism invalid viz. Tertullian and Cyprian who saith they were Hereticks who altered the Form thus as also Didymus S. Augustin Fulgentius Epiphanius and others (l) Vossij Thes de Bapt. disp 2. c. p. 374 375. Now then the most and best of the Fathers held it utterly unlawful to alter the Form of Baptism and consequently by his way of Arguing to alter the Liturgy or Prayers and therefore most of the Fathers were against his pretended Liberty And from this matter of Fact Vossius observes First That mentioning the three Persons is now and hath been of old the usage of the whole World by which it is very probable that it came at first from the Apostles (m) Vossius ibid. p. 371. Again he notes Though Baptism should be valid though the words of this Form were altered Yet the old Form ought not to be innovated or changed at every Mans pleasure And if Christ had not tied us to a certain Form of Words Yet it is much better to retain the
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
while there was any thing of such Eminency in the Church (n) Disc of Lit. pag. 155. And again a little after Diligent and frequent Preaching was the happiness of the Fourth and part of the Fifth Age and its security was the excellency of those Bishops who were the lights and ornaments of those Times (o) Disc of Lit. p. 190. So that for ought I know this Age was a good one for all this long Character of its degeneracy and if I had a mind I could fill as many Pages in its commendation as he hath done in its disgrace and therefore if Liturgies had come in then it had been no hurt no nor any disreputation to them However this Argument thus managed could not injure them Secondly As to his formidable number of invidious Quotations I have taken the pains to examine them all and besides that jumbling of Authors and Times and repeating the same Instances twice or thrice which is his usual way of proceeding I dare assure the Reader there are some of them falsly cited more of them misapplied and most of them impertinent and though I doubt it will be a little tedious yet I will make some short Remarks upon them by which it will appear that these Instances thus cited and applied give a worse Character of him that produces them than they do of the Age intended to be blackned by them Pag. 181 c. If the Church were in so bad a state in and long before S. Chrysostom's Time as that Father piously complains I would fain know when it was in a good state Wherefore this must be taken for Rhetoric and the effect of his Zeal against divers evil Men not for a strict and universal Character of the Age As we may learn from Isidore of Peleusium who Wrote within 20 years after S. Chrysostom's Time and was his Scholar in an Epistle cited by my Adversary very often though he omits this Passage who admires this Age which S. Chrysostom condemns and saith There were Bishops then who were lovers of Vertue averse to Honour delighting in Poverty and Fearing God (p) Isidor Pel. lib. 5. epist 21. pag. 559. So that these holy Men blamed their own Times and commended the former and no Argument can be drawn from these pieces of popular Oratory Pag. 182. Isidore of Peleusium who is so often cited was a pious but discontented Monk living under the Jurisdiction of Theophilus his dear Master S. Chrysostom's mortal Enemy and he was further provoked by one Eusebius a very ill Man who was Bishop of that Diocess where his Monastery stood and by the profligate Lives of Zosimus and two other wicked Priests ordained by the said Eusebius and therefore he doth not speak of the Church in general which a retired Monk could not be supposed to know but in most of the Quotations he refers only to Theophilus and Eusebius and some ill Clergy-men in that Province yet my fraudulent Adversary still applies these Passages as if he spake of all the Bishops and Priests in the World As for the place here cited first Isidore blames a Schism which had then hapned for all the Evils which were broken in upon the Church and he adds that they had now lost all the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gifts of former Ages (q) Isid Pel. lib. 3. ep 480. pag. 410. so that it seems the Gift of Prayer was then gon The next Quotation out of Isidore (r) Id. lib. 2. ep 5. pag 128. only shews that the Apostles Times were far better than those he lived in nor doth he there blame any body but himself and so it is nothing to the purpose Pag. 183. The next Page contains nothing but his affirmation That the Service of God was more corrupt than when it was first instituted Origen indeed shews how the Pagans had corrupted it by their Idolatry c. which he applies to the Christian Church above 200 years after Origen's Death and S. Chrysostom is not at all speaking of Religious Worship In Matth. hom 50. pag. 323. Pag. 184. S. Augustin is twice cited as if he blamed the Church of his Time for prescribing numerous Rites and imposing them yet he lived 100 years before my Adversary allows there was any thing prescribed or imposed But if we consult his Words it will appear that S. Augustin is only speaking of Corrupt Practices observed with great exactness by the Superstitious Vulgar not enjoyned by the Church Aug. ad Jan. Ep. 119. cap. 19. idem de morib Eccles lib. 1. cap. 34. It was these ignorant and superstitious People who began to venerate Pictures and Sepulchres for which the Church reproved them And if Petrus Gnapheus did as he pretends put in the name of the Virgin into the Prayers An. 483. He was a declared Heretick and his Fact ought not to be charged upon the Orthodox who did not imitate him therein But Forms had found Entertainment long before this Pag. 185 186. He fills his Margen with Isidore's Complaints of Theophilus and Eusebius and some others in those parts as if Prelacy had degenerated and the Bishops grown Tyrannical all the World over And he generally breaks off his fraudulent Quotations just at those Words which Isidore puts in to declare he doth not speak of all the Bishops and Clergy no not in that Province So he leaves out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (s) Isid Pel. lib. 5. ep 21. which place is again so cited pag. 187. These things I do not speak of all Thus he writes horrid Corruption of the Clergy (t) Ibid. lib. 5. ep 131. but will not quote those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For all are not fallen into this Gulf. Again he cites another Epistle for a general Accusation where he might have found a large Encomium of one Clergy-man and this limitation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I do not accuse all (u) Idem lib. 3. ep 223. And he might if he pleased have seen a very high Character of Hermogenes a Bishop of that Age and that Country (w) Idem lib. 5. ep 448. p. 466. But his omitting all these shews he designedly perverted this Author to represent the Bishops and Clergy of this time as being generally depraved which argues my Adversary to be as destitute of Integrity as he was of Charity I need not observe that his Quotation out of S. Chrysostom is no more but a just description of the Episcopal Office without any complaint (x) Chrysost hom 37. Tom. 6. Nor that Isidore in the next place cited is only speaking of the fore-mentioned evil Bishops and Clergy-men (y) Isid Peleus lib. 5. ep 272. And it is not he as the blundering Editor thought but Nazianzen who adds the next words And as for that Good Man 't is well known he was angry and highly disobliged when he made the Oration here Quoted And yet he doth not as my Adversary saith wish there were no Prelacy that is No
quoted Oration he saith expresly I neither dare nor can justly accuse all (p) Idem Orat. â—0 in laud. Basilii p. 335. which Words in the same Page my Adversary must see and yet he omitted them on purpose to Arraign the whole Age. S. Basil doth not charge the Western Bishops with Ignorance in general but only That they did not or would not understand the case and condition of the Eastern Church (q) Basil ep pag. 285. Yet this Man produces this Passage to prove that the Bishops of the West and the Chief of them were a sort of Ignorant Fellows His Margen applies it to Damasus and he attempts to prove Siricius and Iâ—nocent deserved the same Character whose Vindication I leave to their own Friends it being no hurt to my Cause if two or three Bishops of one See were not so great Clerks since that Age was full of Learned Men and Famous Scholars And he can have no advantage to his Cause if he could prove the most of these were ignorant because Innocent the last of them lived almost an Hundred years before he will own Liturgies were imposed Pag. 193. That which he cites out of S. Chrysostom relates only to some few Evil Men as the Places will shew (r) Chrysost de Sacerd. Orat. 3. pag. 24. And as we noted before S. Ambrose is speaking of such only as came in by Simony (s) Ambros de dign Sacerd. cap. 5. That Epistle of Isidore's which he cites thrice in this Page seems plainly to refer only to one Simoniack (t) Isid Pel. lib. 5. ep 276. And his next Quotation speaks only of some Corruption in one small Diocess occasioned by an Evil Bishop newly admitted to Rule there (u) Id. lib. 3. ep 245. And I appeal to any Man whether these be fit Proofs that the whole Clergy were then depraved and corrupted Pag. 194. The like Appeal I may make concerning his next Quotations The first place out of Isidore is only about Zosimus one Ill Priest Ordained by one Evil Bishop (w) Isid Pel. lib. 5. ep 426. The next Epistle expresly owns that there were many Good Men remaining (x) Id. lib. 3. ep 259. The third place divides those Bishops into two Ranks Good and Bad and advises him to whom the Epistle is writ to be of the former number (y) Lib. 5. ep 481. The fourth Quotation shews how some especially the Bishop of Peleusium abused their Authority (z) Lib. 2. ep 50. The last Epistle saith no more but that some were much worse by their high Places (a) Ibid. lib. 2. ep 71. In the same Page his Editor hath blundered the Text by referring to wrong places in the Margen But we will follow the order of the Margen and First Sozomen is only relating the History of S. Chrysostom's Deposing 13 Bishops in the Lesser Asia and Palladius reckons them to be but six who suffered this Sentence (b) Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 6. pag. 452. Georg. Alex. vit Chrysost yet even these were thought to have so hard measure and their Crimes to be so small that Chrysostom was very much censured for it (c) See Doctor Cave's Life of S. Chrysost pag. 476. The Character of Theophilus of Alexandria's Ordination is cited from his bitter Enemies who hated him upon the account of Persecuting S. Chrysostom Yet it if it be true (d) Georg. Alex. vit Chrysost Pallad the whole Church ought not suffer by the Facts of one evil Bishop Nor must Chrysostoms account of those few Churches in Asia which he saw in his Exile (e) Chrysost Ep. 2. pass for an account of the whole World Pag. 195. The first place in this Margen relates to the same thing of which he discoursed in the last Page and here he saith Eusebius of Peleusium a creature of Theophilus and Isidore's Enemy Ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Plural number but Isidore speaks only of one Zosimus ordained by him who was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Ignorant Fellow (f) Ibid. Pel. lib. 3. Ep. 81. And the three next Epistles concern only Zosimus and two more ill Priests which Eusebius had ordained (g) Id. lib. 5. Ep. 51 52 53. The two next Epistles also only concer that single Bishop and some few whom he had ordained (h) Id. lib. 5. Ep. 140. 147. Only the Editor hath here made a woful jumble and in the midst of a word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. 