Liturgies and chose out the best things from each put them together in one Volume and then required these Forms should be daily used so that both Priests and People might be accustomed to them And as S. Gregory did not impose the Roman Liturgy or Canon upon Augustin the Monk who lived in a distant Country and in a distinct National Church so we do not impose ours upon Denmark or Sweden upon the Dutch or the Helvetians But to argue from hence We are not for imposing our own Liturgy upon our own Clergy is so weak so obvious a Fallacy as deserves to be laughed at rather than seriously confuted Again because Gregory the Patriarch of the West took the liberty to correct the Roman Offices by that which he approved of in the Forms of other National Churches (w) Disc of Liturgies p. 87. And because he would not impose the Trine Immersion used at Rome upon Leander's New Converted distant Church in Spain (x) Gregor Ep. 41. ad laeanat lib. 1. Therefore every Parish-Priest and private Minister may vary from the Liturgy of his own Church daily if he please And therefore no Bishops ought to impose any Liturgy upon their own Clergy living under them in the same Diocess or Nation This is such woful Sophistry that I am sure he cannot impose this sort of Arguing upon any rational Men yet if these Inferences be not drawn from S. Gregory's Answer it makes nothing to his purpose unless it be to prove there were no Forms imposed in Gregory's Time But how can that be squeezed out of any of these Passages The Epistle first cited supposes a Form of Prayers extant and imposed at Rome before S. Gregory's Time wherein the Hallelujah was never sung but between Easter and Pentecost which ordered the Sub-Deacons to wear Surplices when they sang the Litany in Processions in which Litany by the old Form they did not repeat the Kyrie Eleeson often nor was the Lords Prayer in the Communion Office of that old Book prescribed to be used immediately after the Canon But this Epistle shews that Gregory had altered the ancient Liturgy of Rome in all these Particulars and made it agreeable to the Liturgy at Constantinople from which place he was lately come And this he was censured for by some this he excuses in the whole Epistle (y) Gregor Ep. 63. lib. 7. pag. 230. Wherefore here was a Form imposed before his Time and he imposes it again with his Corrections upon his own Church or else what need the Clergy under his Jurisdiction complain Indeed he did not impose it on Spain France or Britain which were not in that Age under his Authority but he was strict enough at Rome and in the Churches then subject to that See He corrected the Book of Gelasius and imposed that there He compiled Hymns and Antiphons and brought in a New way of Singing them teaching Boys to do it with skill so that soon after all the West imitated that Way (z) Johan Diac. vit Greg. lib. 2. cap. 6. He compiled that Book for the Communion-Service which still is called his Sacramentary wherein are all the Forms used at Rome for the Eucharist (a) Id. ib. c. 17. He brought in the Sevenfold Litany and prescribed how and when it should be used (b) Naucler Gen 20. p. 743. Platin. pag. 82. Johan Diac. in vit And all these Parts of Liturgy were by him imposed on the Roman Church and will my Adversary still pretend he was against the imposing Forms of Praise and Prayer Did he take all this pains for his own private use Did all the West voluntarily conform to this and yet was it not used and observed at Rome any further than the Clergy pleased These are wild Conjectures But he saith Cassander publishes the Ordo Romanus in which there are no Forms of Prayer but only the Order wherein they proceeded I Reply Those Copies which Cassander publisheth are only a Breviat of S. Gregory's Liturgy and therefore the Hymns and Prayers he composed are not set down at large there yet when this was writ out these Forms were so well known that they are named often only by two words of the beginning of each Form Ex. gr Gloria Patri Kyrie Eleeson Gloria in excelsis Dominus vobiscum c. (c) Cassander de Liturg. lib. â Which shews the Forms were then well known and had been so long used as to be understood by short hints in this Epitome of the Gregorian Office But my Adversary knew well that the Sacramentary of Gregory is extant in his Works wherein all the Prayers and Antiphons c. are set down at large which Gregory made and imposed on the Roman Church and therefore it is disingenuous in him to argue for his pretended liberty from this Epitome There is but one thing more in my Adversary relating to this Matter which is That Augustin being not imposed on by S Gregory would not impose it on the Britains (d) Disc of Lit. pag. 87 88. which he gathers from this viz. That the Britains and Scots were Enemies to the Roman Use in Gildas his Time and had no Uniformity in Worship long after Now to his Position I say That if Augustin followed Gregory's Advice as no doubt he did then he did impose not the Roman Forms but those of his own collecting upon the Saxons which I shall prove more largely afterwards But as for the Britains they were a distinct Christian Church then and did owe no manner of subjection to Augustin so that it had been ridiculous iâ him to have imposed a Newly compâââd Liturgy upon them They were no more obliged to receive his Forms than we are to receive those of Geneva or they to observe ours Again as to his Proof How doth the Britains rejecting the Roman Use in Gildas's Time prove That they had no Forms imposed on them by Augustin Gildas died according to Bishop Vsher An. 570. that is Thirty years before Augustin the Monk came in (e) Cave Cartoph Eccles in Gild. Badon pag. so that their dislike of the Roman Usages then is nothing to Augustin's Impositions Besides The Roman Liturgy and Augustin's were two different things and therefore it is very weak to prove they did not receive Augustin's Liturgy from their rejecting the Roman Usage since they were different things So that this would be a good Argument if it were not as destitute of Logic and Chronology as it is of Truth For Augustin did make a Form and impose it on the Saxons under his Jurisdiction and they received it and used it long after As for the Britains Scots and Irish in that Age they belonged not to him and so he could impose nothing on them And for their Uniformity I shall clear that Point after a little while For what hath been observed I hope may suffice to prove That imposed Liturgies were in use in all Churches long before the Time of
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. âag 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-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
was a Form composed with great Art and committed to Memory before it was first spoken and was designed to work upon the Affections of a Croud of Men in a Secular Court and in a Temporal Cause and in that Case even Theatrical Gestures and the Artificial Acting of it were apt to move the Auditory more than the bare Reading it in a private Room to a few Friends Plân epist lib. 2. Ep. 19. But what is this to the Case of Prayers Pliny durst not have come before that Auditory with an Extempore Harangue such as our Dissenters dare come into the presence of God and a great Congregation with He designed no more by his Action but only to work upon the Frailties of Men but our Adversaries I hope will not own That their only design in Prayer is to move the Affections of their Hearers by Tone Gestures Noise and Fluency We who use Forms as Pliny did and generally have them by Heart as he had can repeat them as vigorously as he did the first time and thereby do keep all pious Men in our Congregations very attentive But still we remember we speak to the Most High God before whom our Words ought to be well weighed and our Desires properly expressed because he is not wrought upon by Noise and Action as silly Men and Women are If our Petitions be sincere and hearty prudently Worded in proper Phrases and repeated with new Devotion every day the God we pray to likes them no worse for being daily in the same Words And Pliny could not have wondred at us for Reading daily the same Forms of Prayer for He and all the Priests of his Religion prayed so to their Gods and did not believe the Deities affected Change and Variety or were moved with Gesticulations and Tones Nor would that Judicious Heathen have been so weak as to compare his popular Orations to the Prayers he offered up to his Gods And since he appeals to Pliny to judge between Forms and Extempore we will hear what he and others say of these two Ways even with respect to Civil Pleadings Pliny brings in Pollio saying Pleading agreeably I pleaded often but by Pleading often I came to plead not so well for by too often using this I got an easiness rather than a faculty and not so much an assurance as a sort of rashness (y) assâduitate nimià facilitas magis quam facultas nec fiducia sed temiritas paratur Plin lib. 6. ep 29. And if our Dissenting Brethren had the modesty to confess it I fear they find the same effects of using this Gift when they plead at another Bar. The Grave Tacitus also derides Q. Huterius an Orator who was very ready at Extempore Speeches saying His Orations did not survive him For whereas other Mens Labour and Meditation lasted to Posterity his Noisy fluent way died with him (z) Huterii Canorum illud pr âââns cum ipso s mul extinctum est Ticât Annal. lib. 4. §. 61. pag. â13 So despicable was this kind of Eloquence in those days Again Lampridius saith The Wise Emperour Alexander Severus Suffered not any of his Counsellors to answer him concerning great Affairs till they had well thought upon them (a) Ne inceâitati dicere cogerentur de reâus ingentibus Lamprâd in vit Al. Sev. p. 524. Plutarch also Arguing against Extempore Orations tells us a Story of a young Painter who shewed Apelles a piece of his Work and bragged how little time he had done it in To whom that great Master Replied I saw by the Work it was done in haste (b) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Plut. de liber educ pag. 6. But none is more severe than Seneca upon a Philosopher of quick Invention who used this way This Rapid and Copious way of Speaking saith he is much fitter for a Jugler or Mountebank than one that is about a great and serious Matter (c) Istam vim docendi rapidam atque abundantem aptiorem esse circulatori quam agenti rem magnam seriam Senec. Ep. 40. pag. 101. And I suppose it will be granted That Praying is as great and serious a Matter as a Philosophical Lecture I shall conclude with S. Hierom's Opinion of Gregory Nazianzen's Extempore Preaching which he had heard and could well judge of it Nothing is so easie as to deceive the Vulgar People and an Illiterate Assembly with the Volubility of the Tongue because they do most admire that which they least understand (d) Nihil tam facile est quam vilem plebeculam indoctam concionem linguae volubilitate decâpere quae quicquid non intelligit plus admiratur Hicron ad Nepot Ep. 2 pag. 16. This he spake of his Master and thus he censured the Extempore Preaching of an Eminent Father in that Age And if any had then pretended to Pray at that rate it is more than probable he would severely have exposed the Boldness and Folly of hoping to please God by that contemptible Faculty which was admired only by that ignorant Croud who were deceived by it To conclude this Point I dare refer it to any Man who duly considers the Majesty of God Whether the grave and affectionate Reading of a well-studied and judicious Form of Prayer expressed in proper and pious Words be not more fit to be presented to him and more likely to be accepted by him than a rash unpremeditated Rhapsody without Method strength of Reason or Propriety of Phrase The latter by Noise and Action may operate more upon the Passions of Weak Men but the former is more suitable to the infinite Majesty of him whom we only desire to please when we Pray § 4. After this he Argues that the ancienâ Church had no Liturgies or Books of public Prayers and therefore could have no prescribed or imposed Forms And he would prove they had no Books by the Case of Athanasius his not being accused for abusing the Liturgy nor the Arians for Burning any thing but Bibles by Constantin 's employing Eusebius only to Transcribe the Scripture by the Council of Carthage 's Decree for only holding a Book of the Gospels over the Bishops Head And by the Persecutors finding no Liturgy in their Searches after the Christians Books (e) Disc of Lit. p. 12 13 14 15. c. to the 20th To which I answer First in general that I have made it so Evident that there were prescribed Forms and Books of Hymns and Prayers in these Ages that a negative Argument taken from some few Authors in some places not mentioning them is of no Force against plain and positive proof But Secondly We will examin his particulars and shew that they do not make out his Point First His own Quotation concerning Athanasius expresly saith that Macarius who was employed by Athanasius did Burn ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the Holy Books (f) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Socrat. l. 1. cap. 20. p. 539. he Translates it fraudulently in the
was the very Case of Liturgies then they were writ down but kept secret from the Unbelievers though at the same time they were known to all the Faithful And for his alledging pag 42. That Writing them out for many Châââââes must needs divulge them The Formed Epistles also were written out for every Bishop and a Copy transcribed as often as any of his Diocess was to Travel into a strange Country by shewing which to the Bishop of that remote City who had a like Form written down beside him this Stranger was admitted to Catholic Communion So that these were Written often out and yet kept secret from Hereticks as the Liturgies were also written out frequently yet still kept from the sight and hearing of the Catechumens or if any of them by chance came to the sight or knowledge of the Liturgick Forms he confesseth pag. 43 that Man was immediately Baptized and so obliged to keep all secret from those without And as to what he saith there of the Pagans torturing Christians to get out the Secrets of their Worship that proceeding was over long before the Age wherein he saith this Secrecy was so strictly practised And therefore he should not urge those Methods But if we grant this Concealing Mysterios began sooner there is no doubt but the Faithful were taught to be as resolute not to publish their Mysteries as they were not to deny their Faith so that there was no danger of their being published by Tortures Finally If the People had all their Responses and their part of the Liturgy by Heart as they might easily have there was no need of Writing out the Forms for them as he insinuates pag. 44. and so that could be no occasion of publishing the Forms to Unbelievers To conclude There is nothing in this tedious Ramble of my Adversaries for 16 Pages together which doth in the least prove That the Christian Mysteries were not celebrated by Written Forms and therefore there is nothing in it to his purpose but on the contrary much of it tends to prove That the Divine-Service was then performed by Prescribed Forms § 8. The next thing which looks like an Argument is his deducing the Fathers Extempore Praying from their Extempore Preaching For when he hath spent many Pages in proving That Origen Cyril Nazianzen Chrysostom Atticus Hierom and Augustin Preached ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or Extempore He concludes at last in these Words Thus they did Preach and thus they might Pray (a) Disc of Lit. pag 50 to pag. 60. I Answer He seems very dubious he dare say no more than It is possible they might Pray so But still it is possible also they might pray by Forms and it is more than probable they did so because this Author hath ransacked every Corner of Antiquity and cannot produce one plain Evidence wherein any of these or other Fathers who are commended for Preaching thus are either affirmed to have Prayed ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or Extempore or commended for that Gift which our Adversaries think was then and is now one of the main Qualifications for the Ministry We need not doubt but if he had found any such thing he would have brought it out with all imaginable Triumph and Ostentation He that is forced to spend so much Paper to force two obscure Phrases into a Sense for his purpose viz. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and de Pectore which do but remotely hint That in the Ages of Inspiration when Justin Martyr and Tertullian lived they prayed without Book How would he have triumphed if he could have met with any plain Evidence of their Praying Extempore This would have done his business at once and gon far toward ending the Controversie But when this Author cannot find one word of this but is forced here to falsifie Nazianzen most grosly and pervert the Meaning of S. Ambrose as was shewed before to make out a remote Conjecture but he hath not one Positive Proof no not here where his Cause needed it so extreamly We may conclude there is no Evidence that any of these Fathers did pray Extempore in Public and thence it will follow that after the Fourth Century began the Gift of Prayer was ceased and the Usage of the Church was to pray by Forms yea these very Fathers who preached Extempore and so could have invented their Public Prayers as well as their Public Sermons having acquired that Faculty yet did not see fit to use it in their Addresses to God because they considered the Greatness of His Majesty and the Care and Caution to be used in speaking to Him before whom Angels voil their Faces their Sermons were only spoken to mortal Men but their Prayers addressed to a Glorious Immortal God therefore they took freedom in the one but durst not in the other There they used holy and known Forms not out of necessity but choice which shews their Judgment was That Forms were the best way of Serving God in public especially and though they were better Qualified than our Dissenting Brethren for Extempore Praying they rejected that Method All this we have reason to believe from the Universal Silence concerning Extempore Prayer in all these Ages wherein we see they do observe there was an use of Extempore Preaching and if this Gift of Praying on the sudden had been so admirable a thing and so necessary to qualifie a Man for the Ministry 't is impossible but there would have been some memorial of the use of it and some of the Fathers must have been commended for excelling in it but no such matter appearing while yet there are plain and express Proofs of Liturgies we conclude that none then did use to pray Extempore in a Public Congregation § 9. After this he Argues from the Liberty the Ancients took to use several Forms in Baptism with great variety That they also used as much Liberty in their Prayers (b) Disc of Lit. pag. 93. yet he tells us at first That Tertullian saith The Law of Baptism is imposed and the Form prescribed by Christ (c) Lex namque tingendi impositâ est Fârma praescripta Tertul de Bapt. cap. 13. viz. in those words Matth. xxviii 19. Go teach all Nations and baptize them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Now it will not easily be believed that the Holy Fathers who took this prescribed Form to be a Law bound upon them by the Authority of Christ himself should think themselves at liberty to alter this Form as they pleased especially since we know the Ancients generally declared those Hereticks Baptism to be null and void who did not Baptize in this very Form of Words (d) Can. Apost Can. 49. Cyâr ad Jubai Epist 73. Concil Niâend Can. ult item Sozom. lib. 6. cap. 26. Which is a strong Proof that these Holy Fathers believed this Form to be invariable Let us therefore see how he makes out the contrary Why First his Text and Margen