147. hath broken that word to pieces and put down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and then goes on with a whole Sentence out of Epistle 140th as far as to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And then puts in the rest of the broken word and Prints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epistle 147th making it neither good Greek nor so much as good Sense In the same Page we have an account of the Ignorance of the African Church in the year of Christ 401. But this was 100 years before he will allow the use of Liturgies and by his account these Men were all to Pray Extempore for which they do not seem to be very well Qualified so that a Man who Reads this must be apt to think he hath dated the Original of Liturgies wrong because it is no way Credible that Aurelius the Bishop of Carthage and S. Augustin here also cited would allow Men to Pray after that manner who were so void of Learning and Judgment that they neither could avoid Solecisms nor discern Heresy But as to the matter of Fact we have sufficient Testimony for all this good Bishops complaint that there were at that time many very Learned Men in Africa and therefore this must be understood only of some few Churches Pag. 196. He rakes into the Subscriptions of Councils to find out some Bishops who could not Write their own Names but got others to Subscribe for them and hence he seeks to confirm his Notion of the Ignorance of the Clergy in this Age. But to this I must reply that the Subscriptions of some Councils are not of any great Credit nor void of Suspicion of Forgery (i) Existimoâ— subscriptiones illas quae hodie circumferuntur fictas esse Whitak de Concil Q. 4. But if we do allow those of Ephesus and Chalcedon to be genuine and his Quotations to be true though I can find but one of them in Binius and have not Crabs Edition of the Councils besides me There are but 4 Bishops in both these general Councils who are put to Subscribe by others because they could not Write their own Names But there were near 200 Bishops at the Ephesine Council and 630 at that of Chalcedon Now suppose among 800 Bishops there were 4 who could not Write I hope since there were 796 who could Write it will not follow that the Age was Ignorant or the most of the Bishops unlearned And besides he grants that these unlearned Bishops were not fit to
Salmâ—s defens reg cap. 8. To him I will add another Man of incomparable Learning who had no Obligations to this Church of England but rather the contrary which is the Famous Hugo Grotius who saith I am sure the English Liturgy the Rite of Laying Hands on Children in memory of their Baptism the Authority of Bishops of Synods consisting of none but the Clergy and many such like things do sufficiently agree to the Orders of the Ancient Church from which we cannot deny but that we have departed both in France and Holland (*) Grot. ad Boetslaer ep 62. pag. 21. And whoever considers these most Eminent Writers great Judgment in Antiquity may very well allow them to be sufficient Witnesses in this Question But none of the Forein Divines are more full or more clear in determining this Matter than the deservedly famous Lud. Capellus who lived to hear of this very Independent Sect who rejected our English Liturgy and all prescribed Forms and writ a most claborate Thesis on purpose to answer and expose their frivolous Objections a Thesis deserving to be read by all English Divines and to be wholly translated into English for the Common Good out of which at present I will only recite a few Passages viz. That as soon as Miraculous Gifts ceased and Hereticks began to infest the Church there was a necessity for Liturgies which wise and pious Bishops composed for the use of all the Presbyters in their Diocesses (a) Theses Salmurienses Praesid Lud. Capello par 3. De Liturg. Formulis conceptis Thes 3. pag. 657. This was done chiefly in the Great Churches as that of Rome Alexandria Constantinople c. and followed by Lesser Churches (b) Ibid. Thes 4 These Forms were short and plain at first consisting of some few Prayers and Lessons cut of the Psalms and other Scripture with the Blessing Consecration and distribution of the Communion c. And such was the Roman Office in the first Four Ages till Damasus's time but augmented and corrupted by the following Popes (c) Ibid. Thes 5. And then he hath these Words which I will transcribe at large But about 140 years ago when there was a Departure from the Roman Church and the People came out of Babylon and withdrew themselves from the Pope's Tyranny The Authors of the Reformation then purged the Holy Liturgy from all the Superstition and Popish Idolatry and took away all that was burthensom and that did not tend to Edification And thus at that time there were divers prescribed Forms of Liturgies simple and pure Composed by the several Authors of the Reformation in Germany France England Scotland Holland c. which differed as little as could be from the ancient Forms of the Primitive Church which Liturgies the Protestants have used hitherto happily and with good success in their several Nations and Districts Vntil very lately there arose in England a sort of morose scrupulous and too nice that I say not down-right superstitious Men who for many trifling Reasons of no moment not only dislike the Liturgy hitherto used in that Church but would have both it and the whole Order of Bishops to be utterly abrogated and abolished in place whereof they would substitute that which they call their Directory To which some wild and frantick Men add this Opinion That it is unlawful to use any prescribed Form either in public or private Prayers and that no good Man can with a safe Conscience be present at these Prayers (d) Id ibid. Thes 6 7. pag. 658. After this he acurately states the Controversie by distinguishing about the several Parts of the Public Service and proves Forms may lawfully be used in any part of it but as to Prayers he reckons it is most requisite they be made by Forms (e) Thes 9. ad Thes 23. pag. 659 c. And then he brings in all their Objections against Forms and all their little Reasons for their Arbitrary way and very learnedly and solidly confutes them all I shall only mention the Heads and refer the Reader to the Discourse it self for his full satisfaction viz. 1. He shews this is not an imitation of the Papists 2. Not a burden to Mens Consciences 3. Not worse because it was not the way in the Apostles Times 4. A Directory is not sufficient security against Heresie 5 He shews That though Forms are most necessary for the Unlearned yet the Learned ought not to be left free in the Public Prayers 6. He proves this is not that Will-worship which is forbidden in Scripture 7. He confutes those who say These are not our own Prayers 8. And those who pretend they are against Christian Liberty 9. Or that they spoil Ministers Gifts 10. Or do not profit the Auditory And lastly He answers that Objection That the use of Forms hinders our lifting up our Eyes in Prayer (f) Id. ibid. Thes â—4 c. ad pag. 669. And after he hath called all these light and frivolous little Reasons and petty Objections He concludes the whole Question with five Positions First That Forms are not absolutely necessary for all Persons in all Times and Places Secondly That they would not be generally necessary but only because all things are to be done decently and in order Thirdly That where there are Unlearned Pastors there Forms are absolutely necessary Fourthly Even where there are Learned Pastors a public Form is very useful and necessary for the common Edification of the Church Fifthly The use of these Forms cannot justly be condemned or disliked since always and every where it is most convenient and hath obtained in the whole Christian Church throughout all the World perpetually for above 1300 years and it is now every where used but only amongst these Vpstart Independents (g) Id. ibid. Thes 49. p. 669 So that truly the Moroseness or Scrupulousness and Superstition or rather the petulant and obstinate boldness of these Men is senseless and prodigious superstitiously to condemn and foolishly to compare to an Idol forbid in the Second Commandment to be avoided by all a Thing which is in it self most innocent whose use is most profitable and its observation most convenient which hath so long been practised in the Vniversal Church and never was yet rejected by any Church and which all the Churches of God every where now use to their great benefit but they reject it out of meer Whimsey or out of a Vile design to bring in an unbridled Licentiousness and intolerable Disorder into the Church But amongst them such are most to be detested who either will not use the Lords Prayer or none but that Form and that without joyning it to any other Prayers public or private and hold it a Sin for any good Man to be in a Church or a Family where they use prescribed Forms and account this to be a just cause of Separating from such Worship lest they should be defiled with their Sin who use such Forms
These are like those in Isaiah Chap. lxv 5. which say Stand by thy self come not near for I am holier than thou these are saith the Lord a Smoke in my Nose That is They vehemently stir up my Wrath against them God grant they may return to a better mind (h) Id. ibid. Thes 50 51. pag. 670. Thus that pious and learned Author concludes his Learned Theses and I will only make one Remark more of his concerning this Sort of Men viz. That nothing seems to incite them so studiously to condemn all Forms of Liturgy like the love of Innovation and the design of introducing Corruption that under the specious veil and pretence of liberty of Praying and Prophecying they may bring in all kind of Sects into the Church and therefore they make Men believe that vain false and erroneous Opinion viz. That in our Times as well as the Apostles the Spirit of Prayer and Supplication is to be poured out on the present Church according to Joel ii 28. and Zech. xii 10. which is the common and most pestilent Error of all Phanaticks about the Comforter which Christ was to send (i) Id. ibid. Thes 28. p. 663. It is a Reformed Divine of the French Church Second to none of his Time for Learning Piety and Judgment a famous Professor in an Eminent Protestant University who gives this Character of that Party of our Dissenters who are against all Prescribed Forms and by it we may discern what Notion Forein Churches have of them and of our Liturgy also I shall end these Forein Testimonies with a Paper delivered to me Signed by two Exiled French Pastors of great Piety and good Learning now residing in this City We whose Names are hereunto Subscribed being asked what we thought of Liturgies have expressed our Opinion in these Words We think a Liturgy in the Church is not only useful but also necessary For as there is and ought to be One Rule of Faith so also there ought to be One and the same Form of Gods public external Worship And it manifestly appears That the Protestants of the French Churches never were against such Forms because they had a Form for Administring the Sacraments for celebrating Matrimony and certain other Prescribed Prayers which none of us were allowed to recede from †Carol. Daubuz Minist Gal. Johan Costebadeus Minist Gal. Dated at York April 8. 1690. And now I will produce only two Domestick Testimonies of Men most entirely Unexceptionable and so conclude The first is that of Bishop Ridley who died a Martyr for the Protestant Faith and he in a Letter writ to his Friends a little before his Martyrdom saith This Church had of late i. e. in K. Edwards days the whole Divine Service all common and public Prayers Ordained to be said and heard in the common Congregation not only framed and fashioned to the true vein of Holy Scripture but also set forth according to the Commandment of the Lord and S. Pauls Doctrin for the Peoples Edification in their Vulgar Tongue (k) Bish Ridlies Farewell An. 1555. in Fox Acts Monum Vol. 2 pag. 1940. This was the Opinion of this great and glorious Martyr concerning our Common-Prayer before it was so refined as it hath since been And as to the Liturgy as it was Corrected by Queen Elizabeth the incomparable Bishop Juell in his never enough to be admired Apology gives this Testimony of it We have come as near as ever we could to the Church of the Apostles and to that of the old Catholic Bishops and Fathers while we know it was yet pure and as Tertullian saith an uncorrupt Virgin not stained hitherto with any Idolatry or any grievous or notorious Error And we have directed not only our Doctrin but also our Sacraments and our Form of public Prayers by their Rites and Institutions (l) Juelli Apolog Lat. edit Lond. 1591. pag. 170. I need add no more Evidence in a matter so plain for this will shew to all whom Interest and wilful Prejudice doth not blind both that all Foreign Churches and Eminent Writers do approve of prescribed Forms and that they as well as our own Reformers generally esteem our Liturgy as a most excellent Form of Service Wherefore I will now conclude with a charitable and compassionate Address to those unhappy but well meaning Dissenters who are designedly imposed on by their interested Teachers I doubt not but many of them sincerely desire to worship God in the most acceptable way and the reason why they separate from our Worship is because they have been industriously prejudiced against Forms as a Novel Corruption a Popish Superstition a Method of Praying contrary to Scripture and to the Judgment and Practice as well of the Primitive and Ancient as of the Protestant and Modern Churches But now my Brethren when all this is proved to be nothing else but Falshood and Malice I hope you will suffer your selves to be undeceived and joyn with us in that way of Praying which was used by the Saints in the old Testament enjoyned by Christ in the New practised by all those Holy Bishops and Devout Christians who lived ever since the first setling of the Church and now allowed and observed in all Regular Protestant Churches And especially since we have a Liturgy so generally approved by them all You have heard their Judgments of it and you may see the Practice of these Foreign Protestants who come hither from France and Holland Germany and Denmark they all like our Worship and as soon as they understand our Language joyn with us in it There never saith Mons Bochart was any of us in England who did not freely come to your Divine Service as soon as they had learned your Tongue none of us who did not receive the Holy Sacrament from Presbyters ordained by Bishops or if occasion were from Bishops themselves which I my self profess I often did with great profit while I studied Divinity at London and Oxford (m) Samuel Bochart Ep. ad Claris Morleum ap Durel p. 64. Foreign Protestants joyn with us and wonder at you for separating from us And can you still be made to believe our Service is Popish or that it is the Protestant interest either for us to cast off this our Protestant way of Serving God or you by continuing in your Separation to divide and weaken the most famous and best established Protestant Church in the World I do in the Bowels of Jesus Christ beseech you to cast off your Roman-like implicite Faith in those who have so evidently deluded you and to lay aside your prejudices which you may here see are so ill grounded For if once you discern your Error and can conquer your unfortunate Mistakes I doubt not but all of you who have no other ends to serve but those of Piety may come to our Churches and will find great comfort and benefit by our rational pure and Primitive Forms and will
Christians only sang praises without any Prayers in their Assemblies Or we must grant he speaks of Hymns by a Synechdoche putting them for the whole Christian Service of which the Hymns were the greater and more Eminent part and so mingled with the Prayers that the one could not be separated from the other For the Christians imitated Paul and Silas who Praying sang Hymns to God in the Prison (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. xvi 25. They therefore mixed Hymns and Prayers and the Hymns were so great a part of the Service that to be present at the Morning Hymns (z) Synod Vinet can 14. An. 453. signifies to be at the Morning Prayer And to be forbid to Sing in the Church (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isidor Peleus lib. 1. ep 90. imports Excommunication from the whole Service Wherefore if the Hymns were certainly in Forms prescribed it is more than probable the Prayers were so also because it would have been very odd and preposterous to break off from Forms of praise and run out into Extempore Prayers in the ordinary Public Worship one part of which at this rate must have had no kind of Congruity to the other Wherefore this Testimony proves that the greatest part of the Christians public Service was performed by prescribed Forms in the first Century and shews it is very probable that their Prayers also were set Forms even in that early Age. § 3. We have no Writer remaining in this Century but Ignatius Ignatius Antioch An. Dom. 99. who lived also in some part of the next And from him it seems very probable that the Bishop did appoint one Form of Prayer and Supplication for the public Worship especially for the Administration of the Sacraments for he charges all those to whom he Writes to do nothing without the Bishop and orders them of Magnesia to do nothing without the Bishop and the Presbyters nor to make tryal of things which seemed agreeable to their private Fancies but when they met together he tells them they must have one Prayer and one Supplication (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ep ad Magnes p. 34. declaring to those at Smirna that the only Authentic Celebration of the Eucharist and of Baptism was that which the Bishop either performed or allowed (c) Ignat. Epist ad Smirn. pag. 6. Now if their Prayers were varied every day they could not properly be called one Prayer And if every private Minister might order the Form of Baptism and the Lords Supper as he pleased as our Extempore Men take on them to do how could Ignatius say none was Authentic unless the Bishop allowed it Therefore it is likely they then had approved and uniform composures both for Prayers and Sacraments And as for their Praises Socrates saith Ignatius first brought the usage of Singing by way of Antiphone into the Church of Antioch (d) Socrat. histor lib. 6. cap. 8. and the same is attested by Photius (e) In Dr. Ham. view of the Directory pag. 145. Now if we consider that this was the Method of Singing Hymns among the Jews and Essenes and also among the Christians in this Age in other places it can be no ways improbable that Ignatius did set up this custom of Singing alternately at Antioch I know some take exceptions at the Vision of Angels from whom he is said to learn this Method but let it be Noted that this was an Age of Miracles and that the Holy Scripture represents the glorious Seraphins Singing in this Alternate manner (f) Isai vi 3. So that it is not unlikely that so great a Saint and Martyr might have such a Vision and Theodorets silence of this which is all this Author pretends against it (g) Disc of Liturg. p. 167. may proceed from his taking it for granted and supposing it was generally owned and known So that this will prove Forms of Prayer approved by the Bishop and Alternate Singing which must be in prescribed Forms was used in this Age Wherein it seems there were Psalms and Hymns written and composed by the Faithful to glorify Christ the Word of God As that Primitive Author cited by Eusebius testifies who Writ against the Heresy of Artemon and among other Mediums confutes it by citing these very Hymns which had been made almost from the beginning of Christianity and were of so great Authority that in the Reign of Pertinax * Circ An. 193. they were quoted as good Evidence in a matter of Faith (h) Euseb Hist lib. 5. cap. 28. pag. 145. Now an Extempore Hymn could not be cited nor be produced as a Testimony and therefore we conclude there were Written Hymns or Forms of Praise composed and allowed as Evidence in points of Faith from the very beginning of Christianity And therefore we have reason to suppose there was a Liturgy and Forms of Prayer also and this may be sufficient for this dark Century CHAP. II. Of Liturgies in the Second Century § 1. WE have not many Writings of this Age and none that had occasion to write particularly of the Church Service which they cared not to publish lest the Pagans under whom they lived should deride or blaspheme their sacred Mysteries and for this reason we must not look for any clear Evidence of Liturgies as yet though considering the Gospel was in planting and Churches were but begun to be setled there is as plain indication of the use of Forms as can be expected First Lucian the Jeering Pagan Lucian An. Dom. 112. who certainly had some knowledge of the Christian Rites describes his coming into a Religious Assembly which by all the Circumstances must be a Christian Church and he saith he there heard That Prayer which began with the Father and ended with the Hymn of many Names (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lucian Philopat p. 1128. Where we see the Christians had a certain Prayer known by its beginning which therefore must be an usual Form We may also perceive there was an Hymn at the end of this Prayer commonly called the Hymn of many Names which therefore probably was a Form also or else this was no proper or certain description of it I need not determine whether he means this of the Lords Prayer and the Doxology only though it is not likely so short a Form of Praise in which are only the Attributes not the Names of God should be called the Hymn of Many Names I rather think it might be meant of the Communion Office which probably began with Our Father c. and after some other less remarkable Prayers they added the Tricagion Holy holy holy Lord God of Hosts But whatever the particular Forms were this is certain they were Forms of Prayer and Praise known by their proper Titles and that suffices to prove That Forms were then used in the Christian Worship § 2. Justin Martyr doth often speak of the Christian Assemblies Justin Matyr An. Dom. 140. and of