Liturgy was imposed on the Roman Clergy and those of Aquileia and Ravenna upon the Clergy subject to those Churches And then my Adversaries whole Book which is written to assert that Liturgies were not imposed before the end of the Fifth or beginning of the Sixth Age that is 200 year after is false and utterly wrong And then also the Church of England both in composing a Form and imposing it imitates a very pure Age of the Church viz. The time a little before the begining of the Fourth Century or thereabouts and hath the Prescription of 1400 years to justifie her in both But because his main Author is Vostius we will here observe what that learned Man freely owns as to Creeds viz. That there was a âorm in the Oriental Church very like to that which is called the Apostles Creed long before the Council of Nice And this which we call the Apostles Creed was the Roman Form bâfâre the time of that same Council and the Creed of Aquileia differed from this but very little (r) Vosâ de trib âymb diss 1. §. â0 pag. 24. Again he saith these Forms were not made by any General Council and were so old in Ruffinus his time that they were taken to be Apostolical (s) Ibid. §. 45. pag. 31. And the Church of Jerusalem had a Form which seems to have been elder than any of them being explained by S Cyril An. 350. and then delivered as from a very ancient Tradition (t) Ibid. §. 51. pag. 34. And both he and Grotius who fancy the Creed consisted at first of no more Articles than those of the Trinity do believe the remaining Articles about the Catholic Church the Remission of Sins the Resurrection of the Body and the Life everlasting were added as early as Tertullian's Time So that if these Authors Conjectures be allowed then there were Forms of Creeds in every great and eminent Church before the Third Century began From whence I thus Argue in my Adversaries own way and almost in his very words It is not probable that they who had a Creed in a Set Form in every Principal Church and did impose this Form to be learned and used by all that were Admitted Members of that Church by Baptism even before the Third Century should not also have their Set Forms of Prayer to the use of which all the Members of that Church and all under its Jurisdiction were obliged How credible and likely is it that they who did not leave their Creed at liberty also did not allow Arbitrary Prayers Since Heresies might creep in by the way of Extempore Prayers and Hymns as easily as by the use of various and arbitrary Creeds If they thought it requisite to limit the Rule of Faith for this Reason there was the very same Reason to Limit the Prayers Supplications Lauds and Litanies (u) See the Disc of Lit. p. 102 103. This is his way of Arguing upon a false Supposition That the Creed was not in a Set Form in the First Ages Wherefore since it appears by his own Authors that it was in a Set Form in or before the Third Century he must allow this to be a firm Argument against him It is nothing to my Question to enter into the Controversie Whether the Apostles themselves made that Creed which goes under their Name But after I have considered all that Vossius c. have said in this Matter I am verily persuaded That the Apostles themselves did make one Form of Faith at first but did not commit it to writing because it was to be taught orally to every Christian at his Baptism and kept as the Cognizance to distinguish between Hereticks and true Believers and the likeness of all the ancient Forms to one another shews they had one and the same Original at first and were derived from the first Planters of Christianity As for the variety between these ancient Forms in several Churches it was the natural and necessary effect of delivering it Orally which in distant Countries and in tract of Time by passing through divers hands must needs produce some small difference in the Order and Words and that shews That Oral Tradition is not so safe a way to convey Articles of Faith as Writing and though the Apostles had left the Scripture to be a standing Rule to secure the Creed from any dangerous Corruption yet it was necessary to have this short Form besides to teach the Candidates for Baptism But if the Reader desire to see this more fully proved I refer him to a Learned Book writ by a very Worthy Author Mr. G. Ashwell Wherein both by Arguments and evidence of Antiquity it is strongly and clearly made out that this Creed was made by the Apostles themselves (w) ãâã Apoâââ or â Dâscourse aâââting the Antââs and Autââ ãâ¦ã Creed P inted at Oââa 1683. And there it may be seen how bold my Adversary is to give Ruffinus the Lye since all the Writers of that Age generally agree in the same thing There also it appears that my Adversary is grosly mistaken in affirming that the Ancients took no notice of this Creed for above 300 Years As for his Arguing That the subsequent Creeds varying from it shews they did not own that to be Apostolical especially since they preferred their own Forms before it on the most solemn occasions (x) Disc of Lât ãâ¦ã it proceeds upon a Mistake For Vossius owns that the later superadded Creeds were only taken to be Commentaries on the Former and clearer explications of such Articles as the Hereticks had attempted to pervert and he shews that they did not cast off nor disuse the ancient Form when they made these New ones They kept the Apostles Creed still and used that in the most solemn Office of Baptism Yea they gave it the precedence before all other Creeds and therefore the Third General Council says They received in the first place the Creed delivered to them by the most Holy Apostles and then the Confession made by 318 Holy Fathers in the City of Nice (y) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. Act. Concil Ephesin Bin. Tom. I. par 2. pag. 415. Wherefore this was used and reckoned in the first place even after other Creeds came in Finally He need not wonder that the Creed in the Constitutions is not the same with that which we call the Apostles because no Man pretends now that the Apostles made those Constitutions The Creed found there as we have shewed is the Apostles Form as it was varied at Antioch about the Year 330 which Daillé owns to be the Time when that Clemens writ the Constitutions (z) Daill praef ad Dissert de relig cult objecto not the Year 500 as my Adversary falsly pretends (a) Disc of Lit. pag. 111. Now it is no wonder that the same Form in 300 Years time should be varied as much in two several Churches so far distant as Rome and
be trusted with making Extempore Prayers and therefore it seems necessary that these Bishops should have Forms prescribed which they either Read or got them by Heart and if so then such Forms were used above 50 years before the Period he assigns As for his last Instance of Leo's not admitting any one to be a Bishop unless he were perfect in the Psalter I observe that this Emperor intended to prevent that Scandal which had been given by those few unlearned Bishops in former Times and therefore would have none admitted but such as well understood the Psalter which was a great part of the Liturgy and part of it to be Read every day among the Prayers so that it is very probable that the usual Forms of public Prayer were put into one Volume with the Psalter as our Common Prayer is at this day And I understand the Historians meaning to be That Leo would admit no Man into any Order of the Clergy who was not perfect in the public Book of Offices (k) Theodor. Lector Col. lib. 1. p. 182. and if it be so Expounded then it proves a constant and common use of Liturgies An. 460. However it is well known that whatever was the lowest measure for qualifying a Man to be Ordained there were very many Learned Clergy-Men in that Age Yea and in the following Century also But if the Church were so depraved as he represents it some time before and a little after the year 500 We have sufficiently shewed it doth not hurt the cause of Liturgies which were certainly come into use many Ages before And thus I will dismiss these Fraudulent and Invidious Reflections upon the Fourth and Fifth Centuries desiring the Readers Pardon for following my Adversary in so Tedious a Digression CHAP. V. Of the Agreement of the Reformed Churches in the Approbation and use of Liturgies § 1. THere remains nothing now to make out prescribed Forms of Prayer to be agreeable to Vincentius Lirinensis his Golden-Rule that is to have been used always by all Churches and every where (l) Vincent Lirin contra Haeres cap. 3. pag. 6. But only to prove the Reformed Divines do generally allow and commend Liturgies and all the Eminent Protestant Churches use them Now since the Learned and Pious Promoters of the Reformation did so narrowly examine into and so Unanimously reject all those Doctrins and Practices of the Roman Church which did not agree to Holy Scripture and pure Antiquity and yet none of them did ever reckon prescribed Forms among those Corruptions but approved and established them in those Churches which they had reformed we may conclude That Set Forms of Prayers and Liturgies are ageeable to Gods Word and to the usage of the best Ages of the Church And we have at this time a more particular reason to make out this Consent of all setled Protestant Churches as to the use of prescribed Forms Because our Adversaries are perpetually calling upon us to conform our selves to the Example of Foreign Reformed Churches and pretending that to allow their way will be a certain means to unite all Protestants both at home and abroad We confess the end is a thing at this Juncture very desirable but that which they suppose is so far from being a probable means to obtain it That if we should cast off our prescribed Forms and set up their Extempore and Arbitrary way of Praying we should act contrary to the Judgment of the best Protestant Writers and to the Practice of the most famous Protestant Churches every where but by continuing the use of our excellent Liturgy and binding all our Clergy to it we follow the advice and example of all our Sister Churches And can they imagin that to oblige a few obstinate and singular leading Men and their Ignorant and Enthusiastical followers we will bring such a reproach upon our Church as to cast away that Method of Praying which is so consonant to Scripture and Antiquity and so agreeable to the Opinion and practice of the best Protestants It would be madness in us to do this and it is little less in them to expect it However because some of them are to this day deluded with this gross mistake That prescribed Forms are some of the remains of Popery and a Liturgy established is not allowed in other Protestant Churches I shall conclude this Discourse with some few proofs of the Opinion and Practice of the most Eminent Divines and Churches of the Reformation both Foreign and Domestic and that in relation as well to Liturgies in general as to our Liturgy in particular when I have first observed that the Learned and Industrious Mons Durell hath Collected a great number of these Testimonies some of which I have here inserted and added others of my own observation referring the Reader for fuller satisfaction to his elaborate Book (m) Durell View of the Gov. and public Worship of God in the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas Print Lând 1662. I begin with the Lutheran Churches among whom the Reformation first began and who at this day do far exceed in number the Churches which follow Calvins Method and afford the greatest number of Foreign Protestants § 2. And First for Luther himself There is no Man can or dare Question his Approbation of Liturgies and prescribed Forms of Prayer it being well known that he appointed such Forms for all those Churches which he Reformed and in his works we have a Form of Common Prayer for the Church of Wittenburgh drawn up by himself out of the Mass-Book but so as to leave out that which he thought to be Superstitious and Corrupted (n) Forma Mist pro Eccles Wittenburg Ep. Luther Tom. II. p. 384. And all the Churches of his Communion at this day have and use a Liturgy containing Collects Epistles and Gospels for every Sunday in the year And also Set Forms of Hymns and Canticles Prayers and Litanies together with prescribed Offices for all other parts of Ecclesiastical Ministrations for Baptism and the Lords Supper for Matrimony Visiting the Sick Burying the Dead c. One of which lately Printed in a large Quarto in the Danish Tongue imposed on and used in the Churches of Denmark was lately shewed and in divers places intepreted to me by an ingenious Pastor of that Country Mons Ivarus de Brinch who came over with the Forces into England the last Winter An. 1689. And besides the Agreement between our Collects Epistles and Gospels and theirs I observed that their Litany is almost Verbatim the same with ours And the Churches in upper Germany which are Lutheran have all such Liturgies I have one Book Dedicated to Joachim Marquesse of Brandenburgh Collected by Christopher Cornerus Printed at Leipsick An. 1588. with this Title The select Canticles of the Old and New Testament with the pure Hymns and Collects which are wont to be sung in the Orthodox and Catholic Church He means of the Lutherans who do all to this
day Chant or Sing their public Prayers as we do in our Cathedrals Now this Book contains their Canticles and Hymns as also the Versicles Responses and Collects for every Sunday and Holy-day in the year very like to those in our Common-Prayer and a Litany exactly agreeing with ours in the Petitions the Order and the Responses And all these Offices are paraphrased by Cornerus (o) Cantica selâcta cum Hymnâ Collectâs purââribus c. per ââr Cornârum ãâã 1588. To which Litany aforesaid I doubt but not Rivius alludes in his directions to a Parish-Priest when as to Praying in times of Calamity he saith you have ready a Litany in the Vulgar Tongue which you may use on that occasion for all that is necessary to be asked both in public and private are briefly contained there (p) Jo. Râvii opera Lib. de Officio pastorali pag. 705. Besides I have also lately seen another Book published by Jo. Federus with this Title A Book containing the Doctrine Administration of the Sacraments and Ecclesiastical Rites c. used in the Territories of the Dukes of Mecklenburg (q) Liber continens Doctrinam Adminâstrat Sacram. c. in ditione Duc. Megapolensium ârancfera An. 1562. In which there are Forms of Prayer and Praise and prescribed Offices for all sorts of Christian Service especially under the Title of Ceremonies (r) Ibid. pag. 189 c. And in a word all the Lutheran Churches every where impose and constantly use these Set Forms in their public Worship and their most Eminent Divines approve of this as may be seen in Melanchton who enjoyns the reciting the express Words of the Holy Forms (s) Melancht oper Tom. 3. exp in 6 Math. pag. 323. Chemnitius saith The Romanists unjustly condemn our Churches because in the Celebration of the Lords Supper they choose as did the Ancients to use Forms of Prayer which are Analogous to the Faith and tend to edifie the Church suitably to these Times in which are comprehended all the substantial things which were used in the Prayers of the Ancients (t) Mart. Chemnitii exam Concil Trid. par 2. pag. 91. He grants indeed they are not the very same with the Primitive Liturgies in all things but affirms that they agree with them in the Essential parts I will name but one more viz. a Learned Danish Divine who hath writ a general System of Theology And he upon this Question Whether it be lawful to use prescribed Forms of Prayer Determines That it is lawful for all and necessary for many to use a certain and prescribed Form of Words in Prayer (u) Caspari Brochmondi Theol. System vniv Par. 2. cap. 3. Casu 15. pag. 494. To go on The Protestant Churches in Poland and Lithuania in two Synods held there Ann. 1633. 1634. enjoyned one certain Liturgy to be used in all those Dominions The Preface to which is printed at large by Mons Durell (w) Durel vt suââ in appând pag. 321. to which Author I shall also refer the Reader for an account of the several Liturgies used in Bremen Hessen Transilvania Hungary Bohemia c. (x) Id ibid. Sââ 1. Num. 3. 37 â8 39 c. p. â p. 34ââ5 c. And I will only add that Memorable passage in the Confession of Augsburgh All those Rites are to be observed which can be performed without Sin and which conduce to good Order in the Church such as certain Holy days certain Holy things to be Sung and other such Rites (y) Cânfâss ãâã Art 15. pag. 25. By Holy things to be Sung They mean their Prayers which are all Sung in the Lutheran Churches as we noted but now § 3. But perhaps some may Imagin that those Churches who were Reformed by Calvin Zuinglius or others are not so much for prescribed Forms as the Lutherans I will therefore here add a brief account of the Churches and Divines of Geneva France Helvetia Holland c. I begin with the Famous Calvin whose words have been often repeated but must be set down once more because our obstinate Adversaries who pretend so much Reverence for him do not regard them As to the Form of Prayer and Ecclesiastical Rites I do highly approve it should be certain from which it may not be lawful for any Minister to vary in the exercise of his Function as well in Consideration of the Weakness and Ignorance of some as that it may more certainly appear how all the Churches agree among themselves And lastly that there may be a stop put to the giddy Lightness of some who affect some kind of Novelties and I have shewed before that a Form of Catechism also is good on the same account So therefore There ought to be A stated Form of Catechizing a stated Form of Administring the Sacraments and a public Form of Prayers (z) Calvin ad Protect Angl. Epist 87. pag. 165. This was Calvins advice to the great Manager of the Reformation in England under the Pious King Edward 6th Whereby we may discern that he highly approves of making and strictly imposing one certain Liturgy and gives three weighty Reasons why it must be imposed upon all the Clergy which Reasons continue in full force even to this very day and therefore if our Adversaries will allow him for an Umpire in this Case they must conform to this Liturgy which is much more pure now than it was in Calvins days and all those Tolerabiles ineptiae as he boldly called them are now wholly left out But to proceed Calvin himself also made a Form of Divine Service which is used to this day in the Churches of France and in that of Geneva and their Ministers are bound to the use of those Forms in all their public Administrations And I observe that Beza cites this Form of Prayer and particularly that part of it which is concerning the Ministration of the Lords Supper made as he tells us by Mr. Calvin wherein he saith they had retained the Primitive Form Lift up your Hearts with a proper Paraphrase upon it and also kept many ancient Rites (a) Theodor. Ieâ âesp ad âranc bald inter Tract Theol Tom II. pag. 229. And Moses Amyraldus speaks of this Liturgy when he saith And here for Example sake I will Commemorate that great Wisdom and Temper with which those public Forms of public Prayer were first composed which the Churches of France and Geneva do use so that the very Papists have put some of them into those several little Prayer Books which they publish in the Vulgar Tongue and deliver to their own People (b) Amyrald de secess ab Eccles p. 225. assuring us he had seen this with his own Eies otherwise he could scarce have believed it And a little before this Author wishes that all Reformed Churches would contribute their several Symbols so as all Protestants might agree in one Common Form of Prayer (c) Id. ibid. p.