that is as he expounds it prayed Extempore (t) Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. To which I cannot yield because a dark phrase of an obscure Author which is capable of many Interpretations must not be allowed for a proof of a new Method of Praying I confess Bishop Bilson modestly saith This seemeth to be meant of the miraculous Gift of Prayer which dured in the Church unto his time (u) Bilson's Christian Subject part 4. pag. 411. But then he supposes this Gift ceased soon after and believes that Liturgies came into use long before the time of S. Basil or S. Chrysostom (w) Id. ibid. pag. 437. So that if we allow this Bishops Exposition none of our Adversaries Consequences will follow for it doth no way prove that Ministers may now pray Extempore after the miraculous Gift of Prayer is ceased because those who had that Gift prayed in that manner Though I confess I see no need thus to expound the Phrase For allowing Rigaltius his ingenious observation that Tertullian here opposes the Christians way of praying to the Pagans who had a Monitor standing by them when they recited their Solemn Forms who prompted every Sentence to them that made the Prayer But the difference lies in this That the Christians had their Prayers by heart and could repeat them out of their Memory and he who can remember a thing needs no Monitor (x) Memini tametsi nullus moneas Terent. Eunuch II. 1. ver 10. Whereas it seems the Gentile Priests were not very perfect in their Prayers and had not committed them to their Memory because they stood in need to have a Monitor for every Sentence Now if this be the sense then it supposes the Christians had Forms which they could say by heart or repeat de pectore and then it makes for us and utterly discards Extempore Prayers Secondly Another Learned Man explains this Phrase of those Secret and Mental Prayers which every private Christian used in the solemn Assemblies on the stationary days in the intervals between the public Offices while all the Congregation kept silence Now these Prayers being not Vocal there needed no Monitor for them being only made as S. Cyprian expresses it silently and modestly within the secrets of their own Breasts (y) Tacitè modestè intra ipsas pectoris latebras Cypr. de Orat. Dom. See Falkner's Libert Eccles pag 117. and if we consider how long they stayed at these stations viz. for Nine hours together and how certain it is that all the time was not taken up in the public Offices of Reading Expounding Singing and Common Prayer it will not be improbable that some space was allowed there for these Mental Prayers (z) Albaspin lib. 1. obs 16. and if these be the Prayers Tertullian speaks of then they are nothing to the Public Offices about which we dispute But Thirdly Upon a due survey of the place it appears Tertullian is here proving the Christians sincere Loyalty and shewing they exceeded the Heathens in this Vertue and therefore made better Prayers for the Emperours than their Pagan Subjects For the Pagans had imbrued their hands in their Emperours Blood But the Christians saith he lift up their Hands to Heaven as being innocent The Pagans veiled their Faces in Prayer and might well do so to hide their blushing at the contradiction between their Actions and their Prayers but Christians prayed bare-faced and without any Guilt to make them blush Pagans had a Monitor because they had not laid their Petitions much to heart nor could they think of them so readily as the Christians who needed no Monitor because they prayed from their Hearts ** Oratio de Conscientia procedit Tertul. Exhort ad cast cap. 10. p. 513. most sincerely affectionately and with a true concern for the Emperour's safety So that to pray out of the Breast is to pray ex animo from the Heart and Soul the Breast in all Authors being usually put for the Mind and Soul (a) Manibus expansis quia innecuis capite undo quia non crubescimus denique sine monitore quia de pectere eramus pro omnibus imperatoribus c. Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. Thus then we see there are three ways of expounding this obscure Phrase each of which is more likely to be Tertullian's sense than his and one of them must be expounded of Forms of Prayer wherefore we cannot fear any Argument to be raised from hence against the use of Liturgies in public which undoubtedly began to be generally received before the end of this Century CHAP. III. Of Liturgies in the Third Century § 1. THough we have more Writers and consequently more Evidence in this than in the former Age concerning Common and prescribed Forms yet there are several Reasons why the Fathers of this Century do not frequently mention the Words of those Forms First Because their business was chiefly to convert Heathens and confute Hereticks and most of their Writings being upon those Subjects they had little occasion to Mention their Ways of Worship which in those days of Persecution was performed generally in private Secondly They knew the Heathens derided their Worship and would ridicule and blaspheme it if they had known it and the Hereticks who disowned the Churches Authority which composed these Offices would not allow any Argument drawn from the public Service so that it was not fit to quote their Liturgy when they writ either to the one or the other of these two sorts of Adversaries Thirdly They kept the Knowledge of these Forms from their very Catechumens till they were actually baptized and kept them as a secret and sacred Mystery among the Faithful and therefore cautiously forbore the Mention of them in such Writings as were to come into all hands I know Daileé pretends this opinion and practice of keeping these Mysteries secret did not obtain till after the end of these three Centuries (a) Dail de relig cultus object l. 2. c. 25. pag. 321 c. But he is grosly mistaken as I could prove by many passages but I will only instance in two viz. Tertullian in the last Age and S. Cyprian in this the former argues that the Heathens could not know what the Christian Worship was because the Faithful would not discover it since it was customary to keep all Mysteries secret especially such as were punished if they were discovered And Strangers he saith could have no knowledge of them since even pious Initiations ever keep out the profane (b) Ex formâ omnibus mysteriis silentii fides debeatur pp. unde extraneis notitiae cum etiam piae initiationes arceant profanos Tert. Apol. cap. 7. p. 8. that is not only the Heathens but the Christians in their pious ways of Worship kept out all Strangers and such as were not fit to know them Thus Tertullian and S. Cyprian tells an Heathen who reviled Christianity he ought not to answer him because that which is holy
in the Eucharist they could not be confined to any Set Form (o) Disc of Liturg. p. 66. and that it had been a vain thing to tell him of this if it had been the common Form which he knew before (p) Ibid. p. 68. To the first I answer he must learn to distinguish between reciting the Words of a Form which are addressed to God and relating in a Letter the sum and substance of the things desired when the speech is directed to a Man Now these Words are no Prayer nor addressed to God S. Cyprian is only telling Pope Lucius what things in general they asked for him Yet if these had been the Words of this Prayer and made by S. Cyprian the Primate of Africa on this great occasion of the chief Bishop of the Wests being banished it would not follow that because a Primate of Africa on an extraordinary occasion put in one new Petition into the usual Office therefore in ordinary times private Ministers may vary their Prayers every day To his second inference viz. that supposing this were the common Form he need not have told Lucius of it I reply if this were then the African Form to supplicate for Confessors yet Cyprian might rationally give Lucius an account of it First because it is not certain that they at Rome knew the Form of Praying for a Confessor at Carthage or if they did Lucius could not know till he was thus informed that it was used for him So that whether it was the common Form or no it will not serve out Adversaries purpose for let it be noted if S. Cyprian had Prayed to God for Lucius every day Extempore in various and other Words he had told him a manifest Untruth when he said he Prayed for him in these words That he who is perfect c. So that if these had been the words which S. Cyprian used for Lucius as he supposes they must have been a Form and were prescribed for that occasion by S. Cyprian to his subordinate Clergy His second allegation out of S. Cyprian for such occasional Prayers is that there are also mention of such occasional Prayers in the Epistle to Moses and Maximus (q) Disc of Liturg. p. 68. but he durst not cite the place at large which only speaks of private Prayers made by these Confessors in Prison in which S. Cyprian desires to be remembred believing God would grant them whatever they prayed for But there are no petitions mentioned nor any account whether they prayed with or without a Form so that this Quotation is as impertinent as his third instance is fraudulent For he cites S. Cyprian to prove that the Form of Words used in Baptizing was varied by some but he leaves out those Words which utterly spoil his Argument Quomodo ergo quidam dicunt there he draws a line modo in Nomine Jesu Christi c. (r) Disc of Liturg p. 98. But S. Cyprians Words are these How then do some say who are out of the Church yea against the Church that if a Pagan be any where or any ways Baptized in the name of Christ Jesus he may obtain Remission of Sins (s) Cypr. ad Jubai Epist 73. Therefore it was manifest Schismaticks and Hereticks varied from the Form and S. Cyprian disputes against the practice and proves that it makes the Baptism null and void So that our Adversary is at a low Ebb when he would prove an usage of the Church by the practice of its Enemies and founds their Extempore variations upon the Opinions and the use of Schismaticks and Hereticks Gregorius Thaumaturgus An. Dom. 253. § 5. Gregory Thaumaturgus Bishop of Naeocaesarea was Contemporary with S. Cyprian and though he had so extraordinary a measure of the Spirit that he did many Miracles yet he was so much for a Liturgy that we have the Testimony of S. Basil an Unquestionable Witness concerning him that he appointed a Form of Prayer for that Church of Naeocaesarea from which they would not vary in one Ceremony or in a Word Nor would they add any one Mystical Form in the Church to those which he had left them yea when their Offices grew to be deficient by reason of their Antiquity the Bishops who succeeded this Gregory would allow no addition to be made unto that which he had established (t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil de Spir. Sâ—â—cto cap. 29. pag. 221. and it seems he had appointed also a way of singing the Psalms of which the Naeocaesarean Clergy were so extremely tenacious that when S. Basil would have brought in a better Way they opposed him in it and objected that it was not so in the Days of Gregory the Great (u) Basil Epist 63. ad Cler. Naeocaes pag. 843 844. Now how is it possible to have a clearer proof in the World for prescribed Forms than this That in an Age while Miraculous Gifts lasted a Bishop full of the Spirit Appoints a Form of praising God by Psalms and prescribes a Liturgy containing the Ceremonies the words of Prayers and the Form of Consecrating the Holy Sacrament and this Liturgy used for above an Hundred Year without any variation or addition by the Bishops of that Province and all their Clergy This is not like his Arguments squeezed out of misconstrued Phrases or built upon vain Suppositions and remote Conjectures It is plain and undeniable Matter of Fact of which I shall say no more but this That S. Basil doth not relate this as any thing extraordinary in Gregory nor remark it as a thng strange and done no where else so that it is probable most of the Eminent Bishops of each Diocess did compose or collect a Form of Prayer for their several Churches before the ceasing of Miraculous Gifts but our Adversary alas could find nothing of this kind in all his search for Antiquity or at least he was so wise to conceal what he could not pretend to Answer § 6. Not long after this Paulus Samosatenus Paulus Samosatenus Episc Antioch An. Dom. 269. an Heretical Bishop of Antioch was offended at those Hymns which were sung there in honour of our Saviour Christ and composed others pretending that those Hymns which he rejected were written but lately and composed by Persons that lived but a little before his time (w) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 7. cap. 24. From whence it appears that there were prescribed Forms of glorifying and praising our Lord Jesus used at Antioch and written at least as early as the beginning of this Century and some of them perhaps long before (x) See Chap. I. §. 3. of this History Now Psalms and Hymns as we have proved were a very great part of the Primitive Worship and S. Paul had commanded all to Sing as well as to Pray with the Spirit therefore if they Sung by Forms it is probable they prayed by Forms also there being no reason why the one should be performed