do good (c) Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 6. Now these being the constant and common wants of all Men and things daily needful for every one it was most fit to ask them in a set Form of Words and if they had pray'd for these things Extempore Clemens could not have been so positive in the Method as he seems to be I had almost forgot one of his Objections which is That the Christians then lifted up their Hands and Eyes to Heaven in Prayer which shews they had no Books (d) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 9. Clem. Alex. ibid. I reply It proves no such matter because though the Priest did read his part out of a Book the People might lift up their Hands and Eyes so long as he prayed alone and by frequent use of the common Forms both they and he would be so ready at the accustomed Words as to have liberty enough to look off from their Books and look up to Heaven as we in this Church often do in the use of our Liturgy § 4. At the same time flourished Tertullian Tertullian An. Dom. 192. in whose Works we have sufficient evidence that they used Forms of Prayer and Praises For he declares That Christ hath fixed a new Form of Prayer for us who are his Disciples viz. The Lord's Prayer which he expounds in a peculiar Tract (e) Tertul. de Orat. cap. 1. And in divers places calls it The lawful and the ordinary Prayer (f) De Orat. cap. 9. de Jejun cap. 15. pag. 553. de fuga in persec cap. 2. there being clear proof in him that the Christians daily repeated this very Form Now if they used but one Form in their Devotions they could not think Forms were unlawful nor imagine that Forms stinted the Spirit as our Dissenters now believe Yea that they used in public to pray by Forms seems to be intimated in that Passage That the Christians met together and as if they were drawn up to Battel did joyntly set upon God with their Prayers which Violence was acceptable to the Almighty (g) Quasi manu factâ precationibus ambiamus haec vis Deo grata est Tertul. Apol. cap. 39. for this implies their joyning Voices as well as Hearts And though he do not give us the very words of their Litany because he writ to the Unbelievers yet he describes some of the things which they desired of God to bestow on the Emperours viz. That they might have a long life and a quiet Empire that their Family might be safe their Armies valiant their Senate faithful their People virtuous and that the whole World might be in peace (h) Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. And it must be noted that Tertullian could not have quoted these particulars as a proof of the Christians Loyalty if they had not generally asked these very things Extempore Prayers would have been so various that they could have been no evidence in this or any other case Moreover he calls the Offices used in the celebration of the Eucharist Divine and Solemn Rites and adds That after these solemn Rites were finished the People were dismissed (i) Dominica solennia transacta solennia dimissa plebe Tert. de anim cap. 9. where though he studiously avoid reciting any part of the Office yet he intimates by that Phrase it was a Form because Solennes Preces Solemn Prayers among the Romans were those certain and solemn words in Prayer from which they might not vary (k) Brisson de formul lib. 1. pag. 61. He also saith concerning Baptism That Christ had not only imposed the Law of Baptizing but also prescribed the Form of it (l) Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 13. So that Baptism doubtless was performed then by a certain and set Form and though our Adversary argues that Tertullian uses variety of Words concerning this Form (m) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 94. 95. yet it is to be noted that this is only in his discoursing concerning it where Tertullian doth not pretend to cite the words but mentions the thing occasionally As to the Laudatory part of the Service it appears from him that they sang Psalms and Hymns alternately and therefore in Forms (n) Tert. ad uxor lib. 2. pag. 172. one of which Forms was the Gloria Patri which he describes as Irenaeus did by the last words World without end Amen For he asks the Christians If they could give testimony to a Gladiator in the Theatre with that Mouth which said Amen in the Church or if they could say World without end to any but God or Christ (o) Ex ore que Amen in sanctum protuleris gladiatori testimonium reddere ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã alii omnino dicere nisi Deo Christo Tert. de spectac pag. 83. From whence we may infer that the Glory be to the Father c. which was a Form in the Gallican Church in Irenaeus his time was also a Form used in Tertullian's time in Africa and so may be justly taken for one of the primitive and universal Forms by which all Churches did glorifie God And it will be very hard for our Adversary to give a Reason why they might not use Forms in their Prayers as well as in their Praises He urges against this one passage of Tertullian where describing their Love-Feasts he saith After they have washed their hands and brought in Lights they called for some to sing either Psalms or somewhat of their own Composing (p) Tertul. Apol. cap. 39. Discourse of Liturg. p. 126 143. But if we look on the place we shall find this was after the public Worship was done at their common Meal and if this Hymn was taken out of the Psalms then it was a Form most certainly or if it were of their own Composing probably it was made at home however it will not follow that now those miraculous Gifts of Inspiration are ceased we may compose Extempore Hymns because they did it in an Age when many had those Gifts Some other slight Objections he raises out of this Author against Forms of Prayer As First That Christians then looked up to Heaven when they prayed (q) Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. Disc of Liturg. p. 9. But this was answered before and yet we must add that Tertullian affirms they did not always look up to Heaven in Prayer For sometimes he saith They did not look up with confidence toward Heaven but imitated the Publican who prayed with an humble and down-cast Countenance (r) Idem de Oratione c. 13. And S. Cyprian observes That the Christians did not impudently lift up their Eyes to Heaven (s) Cypr. de Orat. Dom. §. 4. p. 310 So that no Argument can be drawn from the one posture or the other But his main Objection out of Tertullian is that Phrase of Sine monitore quia de pectore viz. That the Christians prayed without a Monitor because they prayed out of their Breast
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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Tâeoââret 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Con. Sard. Can. 12. Here saith Balsamon Liturgy is not put for Prayers And Zonaras saith ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Concil Ephes Bân Tom. 1. par 2. So also in an ancient Ecclesiastical Historian a Bishop beginning the Prayers is said To begin his Liturgy (f) Theâdor Lect. pag. 188. And in Theodoret That place of S. Paul's Epistles viz. The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ c. (g) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Theodorât p. 128. epist 46. vâxit 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã God no â tit 3. de Episc Cââr 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Authent coll 9. tit 6. Nov. 123. cap. 31. is no doubt to be inflicted upon those who disturb a Priest in administring
way of Eminence ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and all Rites and Forms not set down there though they were writ down by the Fathers he calls ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã not written things which is further clear by the occasion of this whole Chapter wherein S. Basil is vindicating himself for using a Phrase and Form of Doxology which was not written in Scripture and his Argument is That the Church used many Rites and Forms which were not written in the Bible such as renouncing the Devil and Praying toward the East and the Forms used in Sacramental Administrations Now Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian Cyprian and many others as we have shewed had written concerning every one of these things but still they were ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã not written in Scripture but derived from Tradition and therefore they ought not saith S. Basil to blame me if I used a Form of Doxology not written in Scripture Now this clear exposition of the place alledged shews our Authors base disingenuity who to serve a turn and patch up an Argument against Liturgies wilfully perverts S. Basil's words which being rightly understood are so far from condemning Forms or proving they were not written that they prove they were composed long before S Basil's time and then owned for Catholic Traditions Finally whereas he insinuates that S. Bosil counts these Forms to be Mysteries not to be published and thence infers that to write them down was to publish them and therefore doubtless they were not written down I reply That these Forms were daily used among the Faithful and they were not nice to publish them to these it was only the Catechumens and Infidels from whom they kept these Mysteries and considering the charge they laid upon the Faithful and the Priests not to divulge them to those who were without the Church there was no need to be afraid to write them down since the Books were only in their custody who then believed it was a damnable Sin to let the Unbaptized see these Books or hear the words of them And he hath answered this Argument himself by shewing us that the Heathens who also counted their Forms of worship to be Mysteries not to be divulged to the uninitiated did write these Forms in Books which were kept by their Priests (n) Compare Disc of Liturg. pag. 28 with 122. 123. Therefore writing is very consistent with concealing Mysteries from Strangers And there is nothing in this place of S. Basil which proves there were no written Prayers in his time Thirdly He alledges that S. Basil in Prayer with the People used the Doxology two ways both Glory be to God and the Father with the Son and with the holy Ghost and by the Son in the holy Ghost (o) Basil de Sp. Sanct cap. 1. pag. 144. and though the same Father say that the Form of Baptizing the Creed and the Doxology ought to agree yet he varied this short Form twice in one day from whence he infers more than once that S. Basil would not be bound up by any Form (p) Disc of Liturgies pag. 104. pag. 130. I answer This Objection is taken out of the same suspected Tract but I will let that pass and observe that though S. Basil saith this was done in the Prayers with the People yet it doth not follow that this was in any part of the Office it might be in the conclusion of his Forenoon and Afternoon Homily which being performed at the usual hours of Morning and Evening Prayers and when the People were met to Pray yea the Prayers both going before and following the Homily he may properly enough say this was done in the Prayers with the People Now these Homilies or Sermons being S. Basil's own composures he thought he might vary the Doxology there as he used to do at other times but fortuning to use an expression that savoured of the Arian Heresy The Orthodox People who had been used to a right Form of Doxology in their Liturgy ever since the days of Gregory Thaumaturgus as was shewed before were able by that to censure these new and strange ways of expressing himself (q) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Basil dc Sp. S. cap. 1. And were so angry at him for this Variation that he was forced to write this Book to vindicate those Phrases Wherefore this variety of Doxology being not used in the Liturgy but the Sermons or Homilies is nothing to his purpose nor will it prove that S. Basil varied from the prescribed Forms much less will it make out there were no prescribed Forms since our Clergy use variety of Doxologies at the end of their Sermons but it would be Ridiculous to Argue from thence that they will not be bound to say the Gloria Patri in that Form wherein it is set down in the Liturgy If it be again objected that S. Basil hath great variety of Doxologies yet extant in the end of his Homilies and therefore had this variation been after Sermons the People could hardly have perceived it I answer The latter of these Forms was used by the Arians in a very ill Sense to intimate the inequality of the Father and the Son and though no doubt S. Basil meant well yet it did so evidently tend towards Heresy and was so very different from the Old Orthodox Form in the Liturgy that the People who could digest various Phrases in unprescribed Composures provided the Sense was Orthodox took check at this dangerous Variation and by the way we may learn from hence how great a security it is to the Faith for the People to be accustomed to Orthodox Forms which doth enable them to observe yea and correct any kind of dangerous Innovations But if my Adversaries will not allow this variation to have been any where but in the Prayers though there is no Reason to allow that yet supposing it were so Then this was an Action of S. Basil which is not to be imitated and since he had like to have run into Heresy by taking this undue liberty it will make nothing for the Credit of Extempore Prayers that they expose such as use them to the danger at least of venting Heretical expressions involuntarily And S. Basils being forced to beg Pardon for it shews it ought not to be quoted for a Precedent yet after all it this variation were in the Prayers it shews there were then Forms well known to the People and confirms us in the necessity of prescribing and imposing such Forms to prevent Heresy from creeping into the Church which otherwise may get ground even by the well meant expressions of some Eminent Extempore Man Fourthly He affirms that S. Basil did not teach his Monks to pray by any Liturgy but to choose their Expressions out of Scripture (r) Basil Constit monast cap. 1. p. 668. 669. I answer Divers of the learned deny this Book to be genuin (s) Scultet medul p. 1056. See Discourse of Liturg. p. 120.
Greek Word (m) Galat. iii. 15. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã For a Covenant or Testament which had been confirmed and ratified long before And therefore Balsamon expounds these Words Prayers which had been confirmed before and were Customary (n) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Bals Annot. Bev. pag 640. and an ancient Scholiast saith that the other Word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã here signifies The whole Liturgy (o) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Schol. in Codic Amberbach Bever Tom. 2. pag. 208. which is very Rational because the Canon treats of Prayers which ought to be said at the Altar and reckons up the several essential parts of the Liturgy Prayers properly so called Prefaces Commendations and Imposition of Hands Now then if all these parts of Liturgy had been heretofore confirmed and ratified in Council then it undeniably follows That there were Forms of celebrating the Eucharist in Africa setled by Ecclesiastical Law before the time of this Council and my Adversary had no shift to hide it but by corrupting the Words of the Canon As he doth again Thirdly in translating ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã May be used by all whereas we must joyn ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã with this Word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã And then it will run thus It seems good to us or We order such Prayers shall be performed by all For if as he insinuates Men might use these approved Prayers or might not use them then this Council enjoyned âothing but left all Men at liberty which is absurd to imagine where they make a plain Decree To have these Prayers used by all Whence we observe Here are all the Essentials of a Liturgy which had been confirmed before by a Council and are now enjoyned upon all Ministers so that they are bound to use them But Fourthly He hath yet another false Translation of the last Words ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which he renders Which shall be Communicated with the more discreet but very fallaciously the Verb not being of the Future Tense nor yet signifying to Communicate a thing with another but to gather together and this very Word in the same Tense in the New Testament is translated Were gathered together ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Matth. xiii â Câp. xxii 34. So that the Council speaks not of new Prayers hereafter to be communicated to the more discreet but of Prayers which had been collected and gathered already out of ancient Forms ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã by learned and discreet Bishops and Pastors So also in the Canon of Milevis à prudentioribus Tractatae is the African Phrase for Prayer Composed (q) Inde Homiliae c. vocantur Tractatus hoc est Compositiones by the more Learned and Judicious My Adversary therefore falsifies the Canon to impose upon his Reader That any Man might make New Prayers or pick them up where he pleased and use them after he had shewed them to the more Discreet But it is plain that the former Canon of Carthage hoped to have kept out Impertinent and Heretical Prayers by obliging such as had writ out any Forms to shew them to the more discreet before they used them which Remedy not proving effectual This African Canon makes a strict Order against all manner of Prayers that had not been Collected out of some elder Forms by Judicious Persons Having thus discovered his corrupting the Text of this Canon it will easily appear a good Evidence for the use of Liturgies For here is an Office consisting of all those Prayers which ought to be used at the Altar and particularly Prayers for the Catechumens Penitents c. and then Prefaces about Lifting up the Heart c. among the Faithful Intercession for all Estates of Men which is here called Commendations and the Prayer of Consecration when the Bishop laid his Hands on the Bread and Wine and blessed them which I think is here meant by Imposition of Hands These primitive and essential Parts were long before written down or else how could they have been read or approved in a former Council And these ancient and approved Forms are now again enjoyned to all that Officiate at the Altar The rest of the Canon seems to respect those Forms which were used in other Assemblies and not at the Eucharist that is at the several Hours of Prayer in the Morning early in the Afternoon and late at Night And as to these the Council orders that no Person at no time do bring in any Forms contrary to the Faith to prevent which unavoidable Consequence of Extempore Prayers and leaving Men at liberty to collect their own Forms this Council decrees That those Prayers only shall be said in the Church I suppose at the Hours of Prayer which had formerly been collected out of ancient Forms by such as could judge whether they were Orthodox and fit for Public use And the Canon of Milevis rightly Translated being a Confirmation of this Canon in the beginning of the next Century justifies this clear and plain Exposition The Words are these It also seems good that the Prayers Supplications and Masses which have been approved in Council whether Prefaces Commendations or Impositions of Hands shall be celebrated by all and that no other Prayers shall be said in the Church but such as have been Composed by the Judicious or Approved in the Council lest by this means through Ignorance or Negligence any thing be Composed contrary to the Faith (r) Concil Milev An. 416. Can. 1â Bin. Tom. 1. par 1. pag. 705. Where we see the Parts of Liturgy are reckoned up more particularly Prayers that is Collects Supplications that is Litanies or Masses that is the Eucharistical Office consisting of Prefaces Commendations and Impositions of Hands The Forms of every one of these having been formerly approved by a Council are now enjoyned to all who are ordered to use these and no others And for all other Prayers in the Church they were to be such as either had been approved in a Council or at least were Composed by Judicious and Orthodox Persons So that the Main Liturgy was formerly established and is now enjoyned again and care also taken that none should pray at any other time in Public but by Forms and by such Forms as had passed the Test of a Synod or had been formerly collected by the Judicious And the Reason given will ever hold good against Extempore Prayers or private Mens arbitrary Composures which is that this may easily bring Heresie into the Church Therefore Smectymnuus freely grant That the Milevitan Canon would have no other Forms used but those that were approved in the Synod (s) Senectymnuns Answ to Remonstr pag â But my Adversary is not so ingenuous yet his Objections are so manifestly Mistakes that to Repeat them is enough to Answer them (t) Discourse of Litu g. pag. 49 c. First he saith The African Canon left them at liberty to use any Prayers that were allowed by some Prudent Brethren
IMPRIMATUR April 26. 1690. C. Alston R.P.D. HEN. Episc Lond. à Sacris A Scholastical HISTORY OF THE Primitive and General Use OF LITURGIES IN The Christian Church Together with An Answer to Mr. Dav. Clarkson's late Discourse concerning LITURGIES PART II. Of the Time after the Year 400 With an Answer to the Arguments against Liturgies and the Testimony of Protestant Divines for them By THO COMBER D. D. Precentor of YORK Publica est nobis communis Oratio Cypr. de Orat. Dom. § 5. pag. 310. LONDON Printed by S. Roycroft for Robert Clavell at the Peacock at the West-end of S. Pauls 1690. THE PREFACE TO THE Second Part. WHEN those who oppose the Vse of LITURGIES had appealed to Antiquity and boasted it would disown them I concluded they were obliged to stand to the Sentence of a Judge of their own choosing (a) Acts xxv 12. and therefore followed them to that Tribunal before which they had brought their Cause And when the First Four Centuries whose Authority is most venerable and their Testimony the most convincing (b) Antiquitas quo propiùs aberat ab ortu divinâ progenie hoc meliùs ea fortasse quae erant vera cernebat Cicer. Tuscul quaest had given it on Our Side It was the Opinion of some of my good Friends that I need descend no lower and might save the labour of a Second Part But I considered That though it was enough to such as were Impartial to prove that Liturgies began so Early Yet others who were prejudiced against them would question the Truth of that unless I could clear the following Ages also from all the Objections that their Friend hath raised out of them against this great Truth He hath fixed the Original of Prescribed Forms a Century or two Lower and made a shew of proving That the Vse of these Forms was left arbitrary even till the beginning of the Ninth Century And scattered divers Arguments in several places of his Book collected out of some General Observations which could not be brought under any one of the Ancienter Fathers Names nor Answered in the First Part because they depended on Miscellaneous Quotations chiefly relating to the Time after the Fifth Century began Wherefore I was compelled to follow him down through all these Later Ages and shew That Liturgies not only continued to be imposed and used then but were generally believed to have come down to them by Tradition from the most Eminent Bishops of the Primitive and Apostolical Ages and that his Objections rather confirm than weaken this Assertion I was obliged also to Examine every thing that looked like an Argument that I might neither give the obstinate Occasion to call those Reasonings Invincible which scarce deserved a serious Answer (c) Tacere ultra non oportet ne jam non verecundiae sed diffidentiae esse incipiat Cypr. ad Demetr nor leave any Scruples in the Minds of such as are willing to be undeceived And for their sakes as well as to make this History more compleat I have added the Testimonies of the most Eminent Reformed Divines both concerning the Antiquity and Vsefulness of Liturgies in general and concerning the Excellency of Our Churches Forms of Prayer By all which it will appear That such as scruple to Hear or Read our Common-Prayer are so very singular in that Notion that they are not only contrary to Vs and to all Antiquity but also to the Best and most Regular of the Protestant Foreign Churches 'T is true when Men have an Interest to serve they will have no Inclination to yield to the clearest Demonstration nor to the plainest Matter of Fact And therefore perhaps Some of this Party may hope to run down all that is brought out of the Ages after the Year 400 with the old Cry of POPERY and SUPERSTITION But I would anticipate so weak an Objection by observing That their Friend led me into these Ages and they must not blame me for following him Again There is nothing deserves these hard Names in this later Period but only that which was then first brought into the Church and was not known nor used in purer Times Now the First Part sufficiently proves That Liturgies were none of the Inventions of these Ages by shewing they were used and approved in the former Centuries before any of those Corruptions came in I grant that those Copies of Ancient Liturgies which come to our hands have many passages in them which relish of the Superstition of later Ages But then we are also sure by those Passages which the Fathers cite out of them before they were corrupted that they were pure at first and these Exceptionable places have been tacked to them long after they were first composed Which the Compilers and Reformers of our Liturgy well understood and therefore though they imitated them in all that was agreeable to the Doctrin and Practice of the First Four Centuries they cut off and rejected all the rest and so have reduced the Primitive way of Praying to its Original purity and ancient soundness They knew the Praying by Forms was very Ancient the Corruption of those Forms of later date So that when they and other Reformed Churches have purged out all the Superstitious Innovations and restored the Primitive Method of Serving God by prescribed Forms agreeably to the Scriptures and the Practice and Opinions of the best Ages I would hope that all who are prepared to submit to Truth by which it is every Mans interest to be conquered (d) Qui veritati cedit utiliter vincitur Petr. Damian lib. 1. ep 20. will renounce their groundless Prejudices against this useful and Ancient Method of Praying And no longer dote upon the new Extempore and Arbitrary way which was never used in public till of late since the Ages of Inspiration whose practice can be no Rule to us who have not those extraordinary Gifts And which is inconsistent with the Safety the Honour and the Quiet of all Established Churches To conclude The best Christians and the most regular Churches in all Ages have used and approved Forms of Prayer and found great comfort in them and much benefit by them And if our Dissenters would be content to serve God so also they would then be capable of being Members of our Established Church and we should no longer be disturbed weakned and endangered by this unhappy Separation But so long as they retain this Fundamental Error and profess their aversation to our whole way of Worship All projects of Vnion and hopes of Accomodation are vain And for that reason I have so fully considered this Question and set all that relates to it in one Orderly View because it is Evident that the Right Determination thereof must be the first step to that Peace which is the Interest and would be the Safety of this divided Nation the Welfare whereof all good Men unfeignedly desire ERRATA PAg. 9. lin 5. read Scribi fas p. 11. l.