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
Secondly That it was reckoned a pious thing to compose and learn a Form of Prayer which Eusebius would not have commended if Forms had not been esteemed lawful and commonly used in public And Thirdly That those who use Forms of Prayer either by committing them to memory or by frequent use might often lift up their Eyes to Heaven in the repeating of them So that we may grant his Instance of Constantine's Effigies on his Coin represented as in a praying posture with Hands and Eyes lifted up to Heaven (l) Disc of Liturg pag. 10. For since we are sure he used Forms this only shews the folly of his arguing from that posture that such as did use it could not pray by a Form I shall therefore conclude this Evidence with this further Observation That we cannot doubt that Christians had accustomed themselves to pray by Forms in Public before the time of this Religious Prince who was guided by those Bishops who had been Confessors for the Faith and yet composed and used Forms of Prayer and was highly commended for it nor did any of that Age object this as any Innovation in the Christian Worship but Eusebius particularly reckons it as an Instance of his Piety that He ordered all his Army at a certain Signal given by one Man to send up one and the same premeditated Prayer to God (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vita Constant lib 4. cap. 19. Which shews That the Christians did then worship God by premeditated and prescribed Forms and not in the Extempore way which our Adversaries pretend to be the ancient Mode S. Athanasius An. Dom. 326. § 3. Soon after flourished the Great Athanasius in whom there are evident marks of a public Liturgy for we have noted before That the People can never make certain and vocal Responses but only where the public Prayers are made in a known Form but nothing can be plainer than that they made such Responses in the Diocess of Alexandria For he alluding to the ancient Litanick way of Praying declares when he said Let us pray for the safety of the most Religious Emperour Constantius that all the People immediately answered with one Voice Christ help Constantius (n) Athanas Apol ad Constant pag. 156 157. In another Tract he tells us The People mourned and groaned to God in the Church all of them crying to the Lord and saying Spare thy People good Lord spare them give not thine Heritage for a reproach to their Enemies (o) Idem Epist ad Solitar pag. 239. which is an original piece of Litany and a known Form prescribed in Scripture retained in the Primitive Church and continued still in use among us Athanasius also speaks of the Prayers at the Communion as a distinct Office affirming That the People offered up these Prayers with one Voice and without any manner of disagreement adding That in that great multitude there was but one Voice when they unanimously answered Amen (p) Idem Apol. ad Constant pag. 159. From these and other Testimonies the Centuriators confess there were Forms of Prayer used at Alexandria in his time (q) Magdeb. Cent. 4. cap. 6. pag. 412. and the Learned Bishop Bilson observes That the Church in that Age thought it not enough for the Simple to say Amen they knew not to what but requiring and appointing their devout distinct and intelligent Answers Confessions Blessings and Thanksgivings as well in the ministration of the Lords Supper as in other parts of their public Service (r) Bilson's Christ Subjeâ—t part 4. p. 435. So that it is plain he believed there was a Form wherein the Peoples part of all Offices was appointed by the Church which could not be done in the Extempore way I shall only further note That Athanasius orders the People to sing the Psalms in the very Words wherein they are written Affirming That he who thus repeats them may be confident God will hear these Supplications (s) Athâ—n de inter Psalm pag. 303. Which confirms that which was observed before out of Origen That the Church of Alexandria had many Forms of Prayer out of the Psalms As for my Adversary He omits all these passages and as is usual with him he mentions nothing of this Father but two places out of which he hopes to raise some Objections against Forms of Prayer First He saith The Arians who charged Athanasius with burning the Bible do not mention any Indignity done to the Liturgy whence he gathers there was no Liturgy used there ourse of pag. 13. But let it be noted that he falsifies the Historian who saith they charged him with burning The Holy Books (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat. hist lib. 1. cap. 2. pag. 539. in the plural Number which may very well take in the Liturgy as well as the Bible being reckon'd also an Holy or Sacred Book And we have shewed That in the Emperour Constantine's Court there were Books of Prayers as well as of Holy Scripture and therefore it is likely there was so also at Alexandria For even in the relation of the Arians Cruelty there He writes of a Virgin who was very ill treated by them who had her Psalter wherein were many of their Forms of Prayer in her hand (w) Athan. ad Orthod de perfec Arian pag. 171. Secondly He alledges a place out of Theodoret which affirms as he saith That the Devils were more afraid of Athanasius his Prayers than of others and thence concludes that he prayed Extempore (x) Discourse of Liturg. p. 129. I Reply That Theodoret makes no comparison between his praying and others and if he had it would utterly have spoiled his Cause because if the Devils feared Athanasius Prayers more than any others as being Extempore then it would follow that all others had prayed by Forms so that upon that supposition Athanasius had prayed Extempore contrary to the general use of the Church But indeed Theodoret is only saying That the Devil hated him for his fervent Praying and rational Preaching by which he converted many (y) Theoderet hist lib. 3. cap. 8. he makes no comparison between him and others nor doth he say one word to prove that Athanasius did not pray by a Form we therefore will freely grant our Adversary That not Phrases but Devotion of Mind is the Fountain of Prayer And we argue from thence That it was Athanasius his Devotion not his Phrases that was so terrible to the Devil That crafty Spirit is not afraid of new Words or Extempore Phrases it is the inward Devotion of Mind which he dreads and that Athanasius did doubtless exercise to a very high degree even in the use of those Forms which were then allowed and prescribed by the Church Wherefore our Adversary gains nothing by this Father â—â—vianus Antioch An. Dom. 348. § 4. In the time of Athanasius Leontius an Arian was Bishop of Antioch who having altered some few Words in the
shorter Form (p) Proclus Constant Epist de traditione divin Missae ap Bonav de rebus Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 9. And though that and S. Chrysostoms had made this Liturgy to be laid aside at Constantinople yet the famous Council of Trullo (q) Concil Constan â—in Trullo can 32 An. Dom â—80 there cites it under S. James his name as Authentic evidence in a dispute It is therefore most notoriously false in our Adversary to say Balsamon declares in his notes upon this Canon of Trullo that the Greeks under the Patriach of Constantinople and those of the Diocess of the Orient utterly disclaimed this Liturgy 1200 years after Christ (r) Disc of Liturg p. 149. For Balsamon there affirms that S. James the Brother of our Lord being the first Bishop of Jerusalem first delivered an holy Liturgy but the Church of Constantinople having another Form in his time did not receive it nor would he permit the Patriarch of Alexandria to use it in his great Church as he desired though Balsamon confess it was used by those of Jerusalem and Palestine on great Festivals even in his time (s) Balsam not in 32. can Concil in Trull Bever Tom. 1. pag. 193. So that the Greek Church did not utterly disclaim this Liturgy they owned S. James to have been the first Author of it and held Communion with those Churches which used it only having for some Ages used other Forms they thought not fit to permit this Liturgy to be read in their great Church and this confirms my Position viz. That there was anciently such a Form of Prayers used in the Church of Jerusalem But our Adversary objects (t) Disc of Liturg pag. 149. c. ad p. 154. First That this Liturgy is not mentioned by any Fathers or Councils I reply The matter of it and the very Words are mentioned by many Fathers and the very name and Title as we have shewed are found in Proclus and in the Council of Trullo Secondly If S. James made it he saith it ought to be accounted Apostolical and ought never to be added to diminished or altered Answer If S. James had made it for his Church of Jerusalem other Apostles might make other Forms for other Apostolical Churches so that S. James his Liturgy would not have ben necessary for all places But he knows we hold that S. James and the other Apostles Celebrated the Sacrament at first by very short Forms probably using only the Lords Prayer the Words of Consecration and an Hymn of praise and while there were inspired Bishops they added divers Collects Responses and Prefaces which being writ down and remembred brought forth the Primitive Liturgies in the next Age after those Miraculous Gifts of Prayer ceased Now since all Liturgies retain those things which are essential and were certainly Apostolical in other parts of the Office every Church may vary as they find expedient Thirdly He objects that there are many Corruptions and gross Superstitions in this Liturgy Answer We freely confess it and as freely own that none of these are either Apostolical or so much as Ancient But let it be noted these Corruptions crept in by the itch of altering which hath infected every Age and all Churches and by this means brought in all the Corrupt Opinions of every Age into the service of God thus the names of Saints and Ora pro nobis got into the Roman Litanies about the ninth Age or somwhat later but he would be an odd Logician who should argue that the Roman Church had no Litany before the ninth Age because the invocation of Saints came in about that time Since in their Litany there are other Petitions very Pious and agreeable to the Doctrin of the pure and Primitive Church yea the very Phrases are found in the most ancient and Orthodox Fathers and there are yet extant some Manuscript Litanies without any names of Saints So as to this Liturgy there are many Corruptions in it which are modern Additions but there are also many Pious and excellent Prayers agreeable to Scripture and to the best Antiquity yea the very Words of which are found in the Orthodox and elect Fathers Fourthly Therefore whereas he objects that we had better wholly reject this Liturgy because we know not how to separate the Corruptions from what is pure and Orthodox I reply We can easily distinguish between them for we desire to justify no more of this Liturgy than what is agreeable to the Scriptures and to the Doctrin and Practice of the first four Centuries And there is enow of those Primitive passages in this Liturgy to convince any reasonable Man that there was a Form of public Prayers and Praises prescribed and used in the Church of Jerusalem long before S. Cyrils time and therefore I place this Liturgy here as being an Authentic Evidence there were Forms of Prayer allowed in this Age which is all that I am concerned to prove I conclude with Causabon's observation that the Liturgy under the Title of S. James which is now extant is partly true and partly false (u) Causab Exerc. in Baron xvi §. 41. pag. 384. And truly all Du-Plessis his Arguments which our Adversary hath Transcribed do only shew that S. James was not Author of all that Liturgy which now goes under his name (w) Du-Plâ—ssis 〈◊〉 he Mass 〈◊〉 1. chap. 2. but that learned Man never inferred from thence as this Author doth that there were no public Forms used in the Fourth Century for Du-Plessis acknowledges there was an Order and Form for the Celebration of the Sacrament in this Age and shews wherein it differed from the Modern corrupted Roman Mass (x) Idem ibid. Book 1. chap. 4. p. 30. c. and this may suffice to say concerning this Liturgy of S. James § 7. There is another Liturgy in the Apostolical Constitutions ascribed to Clement Clement's Constitutions circ An. Dom. 360. and though the Author to make the Forms and Rites of his own Age look more Venerable falsly claps the Apostles Names upon them yet he is owned by all Judicious Men to have been a Person Learned and well Skilled in Ecclesiastical Offices and is allowed to be worthy of Credit even by our Adversary (y) Disc of Liturg. p. 39. marg p. 110. in that which he relates concerning that time wherein he lived which as we will presently shew must be at least as early as the middle of this Century Wherefore so early we have a clear and undeniable Evidence that there was a prescribed Liturgy and Forms of Prayer used upon all public occasions The particulars are too long to insert but the several Heads are these These Constitutions have the Form of the Deacons warning those who were to Communicate noâ— to come with Malice or Hypocrisy (z) Constit Apostol lib. 2. cap. 58. They mention the alternate Singing of Davids Psalms (a) Ibid. cap. 61. begun at Antioch not long before A
imitated an innovation or a Method taken up lately or only by few And Nazianzen tells us That Julian saw Christianity was Famous for its Doctrins but more Famous and remarkable for those Forms of the Church anciently delivered and still preserved (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naz. Orat. 3. pag. 101. which Forms most certainly were Forms of Prayer and of Administration of the Sacraments derived as Nazianzen believed from Ancient Tradition and retained to his very time and to imitate the Doctrins we see Julian set up Schools and Lectures to imitate these Forms he appointed a Form of Prayers in parts Secondly Nazianzen did believe this way of Praying by Forms to be very agreeable to the Gospel because he there saith That these Forms of Prayer and other things before mentioned were clearly belonging to the good Order of the Christians (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. ibid. So that we may be sure both of the use of Forms of Prayer in this time and of Nazianzens approving them This Evidence for the Antiquity of Liturgies my Adversary suppresseth but cites two other places out of Nazianzen which he would perswade us will make out the use of Extempore Prayers First he tells us that Nazianzen being to discourse of the holy Ghost prayeth that he may be enabled thereby for the expressions (t) Disc of Liturg. p. 59. The words are these That being to speak of the Spirit he may have the presence of the Spirit and that it may give him such a faculty of discoursing as he desires at least such as is suteable to the occasion (u) Nazianz. Orat 44. p. 409. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he translates in the plural number Give me such expressions But let it be noted that this is not properly a Prayer but a Rhetorical Apostrophe in the middle of an Homily by the polite style whereof we may conclude it was composed in his Study before he he came to the Church and therefore both the Prayer and Homily were made in his Closet however being part of a Sermon this is nothing at all to the Churches public Prayers about which we dispute For many Conformists do use such Apostrophes to God or Christ or to the holy Ghost in their Sermons yet none will argue from thence that we have no Liturgy in England Secondly He pretends that Nazianzens Father prayed at the Eucharist by the Spirit and shortned the usual Prayers there when he was sick And of this he his so proud that he quotes it twice (o) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 60 pag. 76 77. But he gives us only the Epitome of this story out of the Centuriators which he imagined sounded more to his purpose Therefore we will give the Fathers own Words who saith His sick Father awaking the Night before Easter first moved himself a little and then more strongly soon after he called on his Servant by Name with very low Voice to give him his Garments and lend him his Hand the Man came with amazement and did readily obey him and leaning on him as on a Staff he imitated Moses upon the Mount and staying up his Hands in the posture of Prayer he readily performed the former and latter part of the Mysteries of the People in few words indeed because he was weak in Body but with a Mind it seems very perfect O admirable Without a Pulpit on the Pulpit a Sacrificer without an Altar a Priest at a distance from the things to be consecrated but these things were made present to him by the Holy Spirit as he knew though those who were present did not see them After this repeating the accustomed Words of the Eucharist and Blessing the People he went to Bed again (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Nazâ—â—at 19. pag. 305. After which he relates how he Recovered and went to Church and solemnly celebrated the Sacrament with the whole Church on the first Sunday after Easter Where I think the Centuriators and our Adversary both mistake the point in supposing the old Bishop to do all this in the Church for there is nothing in the Relation to shew that he went out of his Chamber and his being without a Pulpit an Altar and the things to be consecrated viz. the Oblations of the People brought to the Church do make it plain this was a private Communion celebrated in his Chamber to some few that were about him yet he performed that as nigh the public Forms as he was able And though he abbreviated the long Prayers before the Consecration out of meer necessity yet he kept strictly to the Words of Consecration as he was wont to do he did not alter that Form in the least So that a Man may as well argue We have no larger Office for the Communion in our Liturgy because we have a shorter Office for the Sick as our Adversary can infer from this short way of private Communicating in a case of necessity and in a Chamber That there was no Form of Prayers for public Communions in that Age yea we see by the weak old Bishop 's coming as near the Public Form as he was able and in the most Essential part keeping close to it that there was a Public Liturgy then And Secondly Our Adversary both in his Greek * Note that in citing the Greek after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he draws a Line to conceal his being without a Pulpit c. and goes on thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. See the Marg. of Discourse of Liturg. pag. 77. and Latin omits all those Words viz. of his being without a Pulpit an Altar and things to be consecrated on purpose first to abuse this Reader into the mistake of the Bishops being in the Church to which we see he did not come till a Week after And then secondly he would make us believe that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These things refers to his abbreviation of the Office to his Short Words that so he may pretend Those Words were given to him by the Inspiration of the Spirit which is a manifest falsifying of the Father who saith The Pulpit Altar and Consecrated things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These things were made present to him by the Holy Ghost as Nazianzen believed though no Body there saw them which is a flight of Rhetorick usual in him but upon the gross perverting this Expression all our Adversaries Argument of Expressions and Words in Prayer being given by the Holy Ghost doth depend I beg the Readers Pardon for this Excursion which clearly demonstrates that this Adversary of mine did wilfully misinterpret the Greek after he had read it and cited it with a designed omission to hook in an Argument for his false Notion of praying Extempore by the Spirit but when genuine Antiquity affords no better Testimonies than this They have more use of their Wit than of their Integrity But I doubt not all impartial Men will gather from this very
but if it be S. Basil's it will not help his Cause because these are Directions for the Monks private Prayers in their Cells and therefore do not belong to the Public Offices about which we dispute yet even in that Book he makes Forms both of Praise and Prayer for their private use and though he allow his Monk to collect Sentences of Scripture also for this purpose yet he would have those Sentences put into a Form and he was to offer that Form up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as devoutly as he was able by which we not only learn that S. Basil much approved of these Forms but we see that the Phrase of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about which he made such a stir in Justin Martyr doth properly signify The using a Form of Prayer with all possible devotion I shall only add That when these Monks prayed all together they had a Form also which S. Basil calls their Canon or Rule as we shewed before Lastly Out of the same Tract he observes that S. Basil would have his Monk in Prayer to have his Mind upon God alone and nothing else (t) Basil Constitut Mon. cap. 1. pag. 671. and he fancies this was very hard to do if the Monk had his Book to mind and thence he infers they had no Prayer Books (u) Discourse of Liturg. p. 121. But we may remember that S. Basil ordered his Monks to get the Psalms by Heart and if they got their other Prayers also by Heart that would utterly spoil his Inference Yet suppose they did read their Forms by frequent use they would soon be so perfect in them that a few glances sometimes on their Books would serve to help them to repeat them right and not divert their Mind from God at all And we who use our Common Prayer know by Experience that the Liturgy being early become familiar to us we have nothing to mind but only God when we pray whereas those who pray Extempore have their Fancy so busie in inventing new Phrases and Matter and their Thoughts so taken up with what they have said are saying and are to say next that they cannot steddily keep their Mind upon God And the Congregation also are so busie in observing the new Phrases that they cannot have such fixed Thoughts as they who being accustomed to their well known Forms have no other thing to do than to watch their own Hearts and keep them close to the Duty they are about And this may suffice to confute all his far fetch'd Objections out of S. Basil and to shew they are all of them very insignificant § 15. But we must carry this Matter further and will prove that S. Basil The Liturgy of S. BASIL not only approved Forms but made a Liturgy himself which we shall make out by sufficient Evidence in every Age since it was Composed First His dear Friend Nazianzen who knew him best of any Man saith in his Encomium That the Prayers which he composed were the Ornament of his Throne (w) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Naâ— Orat. 