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) ãâã of Liââ pag. 1ââ 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 responsiâre 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 Sâcerdotes 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 âit 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 Riâes 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and elsewhere he styles it The hidden Mysteries (b) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Synes Ep. 57. pag. 194. And Nicephorus his Scholiast explains ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to be such things as are mystically delivered both as to the words and actions (c) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Nâceph 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) Isâââr 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
of Charity that the Lapsed may obtain the Remedy of Repentance and lastly that the Catechumens being brought to the Sacrament of Regeneration may have the Gate of the Divine Mercy opened unto them (l) Obsecrationum quoque Sacerdotalium sacramenta respiciamus quae ab Apostolis tradita in toto mundo atque in omni Ecclesiâ Catholicâ uniformitèr celebrantur c. Celest Ep. pro Presp Hilar. inter opera Prosper p. 894. This is that famous Passage which our Adversary labours to misinterpret but in vain since nothing can more clearly prove the use of a prescribed Form than these Words For Celestine is here arguing against Hereticks and he confutes them by the Forms then used in the Church producing the very Words and affirming that the Apostles had delivered these Prayers to them at first and that there was an Uniformity in these Petitions between all the National Churches in the World that is all their Litanies had these Requests differing only in the Order and some few Phrases but the Roman Form was this which he here sets down bids the Hereticks look upon it and tells them this was the Rule for Prayer and therefore they ought to believe suitably to these Prayers which might be a Rule for their Faith as well as for their Devotion Now if these Prayers only agreed in the persons and things to be prayed for but were daily varied as every Minister pleased might not the Hereticks have asked him Where they could see Extempore and invisible Prayers or how he could make those Prayers fix a Rule for their Faith which were as various and uncertain as their Ministers Fancies They might except justly against any Argument taken from Prayers which were varied every day and differed so exceedingly in every âeveral Church But since they could be looked on transcribed and urged as an Argument and were so ancient in this Age that even Hereticks durst not âxcept against the Authority of them we are sure they must be prescribed âorms made long before this time I will not deny but that both Innocent and Celestine might stretch their Tradiâion something too far when they âscribed the Original of these Forms to âhe Apostles themselves but even that Assertion especially here in a dispute with Hereticks shews they were so ancient then that there was no Memorial of the first Composer left and ât is usual among the Fathers to call that Apostolical which was generally observed and had so early a beginning that its first Author was not known As for my Adversaries pretence That this Testimony only affirms an Uniformity as to the order the persons and things to be prayed for I must observe that S. Augustine useth this very Argument against the same Hereticks and when he comes to cite the Words of the Prayer he repeats these very Words without altering any thing either in the Phrase or Order We have cited the place in the First part and if there be any verbal difference in the Translation from what is here set down out of Celestine I assure the Reader there is none in the Latin as will appear by comparing both places together (m) Celestin Ep. apud Prosp Et Aug. de Eccles dogmat cap. 30. See this History Part. l. Cent. 4. §. 21. pag. 231. Now when Celestine at Rome some years after quotes the same Form of Prayer verbatim which S. Augustine in Africa had cited before this shews that the Words as well as the Matter and Order were agreed on and it follows that both the Roman and African Church had a certain prescribed Form of Litany at this time and that the same Form was used in both Churches and was so Ancient and of so good Authority then as to be quoted for Evidence in a dispute with Hereticks And who can imagine there was no more but such an Uniformity as he speaks of that is that every Priest in every several Church in Rome used several Phrases every day which is more properly a Multiformity since we see the same Form of Words quoted for Evidence by two great Bishops the one in Italy the other in Africa and this also at two different times Or how can such a liberty and variety in Praying as he dreams of be called legem supplicandi a Rule of Praying How can such an uncertain thing which daily appears in a new and different shape fix the legem credendi the Rule of Believing We conclude therefore that the Words as well as the Method of this Litany was fixed at Rome long before the Time of this Pope § 6. Which will appear more plainly Prosper Aquitan An. D. 430 if we consult Prosper in whose behalf the Pope writ this Epistle For he being to Expound that place of S. Paul 1 Tim. II. 1. I exhort therefore that Prayers Supplications c. refers to the same Litany only supposing that the Form was well known he doth not quote the Words in their order but describes them so plainly that any one may discern it is the same Form which he S. Augustine and Pope Celestine do all appeal to His Words are these Which Law or Rule of Prayer the Devotion of all Priests and Faithful People so unanimously observe that there is no part of the World wherein the Christians do not celebrate such Prayers For the Church every where prays to God not only for the Saints and those already Regenerated in Christ but for all the Infidels and Enemies of his Cross For all Idolaters and all that persecute Christ in his Members for the Jews to whose blindness the Gospel gives no light for Hereticks and Schismaticks who are estranged from the Vnity of Faith and Charity And what doth it ask for these but that leaving their Errors they may be converted to God and receive the Faith embrace Charity and that being freed from the darkness of Ignorance they may come to the acknowledgment of the Truth (n) Prosper de Vocat Gent. lib. 1. cap. 12. pag. 798. We see he is discoursing gnerally of this Litany and breaks the Sentences first running over the persons prayed for and then the things asked for them yet even in this lax way of discourse it is easie to discern that he refers to Celestine's Form and with him affirms That this Prayer was a Rule unanimously observed by all Priests and People whereas if every Priest had daily varied the Words in every Assembly of the People there could be neither Certainty in the Rule nor Uniformity in the observing it I may add that Prosper did so highly reverence S. Augustine that we cannot doubt but he imitated him in the Approbation and use of public Forms and he explains one of those public Forms viz. the Preface of Sursum Corda in his Sentences taken out of S. Augustine's Works (o) Prosp sent ex Augustin sent 153. pag. 434. And in another place he mentions and commends that ancient Custom prescribed in the old Liturgies for the People
to say AMEN when they received the holy Eucharist (p) Prosp de promiss praed par 1. cap. 6. pag. 7. So that my Adversary had no reason to cite him as an Evidence That there was no more but a meer Order of things in his time (q) Disc of Lit. pag. 6. since it is impossible that such an Order could have been uniformly and unanimously observed by all For this liberty of varying Expressions would soon have blundered that Order and made strange differences in the subject Matter as well as the Method of these Prayers Johan Cassianus eod Anno viz. 430. § 7. The Contemporary and Antagonist of Prosper was John Cassian who had been Educated under S. Chrysostom the Author of a Liturgy and was come to live in one of the Gallican Monasteries where he recommended divers of the Eastern Opinions and Practices His Writings indeed are about the private Devotions of Monks in their Cells and Oratories and therefore he hath no occasion to describe the Forms then used in Cathedral or other Churches supplied by the Secular Clergy yet he plainly implies that the public Worship was performed by prescribed Forms and expresly affirms that the Monks used such in their Oratories Hence he calls Our Father The Form of the Lords Prayer (r) Jo. Cassian collat 9. cap. 18. and that Model and Form which was made by the Judge whom we are to intreat (s) Ibid. cap. 24. He also from those words Our daily Bread notes That we ought to use this Prayer every day (t) Ibid. cap. 21. yea he assures us that the Words of it were daily sung in the Church by all the People at which time some Persons who were not in Charity wickedly left out that part of it As we forgive them that trespass against us (u) Nonnulli cum in Ecclest hâc Oratio ab universà plebo concinitur hunc locum tacui praetermittunt Ibid. cap. 22. He mentions also that Litany for the Catechumens which was wont to be said by a Deacon the Form of which we have set down before out of his Master S. Chrysostom (w) Id de Spirit Cenod lib. XI cap. 15. He saith That the People sung the Gloria Patri aloud in France after the Psalms and in the East after the Antiphon (x) Id. lib. 2. de Canon noc modo cap. 9. and describes one of his Monks in a Journey going into a Country Church and celebrating the Evening-Office with the accustomed Psalms (y) Id. Collat. 8. cap. 16. As for the Monks Devotions in their Monasteries it is very plain from him that they had prescribed Forms for every hour of the Day and Night in which they met to pray which Forms Cassian calls The Offices of the Canonical Prayer (z) Id. de Candiurn Oration lib. 2. cap. 12. and The Canonical Mass (a) Ibid. lib. 3. cap. 3. Which word Missa doth not signifie in him as it doth now at Rome The Communion-Office but any prescribed Service consisting of a certain number of Psalms with Prayers intermixed after the recital of which they were dismissed Thus he relates how the Egyptian Monks by ancient Tradition repeated at their Hours of Prayer Twelve Psalms distinguished by a Collect placed and used between each Psalm (b) Id. de Candiurn Orat. lib. 2. cap. 5. And for the Psalms they sung them by way of Antiphon putting a melodious Tune to them (c) Id. ib. cap. 2. like our Cathedral-way In France they only sang three Psalms at the Morning-hour for Prayer (d) Id. ib. lib. 3. cap. 4. and answered Hallelujah at no other Psalms but those which began with Hallelujah (e) Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 11. But so little did they affect Variety that they sung the same Psalms at the same Hours of Prayer viz. O God thou art my God early will I seek thee with some others (f) Ibid. lib. 3. cap. 3. And there were not only certain Psalms appointed for the several Hours in all Churches (g) Ibid. lib. 3. cap. 6. But the Forms of Prayer both for Morning and Night were the very same (h) Sed eodem ordine missam quo prius in nocturnis conventibus celebratam Id. ibid. excepting only some which were appropriate to the Season But neither in them nor any other of these Monastick Prayers did these holy Monks pretend to exercise any Gift of Prayer to shew how long they could hold out in one long-winded Address to God No he saith They utterly disliked such long Prayers and thought the short Prayers which they frequently intermixed with their Psalms were far more profitable (i) Utiliùs censent breves quidem Orationes creberrimas fieri Id. ibid. lib. 2. cap. 10. Which were not only like the short Collects in our Liturgy but in Cassian's Time bore that Name because in them the Minister collected that which was sit for the Congregation to desire into one of these brief Forms which they all said together with him and none were allowed then to be putting up any private Prayers (k) Id ib. lib. 2. cap. 8. Finally The ancient Fathers whom he so much admires were such lovers of holy Forms that when they directed a Monk how to pray always they ordered him to use this Form O God make speed to save us O Lord make haste to help us (l) Id. Collat. 10 cap. 10. p. 848. which was then and is still the Preface to the Western Office for public Assemblies It would be too tedious to remark upon all these Instances which are so plain Proofs of the use of Forms of Prayer and Praise in the Service of God both in and long before Cassian's Time that my Adversary in his very diligent search of Antiquity foreseeing he could no way evade them thought it his safest way to overlook them and therefore he scarce ever cites this Author Concil 3. Oec Ephesinum An. Dom. 431. § 8. In the Acts of the Third General Council at Ephesus we have also many Evidences of Liturgick Forms both of Praise and Prayer For in them we read That when the Messenger from the Orthodox Fathers there arrived at Constantinople with their Letter to the Emperour the Monks went with him in a Body to the Palace Singing of Antiphones (m) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in ââsârâ Constaâ Bin. Tom. l. par 2. pag. 289. which those who stayed at the Gate continued to Sing till the rest came out with the Emperours Answer and then all went in Procession to the Church of S. Mochus and sang the Last Psalm (n) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Ibid. pag. 290. By which we see they were so constantly used to praise God by Forms of Antiphones and Psalms that even in the Streets they could perform this Office and the very People by long Custom could also sing their part with them In the same place it is Recorded of one eminent Monk named Dalmatius
that when Constantinople was shaken with an Earthquake he was frequently desired by the Emperour to come out of his Cell and say the Litany being thought to be one whom God would hear (o) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ibid. p. 290. Now if the Litany had not been a stated Form proper only to be used in a great Assembly because of the great share the People bare in it as Du-Plessis before hath described it this Monk might as effectually have said it in his Cell and need not have done it in so formal a Procession And that it was usual thus to sing or say the Litany in times of common danger or calamity in the Eastern Church long before Mamertus brought that Usage into the West may appear from what Nicephorus and Cedrenus both relate concerning Proclus Bishop of Constantinople An. Dom. 434. That Theodosius the Emperour requested him thus to use the Litany when the City was in danger of an Earthquake Yea the very Manner of the Procession is described by Socrates when he shews how that City was delivered from a dreadful Tempest in the Time of the younger Theodosius by a solemn Litany (p) Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 22. pag. 49. Now that must be a known prescribed Form wherein so many Thousands can make their Responses and bear their part Again The dissenting Bishops in this Council complain to the Emperour that Cyril Bishop of Alexandria and Memnon of Ephesus by the help of the Rabble would neither suffer them to keep the Feast of Pentecost nor to perform the Morning or the Evening Liturgy (q) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Epââ ad Imperat Bâ Tom. I. par 2. pag. 228. and if my Adversary to serve his Cause would translate this The Morning and Evening Administration that would not hurt me because there is such plain proof That the Eastern Church then performed this Administration by a Form and called that Form a Liturgy also Again it is Recorded in these Acts That Cyril in his Letter to John Bishop of Antioch used these words We have been taught also to say in our Prayers O Lord âur God Give us Peace fâr thou art the Giver of all things to us (r) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Ibid. pag 428. Nothing can be plainer thân that this was a Liturgick Form which S. Cyril had not made of his own Head but had been taught it by his Forefathers and it was so generally known and used that he Quotes it to another Bishop as an Argument why they should agree who both used the same Form of praying for Peace I should here have concluded this Section but I will briefly remark That Nestorius who lived in this Time and his Master Theodorus of Mopsvestia who flourished twenty years before it are accused for impiously presuming to alter the Churches usual Liturgy and without any Reverence either for that of the Apostles or for S. Basils made a new and a blasphemous Office of his own (s) Leontius Byzan adver Nestor lib. 3. which in these early days no doubt was accounted a very bold Undertaking and yet still this is only changing one Form for another nor setting up for Extempore Prayers of which there is not any mention in this Age. § 9. This Section shall continue the same Evidence in a few Passages out of some Lesser Fathers as first Petrus Cârysologus An. Dom. 433. Petrus Chrysologus the most elegant Preacher of this Age tells us That the Form of the Apostles Creed was taught to the Catechumens by Heart a little before their Baptism (t) Petr. Chrysol Ser. 56. And he bids them commit it not to Paper but to their Breasts not to their Table but their Memory (u) Id. Serm. 60. pag. 187. Where by the way we may note that the Breast is put for the Memory even as De pectore in Tertullian signifies saying a Prayer by heart or by Memory Again the same Author explains the Words of the Lords Prayer after he had delivered it as a Form to the Catechumens (w) Chrysol Serm. 6â c. And he notes That before his Sermon he had saluted them by praying to God to give them Peace (x) Id Ser. 138. pag. 354. Which we have seen was prescribed in the old Liturgies of the use whereof there are divers other Intimations in his Works Secondly The next place shall be assigned to a Gallican Monk of great Fame Linceriâius Iarinens An Dom. 434. who saith concerning The Common-Prayer-Book which he calls there Sacerdotalem Librum The Priests Book that None of them dared to alter it because it was then Signed and Consecrated by the Confessors and many of the Martyrs (y) Librum Sacâr âtalem quis vestrum resignare audeat signatum a Comessoriââs multerum âam Martyrio consâcratum Iâr n. adv haeres cap. 7. p. 12 13. But whatever his Opinion were we have some who would not only alter but utterly cast away our Priestly Book though the Compilers of it were all either Confessors or Martyrs However we learn from hence That in this Age there was a Book of Offices in France believed to have been originally Composed by the ancient Confessors and Martyrs Lâo I. Ep. Rom. An. Dom. 440. Our next Witness shall be Leo Bishop of Rome whose Works afford many Instances of the use of prescribed Forms both of Praise and Prayer For he mentions the Singing of Psalms with harmonious and agreeing Voices (z) Serm. 2. in assump Pontif. pag. 4. He Comments twice upon that eminent Preface Lift up your hearts noting that it is just and right so to do (a) Serm. 2. in Natâv pag. 37. Ser. 2. in Ascens pag. 207. and observing that if we comply with this Exhortation earthly things cannot depress our Minds He calls the Creed That Rule of the Catholic and Apostolic Faith (b) Serm. 4. de Nativ pag. 48. Ser. 11. de Pass Dom. pag. 164. allowing no variation from it In him we find the same Epistles and Gospels always read upon the same Festivals and generally the same which we read in our Church at this day (c) Serm 3. de Epiph. pag. 76. Ser. 5. de Epiph. pag 84. Ser. 6. pag. 88. item Serm 4 de Quadrag pag. 105 107. Serm. 3. de Pentec p. 218. In him also we find that ancient Use prescribed by the Liturgies of reading the Names of the Offerers and others at the Altar (d) Decretal Ep. 41. cap. 3. pag. 355. Finally he mentions the Prayer for the Jews on Good Friday used in our Liturgy at this day (e) Serm. 19. de Pass Dom. pag. 191. And he gives us this description of the public Fasting and Prayer then in use What can be denied saith he to so many Thousand People joyning in the performance of the same service and unanimously beseeching God with one Spirit It is a great thing in Gods sight when the whole Christian People are instant upon