20 p. 34â— Secondly The Life of S. Basil said to be writ by Amphilocius tells us He prayed to God for such Grace Wisdom and Vnderstanding as might enable him to offer up the unbloody Sacrifice in Words of his own by the direction of the Holy Ghost And the Author saith our Saviour appeared to him telling him His Request was granted whereupon he first pronounced and then writ down the Liturgy which bears his Name (x) Vita Basil per Amphilâ—c inter Opera D. Basilii I shall not undertake to justifie the Miracle that may have been added by some Admirers of this Liturgy but the Matter of Fact on which it was grounded was always taken for a certain Truth in very ancient Ages and as I need not this Testimony so I had not cited it at large but to check our Adversaries Confidence who cites Bishop Jewel saying That Basil besought God he might celebrate with Prayers of his own making (y) Disc of Lit. Marg. pag. 73. by which he hopes to abuse his Reader into thinking that Basil desired to make daily new Extempore Prayers Whereas Bishop Jewel refers to this Passage in S. Basil's Life and it was a Liturgy of his own Composing that he begged abilities for We proceed to Proclus who was Bishop of Constantinople within fifty years after S. Basil's Death and who personally knew S Chrysostom and he saith That S. Basil seeing Mens sloth and degeneracy made them weary of a long Liturgy though he thought there was nothing unnecessary or tedious in that of S. James which was used before yet to prevent the weariness of Priests and People He delivered a shorter Form (z) Proclus de tradit divin Lâ—â—urg The reason is fair and the Authority of this Writer being so near S. Basil's Time is very weighty Again Petrus Diaconus Contemporary with Fulgentius who lived in Africa not very much above an 100 years after S. Basil's Death cites this Liturgy as an undoubted piece of his genuine Works in his Dispute against the Pelagians in these Words S. Basil Bishop of Caesarea in his Prayer made at the holy Altar which all the Eastern Church useth among other things saith Grant O Lord of Hosts our defence we beseech thee that the evil may be made good and those that are good keep them in their goodness (a) Petrus Diac. de Incarnat c. 8. From whence we note first That these Words are still in that very Liturgy which bears S. Basil's Name Secondly That within little more than one Hundred years after S. Basil's Death it was used as S. Basil's Liturgy by all the Eastern Church and known even in Africa by that Name Thirdly That it was of so great Reputation and Authority then and there as to be quoted for unquestionable Evidence even against Hereticks Wherefore we conclude it was certainly of his Composing it being morally impossible that any Forgery in his Name should be so early and generally received in the Eastern Church where he was so well known and should get such Credit among the Africans that even Hereticks durst not except against it To this we may add Leontius a Monk of Constantinople who lived in the same Century with Fulgentius and cites this Liturgy for Evidence against Nestorius (b) Lâ—ont adv Nestor lib. 3. An. â—90 In the very next Age it was quoted as good Authority against the Error of the Armenians by this August Title The Mystical Service delivered to us in Writing c. and then they cite a Passage of S. Basil's Liturgy as that which was daily used in their Church (c) Concil 6. Constant in Trull Can. 32. An. â—â—0 Beveâ— Tom. I. pag 192. We need proceed no lower because the whole Greek Church gives constant and universal Testimony to it ever since as a genuine Composure of S. Basils However we will hear our Adversaries Objections
Chrysostom there being in the former especially no more but the beginning of the Sentences Thus Ye Faithful for That he would instruct That he would reveal c. which are the initial Words of the main Periods of this very Form which S. Chrysostom expounds and it seems were so well known to the Deacons then that it was enough to set down the initial Words of some Sentences which proves it was constantly used and become familiar (z) Vid. Liturg. D. Basil Bib. Patr. Tom. II. pag. 45. Et Liturg. Chrys ibid. pag. 71. And it is much for the Credit of those Liturgies that S. Chrysostom in his genuine Works expounds a Form so very like those in the Liturgies that any Man may discern those are the Epitome of this Larger Form To this I must add That the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions hath set down this Litany at large many Petitions of it being the very same Words viz. To hear their Prayers To open the Ears of their Hearts To bless their going out and coming in c. And other Petitions are the very same things with very little alteration of the Phrase viz. To reveal to them the Gospel of his Christ To plant his holy and saving Fear in them To make them meditate in his Law day and night To grant them the Laver of Regeneration and the Garment of Immortality c. (a) Clem. Constit lib. 8. cap. 5. And indeed Excepting the difference in the order of some Petitions and some Phrases there is an exact harmony between this Litany in the Constitutions and that in S. Chrysostom the Variations being no more than may be expected from variety of Copies transcribed for the use of two several Diocesses and corrected by two several Bishops for their own Clergy This is certain That there was far more difference between the Missals of Salisbury and York than are in these two Forms yet both were used in one Kingdom by those who were Members of the same National Church Nor can we wonder at these little differences in the ancient Litanies considering the aptness of every Eminent Bishop to order something in the public Service it suffices to make my Position good that they were Forms prescribed that probably had all sprung from one Original For all these Old Eastern Litanies agree in the main but some Phrases and something of the order of the Petitions were varied in the Transcripts for divers Provinces And since this small Variety was in S. Chrysostom's Time we may conclude The Primitive Form from whence they were all derived must be much Elder The next part of Liturgy was the Prayers at the Eucharist when none but the Faithful were present And these S. Chrysostom describes also so exactly like that Office which is in the Apostolical Constitutions that it is evident either those very Forms or some little different from them were used in S. Chrysostoms time the Reader may compare the passages which I shall cite out of this Father with the places in the Constitutions noted in the Margen and he will be satisfied of this great Truth In this Office there was a Litany (b) Clem. Constit lib. 8. cap. 13. 19. wherein as S. Chrysostom saith they wâ—re bid to intercede with the merciful God for Bishops and Priests for Kings and all in Authority for the Land the Sea and the Air yea for all the World (c) Chrysost hom 2. in 2. Cor. pag. 557. Which is as plain a description of that Litany as a Lax discourse will admit And both S. Chrysostom and the Constitutions note this was said by all of them kneeling After this the Holy Father Observes they arose all together and then the Bishop imparted Peace saluting them in this Form Peace be with you The People answering and with thy Spirit (d) Chrysost hom 18. in 2. Cor. pag. 647. Clem. Const lib. 8. cap. 15. But as to this Form it was often used in divers places of the public Service as the old Liturgies shew and S. Chrysostom doth attest saying We everywhere Pray for Peace in the Church we desire Peace in the Prayers Litanies and Prefaces the Bishop frequently salutes us with Peace saying Peace be with you and Peace be with you all When he enters the Church he begins with this So also before Sermon (e) De isto ritu vide item Chrysost hom 36. in 1. Cor. So when he blesseth when he enjoyns the kiss of charity and when the Sacrifice is done he saith again Grace be with you and Peace you answering And with thy Spirit (f) Chrysost hom 3. in Coloss Tom. 4. pag. 106 107. After this followed these Primitive and Universally used Forms of Preface which are sound in all the ancient Liturgies with little Variation viz. Lift up your Hearts Answer We lift them up unto the Lord. Of which S. Chrysostom saith Did you not promise the Priest to be devout when he saith Lift up your Hearts and Minds And you replied We Lift them up unto the Lord (g) Chrysost ser 38. de Euchar. poen Item hom 22. in Hebr. Const Apostol lib. 8. cap. 16. Then he tells us the Praises were common and performed by both Priest and People For first saith he You receive their Words that is Let us give Thanks to our Lord God and then you joyn with them and add it is just and right so to do After which begins the act of Praise (h) Chrysost ut supr hom 18. in 2. Cor. which no doubt is that Form in the Constitution It is meet and Right so to do c. (i) Constit Ap. ut supr And as for the Hymn called Trisagion which is Holy holy holy and follows in the Constitutions S Chrysostom mentions it very many times in his genuin Works For he wonders how they dare Slander their Neighbours who with the Cherubins Sing Holy holy holy (k) Chrysost in Ephes hom 14. and he wonders they who are admitted to Sing the same Hymn with Cherubins Seraphins Angels and Archangels dare laugh or behave themselves unseemly in the Church (l) Id. in 2. Corinth hom 18. pag. 647. id Orat. 74. de Bapt. Servant hom 24. in act Ap. So that nothing can be more certain than that this Hymn was sung in this very Form in the Eucharistical Office at that very time And so was the Glory be to God on high also for he saith The Faithful know what the Cherubins sing above that is Holy holy holy and what the Angels sang below that is Glory to God on high (m) Chrysost hom 9. in Ep. ad Coloss intimating they were both sung in that Office S. Chrysostom also confirms this in another place saying in our Eucharist we say Glory be to God on high on Earth Peace good Will towards Men (n) Idem hom 3. in â—p ad Coloss To this we may add other ancient Forms which he occasionally mentions such as these to