the same Offices together and when all orders and degrees of both Sexes unite their Affections for the same end (f) Id. Serm. 3. ãâã Sept. ãâã pag 240. These must be Prayers made ââ 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Nââ âââaenes 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã pp. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Constitution or Order no doubt contained those prescribed Prayers which Socrates calls ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã (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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Pallad Hist Lausiac cap. 23. and because they were short Forms committed to Memory Paulus was constrained to use these ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 Maâarius another Monk said an hundred prescribed Prayers every day (q) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Pallad ib. cap. 24. And another called from his Charity Eleemon used to go to the Church to say the accustomed Prayers (r) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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
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) Pântifical vit â las item Platâna in vit Cent. Magâeb 5 Cent. p. 1271. c. And that he Composed some Graduals Prefaces and Collects (o) Pontif cal ut supr item Câsâandr 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 âat lib. 4. fol. 67. iâem 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 Complânds amongst the which are some that do yet stand and continue pure and uncorrupted (q) Mârnay 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. â96 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 impleââm in Oratione Cârâum id de glor Confess cap. 38. So the Roman Course is put for the Roman Missal (z) Spâlm 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
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 dâsmissed 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
Canon it self do only direct the Order in which these several parts of the Service shall be used and forbid the altering that Order yet withal it refers to these several parts of the Service and calls them by their proper Names supposing a Book well known in which they were written down in the same order which is prescribed by this Canon It is plain the Antiphons Hymns Collects c. were certain fixed Forms not made in this Council but supposed to be commonly known by all long before and since some variety in the reciting these Forms had crept in so as one Diocess differed somewhat from another that Variety though it were but in the order of using these Forms is forbid here and the same Uniformity established in this Province which had been setled every where else And indeed this Canon convinces me there was no difference in the Forms themselves the same Antiphons Hymns Collects c. were used every where that needed not any regulation only they were differently placed in the Liturgies of divers Churches and this they Reform by setling one Liturgy for the whole Gallican Church which is called Ordo Ecclesiae and This Order contained not only the Rubrics or disposal of these several parts of Service but also The Forms themselves so disposed and set in Order And doubtless if any had then been so bold to vary the Hymns and Forms of Prayer these Fathers who would not suffer any Variety in the method and placing them would much less have endured the presumption of altering the Words and Expressions but that was a piece of Confidence that was not heard of in this Age. The next Year was held the first Council of Orleance Concil Aurel. I. An. Dom. 507. which again forbids Any of the People to go out of the Church before that final Blessing after the Lords Prayer in the end of the Communion Service (h) Concil Aurel. I. Can. 28. Bin. Tom. II. par l. pag 562. and enjoyns the Litanies shall be used three days before Ascension day and orders the People who had so large a share in this ancient Form to leave Work and joyn in presenting this general Supplication to Almighty God (i) Ibid. Can. 29. Agreeable to which is that Passage in Caesarius his Homilies where he tells us That the whole Church throughout the World then celebrated these Three Days with Litanies and then no Christian ought to be absent from that Religious Assembly (k) In tribus istis diebus quas regulariter in toto mundo celebrat Ecclesia nullus se à sancto Conventu subaucat Caesar hom 1. Now can any man doubt of the use of Prescribed Forms when these Litanies were so generally observed both in the Eastern and Western Churches Is it not plain the Communion Service was the same in all these Provinces since so many Authors and Councils agree That that Office every where ended with the Lords Prayer and the Blessing An Order now must signifie more than a Rubric For undoubtedly they had a prescribed Rule containing both the Forms and the Method also And the better to secure this Liturgy from being altered Concil Epaun. An. Dom. 509. the Council of Pamiers Ordains That all Churches in the Province shall observe the same Order in celebrating Divine Offices which was used by the Metropolitan Bishop (l) Ad celebrandum divina Officia ââdinem quem Metropolitani tenent Provinciales observare debent Concil Epaun. Can. 27. Bin. Tom. II. par I. pag. 553. And a few years after the same Order was made in Spain where Variety of Nations and Opinions had made some difference in their Liturgies But at Girone in Catalonia it was decreed That as to the appointing of Divine Service as it was performed in the Metropolitan Church so in Gods Name let that same Vsage be observed through the whole Province of Catalonia as well in the Communion-Office as in that of Singing and Ministring (m) De institutione Missarum ut âuâmodo in Metropolitanâ Ecclesiâ fuerât ita in Dei nomine in omni Tarraconensi Provinciâ tam ipsius Misa Orao quam psallenai ministrandi consuetudo servetur Concil Gerund An. 517. Can. 1. Bin. ibid. pag. 618. that is The Order of Divine Offices which by a prescribed Rule was setled in the Metropolitan Church for the Communion-Service the Hymns and other Administrations were to be the Guide to all the Diocesses under the Jurisdiction thereof Which supposes that the Original Liturgy was written and kept carefully there by which all the Books of Divine Offices transcribed for the several Diocesses of his Suffragans were to be corrected which was a very fit Means to preserve that Unity both as to the Forms and Order which they now laboured to restore in all these parts of the VVorld The last named Council also mentions Litanies in two Canons Can. 2 and Can. 3. And informs us That the Lords Prayer was there repeated daily in the end both of Morning and Evening Prayer Can. 10. And all this leaves us no room to doubt of their using those ancient Forms which after these great Confusions began to be restored in these Countries upon the Conversion of both Pagans and Hereticks to the Faith and their beginning to incorporate with the People which they had Conquered in the last Age. And I have a little transgressed the Order of Time that I might lay these Canons together which were all made upon the same Occasion and do mutually explain one another Fulgentius Ep. Ruâpens Ann. Dom. 508. § 3. We must now step into Africa where that Pious Bishop Fulgentius flourished who was the most Eminent Champion for the true Faith against the Arians then very numerous in that Country And this holy Confessor hath left us sufficient Evidence of the continuance of the ancient African Forms For he largely expounds that Primitive Petition so generally used at the Consecration in all the old Liturgies viz. That God would send down the holy Spirit upon the Elements to sanctifie them and make them the Body of his deer Son (n) Fulgent ad Monim lib. 2. cap. 6. p. 79. Yea he confirms the Orthodox Faith from this ancient and well known Form of Prayer He also discourses very fully upon that general conclusion of the Collects which the Arians cavilled at Through Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord who liveth and Reigneth with thee in the unity of the holy Spirit (o) Per universas pene Africae regiones Catholica dicere consuevit Ecclesia Per Jesum c. Fulg. ad Ferrand Diac. Resp ad Quaest 4. pag. 266. Assuring us that the Catholick Church in almost all the Regions of Africa concluded their Prayers in this Form which he proves is agreeable to Scripture to the usage of the Primitive Church and to the Doctrin of the Orthodox Fathers And that must be a very ancient piece of Liturgy which is of Authority in dispute with
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
that part of it which concerns the Divine Service that he prescribed to his Monks We have an Abstract of it in Card. Bona (c) Bona de divin Psalmod c. 18. pag. 895. And thereby it is manifest that although this Founder of Monastick Societies inclined to Enthusiasm in some things Yet he durst not presume to make a new Office consisting of new Forms nor did he leave his Monks to make Extempore Prayers but takes his Office wholly out of the Liturgies then in use Only because these Monks had nothing else to do but to serve God he allots more hours of Prayer and orders many of the Forms to be oftner repeated than was Customary in the Cathedral and Country Churches For this Rule enjoyns the frequent repeating of the Lords Prayer The Apostles Creed The Responses O Lord make speed to save us c. The Hymns and Antiphons particularly the Te Deum Benedictus and Magnificat The Collect for the Day the Kyrie Eleeson or Lord have Mercy upon us by which sometimes is meant the Litany the Allelujah and the like ordaining the Psalter to be Read over in their Office once every Week But all these are known parts of ancient Liturgy and every one of them prescribed Forms which by this time had gained so great Veneration for their Antiquity and general use all over Christendom that none durst presume to omit nor alter them And Benedict's prescribing them to his Monks shews that he took them out of the received Liturgies of his Time And by long usage the Forms themselves were so well known that they are described in the original Rule only by the first words of the several Forms In like manner at the same time that Benedict was Famous in Italy Tetradius Nephew to Caesarius Bishop of Arles Flourished in France and he also writ a Rule for his Monks wherein we have the same Method observed that is to oblige them to repeat the Psalms and all the ancient Forms divers of which are there briefly called by the two first words as Gloria in Excelsis is put to signifie that well known Hymn Glory be to God on High And so for the rest (d) Bibl. Patr. Tom. V. p. 866. Bona de reb Liturg. l. 1. c. 4. §. 4. pag. 512. The same is also to be observed in another Rule made within less than twenty Years after this by Valerianus Bishop of Arles (e) Bona ibid. Cointè Annal. Ann. 550. Now though these Orders of Monks did miserably degenerate afterwards Yet at this time they were the best Men of the Age Renouncing the World Sincerely and Serving God with Extraordinary Devotion yet every Order had its prescribed Forms of Praise and Prayer none of them differing much from others and all taken out of the public Liturgies then in use in the Country where they were first planted after the Example of those Egyptian Monks in the Fourth Century whom Cassian before described to us § 6. Let us now pass into the East Justinianus Aug. Ann. Dom. 530. and see what Laws the famous Emperor Justinian made concerning the Liturgies which we have proved to have been established there long before his Time And First He was much displeased at some who had been admitted into the inferior Orders of the Clergy though they were Illiterate Wherefore he requires that none shall for the future be ordained Priests and Deacons unless at least they be able to Read and can both instruct others in the holy Prayers and Read the Books of Ecclesiastical Canons (f) Authent Collat. 1. Tit. 6. Nov. 6. cap. 4. pag. 13. Again the Religious Prince complains that by the neglect of frequent Synods which would have obliged all the Clergy to be well skilled in the holy Liturgies some even of the highest Order were not perfect in the holy Office for the Communion nor in the Prayer for Baptism And therefore he appoints that before any Bishop be Consecrated He shall publicly Read over the Communion Office The Prayers for Baptism and all the other Supplications (g) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Idem Authent Collat. 9. Tit. 20. Nov. 13â Praef. cap. 1. 2. Now here we may observe that the Prayers then in use were called holy Liturgies and were such as could be Read Learned and Taught And the Qualification of Persons to be Ordained was not to be able to make new Prayers but to Read the ancient Forms which it seems were used also in the Nunneries and therefore this Emperor orders the Bishop to take care that the Nuns might have one grave old Man to make the necessary Responses in their Service and that they should have a Priest and a Deacon of unblameble Lives to perform the Divine Liturgies and give them the holy Communion (h) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Cod. lâb 1. Tit. 3. de Episc cler l. 44. pag 19. But if any had Built a private Oratory in his House though he might perform his Ordinary Devotions yet he Ordains that according to the Laws delivered in the Ecclesiastical Acts touching the Worship of God in public they do not presume there to do any of those things which are appointed by the holy Liturgy (i) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Authent Coll. 5. Tât 13. Nov. 58. p 91. Moreover as to the public Offices the Emperor Decrees that Stripes and Banishment shall be inflicted upon any that come into a Church and injure the Bishop or other Clergy while the Divine Mysteries or the holy Offices are performing But to disturb the Liturgy it self is to be punished with Death And because Litanies were then said in the open Streets in procession the Emperor enjoyns the Bishops and Clergy to be always present at them and makes it capital to affront or disturb them in that part of Divine Service (k) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. Authent Col. 9. Tit. 6. Novel 123. cap. 31. 32. p. 174. All which Laws suppose a prescribed Form of Service and have the very name of Liturgy for that Service as every one will grant who considers that the Liturgies of S. Basil and S. Chrysostom were constantly used in the Eastern Church both in and long before Justinians time I know my Adversary pretends ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Liturgie in these Laws signifies no more than the exercise of any Divine Ministrations (l) Disc of Lit. p. 157. 158. But if we grant that it will not help his cause nor hurt ours because in that Age and those Churches it is certain all those Divine Ministrations were performed by prescribed Forms so that it is all one as to our dispute whether we translate ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Liturgy or Ministration because we are sure they Ministred by Liturgies as we now call them For proof whereof we have a Memorable passage in the Council of Constantinople under the Patriach Menna in this Emperors Reign where it seems the Peoples extraordinary Zeal gainst Hereticks
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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 Traditiân 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 antiâuâ in offerendo sâcripcio Traditione aepeââmus excrantes ut Catholicam fidem adunaâe regere Donamus custodire toto orâe 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 Catâolicà Apostolicâ Ecâlesiâ 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 regârââigneris toto terrarum erbe Offâc 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) Oâdinem quâque precum in celebritate M ssarar nullo nâs tâmpore nuâââ ãâã sign âuacaââ habere aâvââ sed semper ââaem tenore oblata Deo munera consecrare pp. Caetera vero Ordine consueto prosequimur Qua prepter ipsius Canonicae precis textum direximus subter adââectââ quaâââ Deo propitio ex Apostolicâ traditione suscepimus c. Vâgâl Ep. 2. ad Etherâum Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 4. Here we see the Communion-Service and especially the Prayer of Consecration was an ancient Form derived from Apostolical Tradition and the whole Office was written down in a Book and sent into that Country where Etherius was Bishop which some suppose to have been some parts of Spain lately Converted from Heresie (r) Baron Annal An. 538. pag. 278 279. And if so probably this was the foundation of that Office which is called the Mosarabick and was Composed by S. Leander about Fifty year after out of the old Gothic and African Forms compared with this Roman Office However it appears that though in some places where the Faith was newly planted they needed help to settle and correct their Offices yet both the New and Ancient Churches did all agree in the use of Forms And when a new Liturgy was to be made for a Newly Converted Nation the Bishops consulted the most Ancient Forms they could find in other Churches choosing out of them what they thought proper for their own Country and that Form they enjoyned upon all that were under their Jurisdiction We must also observe further That the Roman Office which was writ down and the very Words
3 4 5. apud Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 212. Here we have one Kalendar fixed appointing the very same Lessons one Form of Salutation derived from the Apostles one Written Form for the celebration of the Eucharist and another being the Order of Baptism which in the days of a Bishop who was dead some years before this Council were sent in Writing from Rome and had been ever since used in these Provinces which can be nothing else but a Liturgy from which they will not suffer any Minister to vary in the least And it signifies nothing to alledge That this is one of the first Injunctions for such Uniformity in this Country that had been for an Age and more over-run with Barbarous People and overspread with Heresies because there are evident Supposals That the Ancient Churches which had not been renversed by these Calamities but kept to their old accustomed Ways furnished the New regulated Churches with ancient Forms which had been used among them from the Primitive Ages and that sufficiently proves the Antiquity of Liturgies My Adversary who conceals all this Evidence cites the 30th Canon of this Council but very falsly for he reads it thus Besides the Psalms of the Old Testament let nothing Poetically Composed be Sung in the Church and he false dates it also (z) Disc of Lit. pag. 179. Concil Bracar Can. 30. An. 565. But the Words of the Canon are a Translation of the Canon of Laodicea made 200 years before Forbidding the Singing of any Poetical Compositions in the Church except the Psalms and what Hymns were taken out of the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament (a) Vid. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 212. which was designed to set aside the late composed Hymns of the Arians used among the Heretical Goths and other corrupt modern Composures Not to reject the Magnificat the Benedictus Nunc dimittis and other Canonical Hymns which our Dissenters now totally disuse He adds That Ordo Psallendi in the Council of Tours signifies not what but how many Psalms shall be Sung (b) Disc of Lit. pag. 174. But let the Canon be consulted and any Man who knows the Custom of the Age will see that the design of that Canon was to establish a Kalendar which did appoint and prescribe the very Psalms as well as the Number which were to be Sung at the certain Seasons there mentioned (c) Vid. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. in Concil Turon 2. An. 570. Can. 19. p. 228. And he unfortunately forgot one Canon of this Council of Tours which enlarges the former Canon of Braga and takes in all the ancient Hymns which he pretends are rejected by that Canon for it says Though we have the Hymns of Ambrose in the Canon yet since we have other Forms worthy to be Sung we willingly receive them unless they have no Authors Name in the Title because if they be agreeable to the Faith they ought not to be left out of use (d) Ib. Can. 24. pag. 230. So that we see this Canon owns the Te Deum the Benedicite and other Hymns provided they be Orthodox and the Authors were known Friends to the Catholic Faith and here are Forms supposed as generally used and a Council to allow them after which the Church may use them though they be not taken out of Canonical Scripture I have no more to add here but a scattered Passage or two to confirm the continuance of the old Forms in the Gallican Church First Whereas there was a necessity of leaving the Priest at liberty to put the Names of those who Offered into the Prayer for all Estates of Men some ventured to take more freedom and in that part of the Office varied from their Mother Church Which occasion'd a Council at Arles to Decree That the Oblations made at the Holy Altar should not be offered up by any of the Bishops of that Province otherwise than according to the Form used in the Church of Arles (e) Concil Arelat An. Dom. 554. Can. 1. apud Cointe Annal. pag. 799. Or if with some we expound this Canon of the Prayer of Consecration still it proves That the Forms used in the Metropolitan Church were to be an invariable Rule to all the Churches in that Province The Council of Tours also before cited mentions Litanies Antiphons and the Hallelujah (f) Concil Turon 2. An. 570. Can. 18 c. And we have a farther account of the Use of Litanies there in the first Council of Lions (g) Concil Ludg. 1. eod An. Can. 6. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 232. All which are the Forms which we have shewed were in use in the preceding Centuries And when Chilperic a King of France about this Time pretended to Compose new Hymns and Prayers our Author tells us They would by no means receive them into the Churches Offices (h) Greg. Turon lib. 6. cap. 46. pag. 308. for those were fixed before and none but a Council of Bishops could be permitted to alter or add to them I had almost forgot Martin Bishop of Braga Martin Episcop Bracar An. Dom. 572. who came into that See very soon after the fore-mentioned Council and being a Grecian by Birth he collected and translated divers Canons of the Greek Church into Latin for the use of Spain in which Collection of his we have very many plain Indications of a Liturgy One of these Canons obliges every Clergy-man in a City or any place where there is a Church to be present at the daily Office of Singing Mattens and Vespers (m) Canones Martin Bracar Can. 63. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 246. And another forbids New composed Psalms made by some of the Vulgar to be said in the Church (n) Ib. Can. 67. For indeed the Hours of Prayer and the Offices appointed for them were then so fixed that as none might neglect them so none were allowed to change them or add to them in any sort whatsoever And I must note by the way that this very Martin who collected these Canons was he that had Converted the Suevians in Spain to the Catholic Faith that so we may be satisfied that part of Spain a little before this had a second and New Conversion and that gave occasion to divers of these Canons for an Uniformity in the Divine Service which was to be established there Pelagius II. Ep. Rom. An Dom. 577. § 10. To proceed with the Western Church the Bishops of France and Germany about this Time desired Pope Pelagius the Second to inform them what were the Prefaces then used in the Roman Church that is what Festivals there were upon which they made a peculiar Addition to the Primitive Form of Lift up your Hearts c. suitable to the occasion of that particular Festival And his Reply is this Having diligently read over the holy Roman Order and the sacred Constitutions of our Predecessors we find only these Nine
Orthodox and Heretics agreed in the use of Forms none so much as thought of Extempore Prayers no Nation pleaded for expected or enjoyed such a Liberty nor did any of the Clergy or Laity complain That the imposing there Forms was an Innovation or hindrance to their Gifts or an invading of their Christian Liberty § 12. There is nothing clearer in all History S. Gregor Mag. Episc Roman An. Dom. 590. than that there was a Canon or Form of Consecrating the Communion at Rome long before the Time of S. Gregory the Great The very Words of it have been produced out of S. Ambrose his Book of Sacraments An. 374. and we have proved it cited by the Author of the Questions out of the Old and New Testament who writ in the Fourth Century We have also brought in the plain Testimonies of Innocent Celestine Leo Gelasius and Vigilius all of them Bishops of Rome long before Gregory's Time And we now add That Johan Moschus declares there was a certain Form of the Canon at Rome in the Time of Pope Agapetus who lived An. 535 (y) Joan. Mosch pratum Spirit cap. 150. Bib. Patr. Tom. pag. 1121. And that the Lord Du Plessis whom my Adversary cites often shews very largely that there was a Canon of the Mass at Rome which was very pure and Orthodox before Gregory's Time yea he sets down divers parts of it and assures us it was common to all both Priests and People (z) Mornay of the Mass Book I. Ch. 7. pag. 53. And John the Deacon who writ S. Gregory's Life saith That he corrected the Gelasian Book for the Communion-Office taking away some things altering some few and adding other things to explain the Gospels putting it all into one Volume (a) Johan Diac. vit Gregor lib. 2. cap. 17. Which shews there was a Canon before written down in the Gelasian Book which S. Gregory only altered in some few things and it doth not appear he added any more to it except these Words O Lord order our days in thy Peace deliver us from Eternal damnation and make us to be numbred among the Flock of thine Elect For these are the only Words that all Writers say were of his Making and which he added to the Canon (b) Johan Diac. ut supr Item Pedae histor lib. 2. cap. 1. p. 53 Naucler Gener. 20. pag. 743. ita Platina vit Greg. pag. 82. wherefore he was only the Corrector of the Old Canon not the Maker of a New one And whereas some Authors of later Times ascribe the Composing of the Roman Offices to him we have seen it is usual in most Writers to call such as only corrected and reformed Liturgies The Authors of them by which they mean no more than those who published them in a more compleat Form than before But my Adversary who can prove any thing undertakes to make out two difficult things in relation to this Pope Gregory First That there was no Form of Consecration at Rome before his time Secondly That when another had made this Form he did not impose it on others (c) Disc of Lit. pag. 83 84 85 86 87. The former of these Assertions he proves from a Passage in Saint Gregory his Epistles which the ignorant editor of the Discourse of Liturgies hath put into a wrong Page But I shall cite it at large and then will examine the true meaning of it We therefore say the Lords Prayer immediately after the Prayer of Consecration because it was the custom of the Apostles with that Prayer alone to Consecrate the Host and it seems to me very inconvenient that we should say over the Host that Prayer which a Scholastical Man had composed and not say that Form which our Lord himself composed over his Body and Blood (d) Ut precem quam Scholasticus composuerat super Oblationem diceremus c. Greg. Epist 63. lib. 7. pag. 230. Now from hence he gathers that Scholasticus is a Mans Name who was Contemporary with S. Gregory and since he affirms this Scholasticus composed the Canon therefore the Canon as he pretends could not be made before Gregory's Time The weakness and mistakes of which Inference we shall easily perceive if we consider the occasion and the sense of these Words S. Gregory was accused for imitating the Custom at Constantinople In ordering the Lords Prayer to be repeated immediately after the Canon and these Words are his defence of his bringing in this Custom Now doubtless it had been more rational to object his setting up a New Canon made by a late obscure Author if he had done any such thing than to alledge his only adding the Lords Prayer to it and if he had first brought in this Canon of Scholasticus that had been an imitation of Constantinople too so far as it was a Canon for they had long used the Canon of S. Basil and that of S. Chrysostom there but of this the Objectors take no notice which makes it probable that the Canon was setled long before it was a Prayer which he found and added the Lords Prayer to it But my Adversary urges S. Gregory's Saying That the Apostles only Consecrated with the Lords Prayer and therefore Scholasticus his Canon must be composed about S. Gregory's Time Why so was there not above Five hundred years between the Apostles and S. Gregory If this Canon were not extant in their Time might it not be made in some of the intervening Ages and yet be long enough before S. Gregory And indeed there is a Mistake as learned Men think in the Popes premises for he is supposed to refer to S. Hierom who only saith Christ taught his Apostles that the Faithful might daily say in the Sacrifice of his Body Our Father (e) Hieren adv Pelag. Tom. 2. pag. 469. But neither he nor any Ancient Writer before this Gregory did ever affirm That the Apostles themselves used no other Form of Consecration but only the Lords Prayer it being generally believed they used the Words of Institution recorded in the Gospel and the Lords Prayer when they Consecrated to which long before S. Basil's and S. Ambrose his Time as we have shewed other parts of the Canon were added And for the Roman Canon whatever Du-Moulin and my Adversary say (f) Disc of Lit pag. 84 85. Du-Plessis and other both ancient and modern Writers do agree That several of the old Popes made the several Parts of it in divers Ages long before the Time of Gregory (g) Mornay of the Mass B.I. Chap. 6. p. 44. But Gelasius gathered together all these Additions and put them into that Form wherein Gregory found it and he as Cassander thinks is called by the Title of Scholasticus because he was first a Scholastical Man before he was chosen Pope (h) Gelasius ex Scholastico Papa factus Exp. vet Miss ap Cassand de Liturg. lib. 1. And if this be so as it is very probable then
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
one Order without the least Variation and that one Order was as we see plainly the Old Spanish Liturgy the very Words of which are yet extant (p) Vid Biâ Pati Tom. xv ut supr Item Bona de reb Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 11. p. 365. which was that Office whereby all the little Varieties occasioned by diversity of Religion mixture of People and division of Kingdoms were happily taken away for many Ages and this is the true state of this Matter But my Adversary generously undertakes from this very Council and these Canons to prove First That the Spanish Churches at this time were not subject to Imposed Orders for one Form of Worship no not in the Sacraments which were celebrated there not only variously but unduly (q) Disc of Lit. pag. 133. And this he proves by the Preface to this Council which in a detached Sentence saith The Divine Sacraments in the Churches of Spain are celebrated in a different and unlawful manner (r) In Sâcramentis â vânis quââââ verso ãâ¦ã medo in Hispaniaâum ââââsas celebrantur Baâ Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 345. And this he pretends shews some remaining Ruins of the ancient Liberty even after the Imposing Spirit was rouzed and active But alas the History and Occasion of this diversity shews it was a modern Corruption no ancient Liberty and this very place which he cites calls this diversity Vnlawful as being contrary to the ancient Canons For one Liturgy in one Country was the Old Rule and Original Practice the Variety which yet was no liberty of Praying without Forms was the Innovation yea the same Preface there calls it An Vsurpation assuming licence to it self from Mens negligence contrary to the Ecclesiastical Vsage (s) Quae dum per negligentiam in usum venerunt contra Ecclesiasticos meres ââââtiam libi de usur atione ãâ¦ã Praelat ibid. 'T is plain they had divers Kings different Creeds and all had been confused for some time past but now they had broke through those unhappy Circumstances they resolve to cast out this seemingly Schismatical and really Scandalous Diversity and reduce all to the ancient Uniformity Secondly he saith One of the first Books for public Service that he meets with is the Libellus Officialis in the 25th Canon of this Council which seems rather a short Directory than a compleat Liturgy given to every Presbyter at his Ordination to instruct him how to Administer the Sacraments lest through ignorance of his Duty herein he should offend (t) Disc of Lit. pag. 15. And to make this out he quotes as usually only half that 25th Canon But the whole Canon is this When Priests are Ordained for Parishes let them receive a Book of Offices from their Bishop that they may succeed in their Cures duly instructed lest by Ignorance in the Divine Mysteries they offend Christ (u) Quando Presbyteri in Parochiis ordinantur libellum Officialem à Sacerdete suo accipiant ut ad Ecclesias sibi deputatas instructi succedant ne per ignorantiam etiam in ipsis divinis Sacramentis Christum offendant ita ut quod Quando ad Litanias vel ad Concilium venârint rationem Episcopo suo reddant qualitâr susceptum Officium celebrant vel baptizant Bin. ibid. Can. 25. pag. 351. Here he breaks off but the Canon goes on So that when they come to Litanies or to a Council they may give an account to their Bishop how they have performed the Offices they have undertaken and how they have Baptized This is the Canon entire And to his Objections I Reply First That he did meet with the Codex Gelasianus almost 150 years before this and with Gregory's Ordo Romanus which was made made Thirty year before (w) Disc of Lit. pag. 83. yea he had met with Written Prayers in the Third Council of Carthage An. 398. (x) Ibid pag. 44. And he might have met with a Common-Prayer-Book in Sidonius Apollinaris with Sacerdotalem librum in Vincentius Lirinensis cited before with ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in Sozomen with a whole Liturgy in the Apostical Constitutions with the Books of enjoyned Prayers in Constantine's Time These and many more Books for public Service he might have met with but that none is so blind as he that will not see He affirms Secondly That the Book of Offices mentioned in this Council was rather a short Directory than a compleat Liturgy But this is to outface the Sun when it is certainly meant of the Mozarabic Office wherein all the Hymns and Prayers are writ out at large And it argues a Mind strangely possessed with the Notion of a Directory to tell us That all those Canons which we cited before viz. Can. 2 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16th and 17th had been needless if those Churches had been furnished with such a Liturgy as provided sufficiently for the Severals there mentioned (y) Disc of laÌt pag. 16. For those Canons do all suppose there had been divers Liturgies appointing a various use of those Forms but since now one Liturgy was established as the Second Canon shews they add the Authority of a National Council to that One Order agreed on and forbid all former ways which did in the least vary from it and considering how apt Men are to be tenacious of their own Way which they have long used all these Canons were little enough to secure and restore the ancient Uniformity yea the very Reason given in this 25th Canon why the Bishop delivered this Book of Offices to every Parish-Minister at his Ordination is that they might Officiate by none of the Old Liturgies but by this alone and when these Country-Ministers came to their Bishop either upon occasion of the Grand Procession used when the Litany was publickly said by the whole Clergy of the Diocess or at those Synods which were then held at least once a year Then he might bring this Book along with him to certifie the Bishop that he had used no other Forms but these established in any Offices of his Ministration Now had this been only a Directory according to my Adversaries extravagant Fancy some might offend Christ out of Ignorance by not choosing or making proper Forms and it had been impossible they should all have agreed so exactly in every Office as the Second Canon requires that the People could not observe the least difference To conclude The Fathers of this Council tell us in the 13th Canon That divers Hymns used in the Church were composed by the Ecclesiastical Doctors and if any for that Reason would not use them they must also reject the Forms of Prayer For say they these Hymns are composed as Masses or Supplications or Prayers or Commendations that is Intercessions for all Estates of Men or Impositions of Hands are Composed Which if they might not be said in the Church all Ecclesiastical Offices must cease And therefore they conclude That as none of them did refuse