stand up and with great Decency (o) Id. hom 4. de natura Dei And that Holy things must be given to Holy persons (p) Idem hom 17. in Hebraeos Both which passages are in the Liturgy in the Constitutions in so many Words (q) Constit lib. 8. cap. 15. cap. 20. And also in every one of the ancient Liturgies which go under the names of S. James S. Basil and S. Chrysostom in all which also there is a Form of Prayer after the Holy Communion (r) Constit lib. 8. cap. 22. and S. Chrysostom hath a Homily to reprove those Who left the holy Liturgy unfinished and went out before the last Prayer which is the Title of that Homily (s) Chrys Tom. 5. edit Front Dac et p. 522. All which abundantly proves that there was a set and prescribed Liturgy at that time by which the Eucharist was Administred I might be much larger in my proof of this had I time to make a narrower search in the learned Volumes of this elegant Father but I take this to be sufficient especially if we consider the Evidence we have that S. Chrysostom did compose that Liturgy as to the main which now goeth under his name The Authorities and Arguments for which being much the same with those produced for the Liturgy of S. Basil (t) See before in this Chap. §. 15. we refer the Reader thither And shall here only observe First That Proclus who was S. Chrysostoms successor at Constanstinople and came into that See within 27 years after Chrysostoms Death affirms That this Holy Father like a good Pastor who was careful of his Flock resolved to root up all the pretences which human sloth was wont to make and therefore drew up a shorter Form of Prayers for the celebrating of the Eucharist lest Men who hate to be confined too long being deceived by the craft of the Devil should omit this Divine Ordinance (u) Proclus de traditione divinae Missae And the Greek Church hath ever since used this Liturgy as the genuin composure of S. Chrysostom Secondly The main part of this Liturgy is found either explicitly or by plain intimations in the genuin Works of S. Chrysostom who reckons up the same Ceremonies Hymns and Prayers and generally in the same order And also upon occasion comments upon and explains both the Rites and ancient Forms and covertly refers to many more passages in this Liturgy only he would not speak out because his Homilies were Preached to a promiscuous Auditory Thirdly There is a great part of this Liturgy very pure Primitive and worthy of this great Author even so much of it as is Recorded in his own Writings and in the Works of S. Cyprian S. Cyril S. Basil S. Augustin and others or so much of it as is taken out of Holy Scripture And in all this there is nothing of Praying to Saints to Angels or the blessed Virgin nothing of any Prayers for delivering the deceased from pain nothing of venerating the Cross or any other Image The passages which look this way are later Patches tacked to this holy Liturgy in corrupter times easily distinguishable from the Original composure both by the Stile and Matter wherefore these Parts we reject but must not throw away the Wheat with the Chaff there being no Father to which some corrupt Additions have not been made but we must not for the sake of these spurious Tracts reject that which is true and genuine Fourthly Since it is so clear that Forms had been long used in the Church and that the Gift of Prayer was ceased before this Century began it cannot but be very probable that so great a Bishop of so eminent a Diocess and with so large a Jurisdiction should model and correct the ancient Forms and adapt them to the use of the Churches under his care as S. Basil had done for those under his charge especially since no ancient Author did ever contradict this Universally received Notion That this Liturgy was made by S. Chrysostom Nor doth any Historian assign any other Person as the maker thereof or mention this Liturgy as coming into use in any other Age. § 20. And now we will consider those things which are objected both against the use of Forms in this Age and against the Authority of this Liturgy my Adversary produces divers places out of S. Chrysostom to prove that Words spoken in the Celebration of the Sacraments were Mysteries which S. Chrysostom thinks ought to be concealed and therefore he supposes there were no Written Forms in his time however none of his Wrting (w) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 29. pag. 35 36 37. I have often answered this Argument before But I shall now observe That this Notion of the great Sin of divulging Mysteries to the Unbaptized hinders S. Chrysostom in his Discourses which are generally Sermons Homilies and Orations made to a promiscuous Auditory from giving as many Passages of the Ecclesiastical Forms which he generally there wraps up in dark Expressions yet his appealing to the Faithful and telling them they knew and remembred such and such things is a certain sign that there were known and prescribed Forms For how could he appeal to the Initiated or tell them they knew or remembred such or such a Passage which he darkly hinted if Sacraments had been celebrated or Prayers made in the Extempore way by Phrases daily varied Thus in those Instances which my Adversary brings Speaking of the Litany used by the Faithful S. Chrysostom saith It is a Mystery but the Initiated know how it abounds with Mercy (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chry◠in Matth. hom 71. p. 451. Disc of Liturg. pag. 29. This must be some Form which they knew otherwise he could not have made this Appeal So when this Father speaks of the mystical Words in Baptism he doubts not but those who were baptized could remember what they Answered (y) Id. Hom. 40. in 1 Cor. p 514. Disc of Liturg. Marg. pag. 29. which shews they Answered in a certain Form of Words And it appears they also had a set and certain Form of renouncing the Devil because S. Chrysostom appeals to the Initiated and bids them Remember those Words by which they renounced the Devils Tyranny (z) Hom. 2. in 2 Epist ad Cor. pag. 555. yet our Adversary by a dexterity of arguing peculiar to himself cites this to prove there was no Form of Renunciation (a) Discourse of Liturg. p. 37. By which rare Art also he quotes S. Chrysostom's Exposition of Gal IV. 28. where he saith The Faithful knew the Divine Words pronounced by the Priest at their Baptism (b) Chrys hom in 4 Galat. p. 748. Disc of Liturg. p. 37. to prove there were no Forms and yet if there had not been known Forms this Appeal could not have been made For no Dissenting Pastor who Officiates Extempore can appeal to his Congregation and say You know
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
this Extraordinary occason All which can be gathered from hence is that they had no Form of Prayer in Africa then for casting the Devil out of an House But that is no Argument to shew they had no Forms for public Worship on ordinary occasions since we have no Form for this extraordinary contigency but none must Argue from thence That we have no Common Prayer Yet Thirdly I see no Reason to grant that Quantum potuit signifies any more than that this Presbyter Prayed with as Vigorous a Devotion as he was able or with all the powers of his Soul because it is not a long-winded Prayer nor variety of new invented Phrases that the Devil fears but an earnest and fervent Prayer And we could give many Instances where this Phrase is used only to denote doing a thing earnestly and devoutly one Example shall suffice at present where the Jews who always in that Age praised God by Forms are commanded when they praise God to exalt him as much as they can (z) Benedicentes Dominum exaltate illum quantum potestis Ecclesiastic 43. in sine by which the Son of Syrach did not intend to oblige every ordinary Man to make an Extempore Form of Praise in the highest strains of Rhetoric but only enjoyned them when they used the Forms of Blessing to say them with all the joy gratitude and devotion imaginable And if we explain the Phrase thus then this Passage will not suffice to prove so much as that they had not a Form for dispossessing Houses or Persons infested with Evil Spirits Lastly He saith Augustin did not take any offence at the Varieties used in the Sacrament though they were more than could be known (a) Discourse of Liturg. pag 82. and for this he cites the Retractations which mention his Epistles to Januarius and a Passage out of his Epistle to Jubaianus intimating that every Bishop in these Cases might do as he pleased But all this is manifest Sophistry For whereas he applies this to the Eucharistical Prayers S. Augustin is not treating of any Variety in them Yea he himself cites S. Augustin in one of these Epistles affirming That there were many things in the Sacrament universally observed without any variation and these were Instituted by the Apostles (b) Disâ—ourse of â—â—turg p. 173 Marg ex Aug. ad â—anuar Ep. 118. that is the Prefaces Prayer of Consecration c. as we noted before these were Forms and not to be varied from But the Variety which S. Augustin speaks of is a Variety in Rites and Ceremonies in the Churches of divers Provinces and Countries these he Instances in and affirms there was great Variety in these and that every Bishop in these Matters had power to appoint such Rites as he thought to edification S. Augustin being only a Bishop no Primate or Metropolitan would not impose the Rites used in his own Church upon any But as to the main parts of this Service he often observes all Churches did and ought to agree in them Wherefore it shews a want of better Arguments when he is forced to urge the Variety of Rites in divers Provinces to prove that they varied the Prayers themselves every day which false Notion neither he nor any of his Friends have or can make out And this may suffice for S. Augustin's Judgment and Practice both which are clearly on our side § 23. The Third Council of Carthage An. Dom. 398. We should here have concluded this Century but only our Adversary produces some African Canons and pretends they shew there was no prescribed Form at this Time in that Church First He cites the 23d Canon of the Third Council at Carthage (c) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 44. in these Words That no Man in Prayers shall name either the Father for the Son or the Son for the Father And when they are at the Altar the Prayer shall always be directed to the Father And what Prayers-soever any shall Copy out for himself he shall not use them unless he first debate them with his Discreeter Brethren (d) Concil Carthag 3. Can 23. Bin. Tom. 1. par 1 pag. 575. This Canon evidently consists of Three parts The first to correct the irregularity of naming the Father for the Son or the Son for the Father and hence my Adversary infers That those who were guilty of this Fault did not use prescribed Forms and supposes the Church left them at liberty for the future to use what they thought sit only imposing this on them Not to name the Father for the Son (e) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 45. I Answer This first Clause for any thing appears in the Canon is meant of private Prayers and so is nothing to our Question it was a Fault committed by private Christians who had the misfortune to Copy out Heretical Forms But suppose the Council refers to those Ignorant Bishops lately mentioned in S. Augustin who for the use of their own Diocesses writ out Heretical Forms not knowing them to be such wherein those who held Heterodox Opinions about the Trinity had altered these Names in favour of Sabellianism or Arianism These were Forms and no doubt prescribed by these Bishops to their own Clergy but the Council rejects all these new Forms and reduceth them to the old Liturgy which they were sure was Orthodox and wherein we see the Prayers began with an Address to the Father and concluded through the Son so that they order None shall begin with the Sons Name or end with the Fathers However it cannot well be understood how this Council could prevent such Ignorant persons from making this Mistake but by obliging them to use the Churches Forms where they take it for granted these Names were always right placed So that in effect this prohibits all new Forms of Prayer and binds them to the Old ones wherein such Instances could not be made And our Adversary supposes this Council to be extreme Silly in saying they left such Men as he grants (f) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 46. were fit to be confined to prescribed Forms because they could neither make nor judge of Prayers to their liberty to do as they thought fit this makes the Canon Non-sense for how should these Men know when they ought to name the Father and when the Son and exposes the whole Council who could no way prevent this Mistake but by casting away all such new Forms and confining all Men to the Old ones and without supposing such we cannot make Sense of the Canon which Supposition is not made at random because we have abundantly proved out of Tertullian S. Cyprian Optatus and S. Augustin who was one of this Council that there were Forms used of Ancient time in the African Church The second Clause of the Canon refers to the public Prayers all which and not only those peculiar to the Eucharist were then made at the Altar And these Prayers were then in the public Forms as