such Composed Prayers so none of them for the future ought to reject Hymns so Composed for the Praise of God (z) Componantur ergo Hymni sicut componuntur Missae sive Preces vel Orationes sive Commendationes seu Manus impositiones ex quibus si nulla dicantur in Ecclesia vacant Officia Ecclesiastica c. Concil Tulet 4. Can. 13. Bin. ut supià pag 349. I suppose he will grant the Hymns were Forms of Praise in Words at large made by ancient Holy Fathers And they declare that their Communion-Service their Prayers their Collects Intercessions and Forms of Absolving Penitents were composed just as the Hymns were composed viz. in Words writ down at large by Ancient Doctors so that if any Men had then been of our Dissenters Principle to use no Human Composures in the Church except their own all Divine-Service must have ceased because they had no other way to perform it by but by a fixed Liturgy in which these Old Forms were set down But they were so happy that none scrupled to use these Prayers then either because they were Forms or because they were made by Ancient Doctors and thence the Council Argues very firmly That it was ridiculous for them to use prescribed Forms of Prayer of Human Composure and at the same time to scruple the use of Hymns that were Composed after the same manner This sufficiently proves it was a Liturgy at large which was writ in this Book of Offices and so we may dismiss him and his Directory as having no Foundation in or Encouragement from this Council Thirdly He cites a Rule of Pope Gregory's said to be praised in this Synod of Toledo viz. That where there is one Faith there 's no hurt to the Church by diversity of Vsages (a) Disc of Lit. pag. 86 87. His blundering Editor refers this to a place in Eusebius about different ways of Fasting in divers Churches and puts the true Quotation into the next Page But to let him pass We grant that S. Gregory hath such a Rule in his Epistle to Leander (b) Gregor Epist 41. ad Leand lib. 1. and it is quoted with Approbation both by this Council (c) Concil Tolet. 4. Can. 5. and by Walafridus Strabo (d) Walafrid Strab. de reb Eccles cap. 26. But Gregory himself and these who cite him apply this Rule only to a Ceremony in Baptism which he thought might be used variously in divers Churches without any prejudice to that One Faith wherein they agreed and therefore though Trine Immersion was used at Rome he would not impose it on Spain But what is this or the Censure upon Victor in Eusebius for imposing the Roman way of Fasting upon the Eastern Church to our Question about the lawfulness of a National Churches imposing one Liturgy upon her own Members Gregory did most certainly impose Trine Immersion at Rome and Leander and this Council imposed Single Immersion on Spain Nor did any blame Victor for imposing his way of Fasting and keeping Easter upon his own Church of Rome and its Dependants This sort of imposing Ceremonies and Liturgies always was thought very lawful and was practised in all Ages and Countries And this is all we desire viz. to impose the English Liturgy and Ceremonies upon the English Church leaving other National Churches to their Liberty in both cases Fourthly My Adversary saith He can no where diâcâver the Song of the Three Children before this Council of Toledo where it is mentioned as used before but then first imposed (c) Disc of Lit. pag. 178. I Reply The Words of the Canon shew this to be a Mistake For they say That the whole Catholic Church throughout the World celebrates this Hymn and that only some of the Spanish Clergy neglected to sing it at some solemn Times viz. On Sundays and Holy-days therefore they Decree it shall be sung in all the Churches of France and Spain in all solemn Masses and that they who omitted this ancient Custom and broke this Decree should be deprived of the Communion Now how could the whole Catholic Church agree in the use of this Hymn if it had not been imposed Had all Churches been at liberty as he fancies some of them would have used it and others not Again how comes this Council to call it an ancient Custom if this were the first time it was prescribed Or why do they say it was Negligence in those few who omitted it if it were not a Duty before It is plain enough that this Hymn was anciently prescribed but some Scrupulous persons by mistaking the Canons of Laodicea and Braga as if they forbad all Hymns which were not taken out of holy Scripture would not obey the Injunction nor use this Hymn at solemn Times This indeed may prove that some of the Clergy then did neglect to read the whole Office and yet it shews that to be a great fault but it doth not prove that this Hymn was never enjoyned before it rather supposes the Contrary And indeed the Canon of Laodicea only forbids ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Psalms composed by private Persons which cannot reach this Hymn And that Canon of Braga is a Translation of that made at Laodicea and forbids private Mens Poetry to be used in the Church Yet perhaps some did abuse this into the rejecting Hymns composed by the Ancients and therefore seven years after The Second Council at Tours made a Canon to justifie and allow the use of the Hymns made by the Ecclesiastical Doctors (f) Concil Turon 2. Can. 24. An. 570. And what was Decreed then in that Council the last Century is confirmed in this Century by this Fourth Council of Toledo which contains as we see cleer Evidence for the use of Liturgies both now and in ancient Time also Before I leave Spain let me briefly note That the Fifth and Sixth Councils of Toledo do strictly enjoyn Litanies to be used Solemnly upon the Ides of December (g) Concil Tol. 5. Can. 1. An. Dom. 636. Concil Tolet. 6. can 12. An. 638. Bin. ut supr pag. 365. 370. And all Men know Litanies were put into prescribed Forms many Ages before The Eighth Council of Toledo (h) Concil Tolet. 8. can 8. An. 653. Bin. ut supr p. 491. complains of some Clergy Men who were not throughly acquainted with those Orders or Forms which were daily used And they Decree that none hereafter shall be ordained but such as have perfectly Learned the whole Psalter The usual Hymns and Canticles and the way of Baptizing And if any such be already admitted they are compelled to exercise themselves in Reading these Offices Which is a Demonstration they were in written Forms which might be read over by them Another Council about twelve Years after makes a Canon for observing the Method prescribed in the Mozarabic Liturgy about the place of that Psalm O come let us Sing unto the Lord in the Evening Office (i)
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) Uââer 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 âital 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
Antiq Brit. Eccles pag. 370. An. Dom. 560. Moreover Baleus further tells us That S. Asaph the Scholar and Successor of Kentigern writ a Book Of the Ordinations of his Church (g) Balaeus de script Brit. fol. 34. An. Dom. 590. which seems to be the Forms used there in Ordaining Presbyters and Deacons and perhaps in Admitting of Monks This may suffice to shew us the Britons had written and prescribed Forms before my Adversary will allow them to have been used any where and if any require further satisfaction he may consult the Learned B. Vsher's Antiquity of the British Churches where there are divers Evidences of this Truth We proceed therefore to the Saxons who were Converted by Augustin the Monk about the end of the Sixth Century And He no doubt according to S. Gregory's direction made a Liturgy for them taken out of the Roman the Gallican and other Forms which continued in use for some time But after Gregory's Roman way of Singing began to be so generally admired in all these Parts of the World That was also laboured by Augustin's Successors to be brought in here For Bede mentions one James a Deacon who was skilled both in the Roman and the Canterbury way of Song saying of him That Paulinus leaving York and returning to Rochester left this James behind him in the North who when that Province had Peace and the Number of the Faithful encreased being very skilful in Singing in the Church became a Master of Ecclesiastical Song to many after the way either of Rome or of Canterbury (h) Bedae histor lib. 2. cap. 20. circ A. D. 640. Which must signifie his teaching Clerks how to recite Gregory's or Augustin's Forms of Service because in that Age they chanted their Prayers and Praises both About Thirty years after this in Theodorus his Time They learned to Sing the Office all England over and one Eddi after the aforesaid James was their Master in the Churches on the North of Humber (i) Beda ibid. lib. 4. cap. 2. circ An. 670. And a little after those who Instructed Men in Ecclesiastical Offices are called Masters of Singing (k) Idem lib. 5. cap. 20. because the Offices were set to some certain Notes and that alone is enough to prove they then Prayed by certain prescribed Forms it being impossible to set Arbitrary or Extempore Prayers to Notes which though some have affirmed liable to be Canted yet none ever thought them capable to be Chanted But we proceed I doubt not but the Gregorian Forms as well as his way of Singing came into use here before the Year 700 For in the late elaborare Collection of Old Saxon Books and Manuscripts put out by my Worthy Friend Dr. Hicks there is a Sacramentary of S. Gregory which is at least a Thousand years old (l) Grammatica Maeso-Gothic D. Hick p. 148. and then it must be Written about the Year 690. But this is more plain in the Famous Council of Clovesho which sat 24 year after wherein there is not only clear Testimony for the use of Forms but a full Evidence of the prevailing Interest of the Roman Offices For there it is appointed That All Priests shall learn to repeat the whole Office by Law appointed for their Order and shall be able to interpret the Creed the Lords Prayer and the holy Words pronounced in the Mass into the Vulgar Tongue Can 10th As also That all Priests shall perform all their Offices after the same way and manner Can. 11th And further it is Decreed That the Festivals in memory of our Lord be celebrated in one and the same manner in all Offices belonging to them as to Baptism Administring the Communion and the manner of Singing according to the Written Form which we have received from the Roman Church and that the Festivals of the Martyrs shall be observed on the same day according to the Roman Martyrology with the Psalms and Hymns proper to each of them Can. 13th And finally That the Seven Canonical Hours of Prayer be observed with the proper Psalms and Hymns and that the Monasteries shall all Sing alike and shall neither Sing or Read any thing but what is generally used and is derived from Scripture or permitted by the Custom of the Roman Church that so all may with one Mind and one Mouth glorifie God Can. 15th (m) Concil Clovesho Can. 10 11 13 15. apud Spelm. Concil Tom. l. p. 249. circ An. D. 714. From which Canons it is very plain that the Saxons within one Century after their Conversion had Written Forms of Prayer for all Offices and that the Roman Liturgy was now beginning to be generally received in this Land I shall make but one Remark more in so clear a case which is That Venerable Bede dying on Ascension-day is by ancient Historians said to have repeated the Collect for the Day in these Words O King of Glory and Lord of Hosts who as on this day didst ascend triumphantly into the Heaven of Heavens leave us not comfortless but send us the Promise of the Father even the Spirit of Truth (n) Gul. Malms de gest reg lib. 1. cap. 3. pag. 12. Sim. Dunelm lib. 1. cap. 15. and soon after he gave up the Ghost Now this is the Collect in the Old Roman Forms and is yet continued in our Liturgy almost Verbatim which gives that Collect the honour of having been received in this Nation for near a Thousand years But since my Adversary dares not attempt the Saxons and Spelman's Councils afford so many undeniable Proofs of prescribed and imposed Forms used here from the Time of their Conversion I shall not heap up needless Instances but proceed to the Kingdoms and Churches in France and Germany where the same Order and Method of Praying was observed § 5. I have so fully proved Ecclesia Gallicana ab An. Dom. 450. that there was a Form of Service peculiar to the Gallican Church that I need not have added any thing on that Subject but that my Adversary hath the confidence to say In France they had Books for public Service in the 8th Century yet they were used at the discretion of those that officiated who added and left out as they thought fit till Charlemain in the beginning of the Ninth Age would have them Reformed after the Roman guise And this he proves by a Passage cited out of the Chronicle of Engolism related in Mornay of the Mass (o) Disc of Lit. p. 134. but the whole Story is nothing else but Falshood and Fallacy For First He speaks of Books for public Service in France in the 8th Century as if they had none before Whereas we have made it appear That S. Hilary made a Book of Hymns for the Gallican Church in the Fourth Age An. 354. That Museaus of Marseils composed a Book of Prayers for Consecrating the Sacrament in the Fifth Century An. 458. We have shewed That the Gallican Office which is
of Rome (m) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap. 9. pag. 74. For then it follows That the ancient German Offices were still used in some Parts that were subject to the Archbishop of Colen So that still this is exchanging one Form for another and no proof at all of liberty in Praying a thing unknown in this Age. Agobardus Episc Lugdun An. 831. § 7. We have little more in this Discourse against Liturgies out of Antiquity excepting only some few pretended proofs from late Ages to shew that they used various words in the distribution of the Eucharist As First he tells us that Agobardus the Famous Arch-Bishop of Lions could not well like that Common Roman Form The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ c. since he was only for Scripture Expressions in the public Offices And then he intimates that Agobardus was censured for this by Baronius and his Epitomator (n) Disc of Lit. pag. 90. 91. To which I reply First That Baronius never censures this great Bishop at all for this passage is not in Baronius but only in Spondanus the Epitomator and from him alone my Adversary cites it (o) Vid. Baron Tom. 9. An. 831. p. 797. 798. Secondly Spondanus speaks not one word of Agobardus his correcting the Communion-Office but only that he took great pains in restoring the ancient Antiphonary or Book of Hymns (p) Spondan Epitom An. 831. Num. 2. And Baluzius hath now put out the very Tract which Spondanus refers to and there is not one Syllable in all that Book expressing any dislike at the Words used in the distribution (q) Agobardi lib. de divin Psalmod lib. de correct Antiph oper Tom. 2. edit Paris 1666. Yea there is a peculiar discourse of this Bishop against Amalarius his Comment on the Mass wherein he speaks of the Roman Canon Te igitur c. yet never makes the least exception against the Roman Order or any thing contained in it (r) Ibid. lib. contr Amal. pag. 101. So that this pretended dislike of the Roman Form of distribution is a meer Fiction of his own Brain And if it were true that Agobardus did not like any thing in Sacred Offices but what was Scripture Yet there is no cause he should for that cause dislike this which he calls the Roman but was the Primitive and is now our Protestant Form since the words are taken out of and grounded on express places of Holy Scripture The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ is a Scripture Expresion (s) Math. xxvi 26. Luk. xxii 19. 1 Cor. xi 24. and the next words Preserve thy Body and Soul to Eternal Life are grounded on Scripture Promises (t) John vi ver 50.51.53.54 58. so that if Agobardus were never so scrupulous he might very well like and use this Form But because my Adversary deals only in Epitomes I will now give a full Account of this matter We must observe therefore that Leidradus the Predecessor of Agobardus in the year 799. according to the desire of Charles the Great had brought in the Roman Order of Singing into the Church of Lyons and had put out an Antiphonary with an Epistle before it the Hymns whereof were generally taken out of the Holy Scripture (u) Leidradi Ep. ad Carol. Mag. inter oper Agob Tom. 2. p. 127. But about 30 years after Amalarius a busy Monk pretends to bring a new Antiphonary from Rome Corrected after the Roman Office in the time of Gregory the Fourth which he presented to Lewis the Godly and hoped by his Authority to impose it on all the Gallican Church But Agobardus the Primate of France rejects this new Antiphonary and writ a Book to prove there were Heresies Blasphemies and Nonsense in these Hymns of Amalarius and keeps to the old Roman Antiphonary established by his Predecessor the Hymns of which were for the most part taken out of the Psalms and other parts of Holy Scripture commending this to his Clergy and giving them his Reasons why he would not admit of the other And this Book of Agobardus concludes with these words As the Church hath a Book of Mysteries for Celebrating the Solemnity of the Mass digested Orthodoxly and with convenient Brevity and hath a Book of Lessons collected Judiciously out of the Divine Books so they ought to have this Third Book the Antiphonary purged from all Human Figments and Lies sufficiently ordered out of the pure words of Scripture through the whole Circle of the year That so in performing sacred Offices according to the most approved Rule of Faith and the Authority of ancient discipline there may be kept among us one and the same Form of Prayer of Lessons and of Ecclesiastical Songs (w) Agobard de correct Antiphon §. 19. Tom. ii p. 100. This is the whole Story and the passage which Spondanus ignorantly or at least rashly Censures and my Adversary Ridiculously brings in to shew Agobardus his dislike of the words of distribution Whereas these words refer only to the Hymns which yet probably were not all the very words of Scripture but were either Transcribed thence or agreeable thereto much more than the new Hymns of Amalarius And since Agobardus received and used the Roman Canon and the whole Roman Missal wherein were many things which are not the words of Scripture we must not expound these words cited but now so strictly as Spondanus doth as if he would not use any words in Divine Offices but those of Scripture For Agobardus means no more than that the Hymns ought to be either taken out of Scripture or agreeable to the Doctrine thereof for he proves that the Hymns of Amalarius were Heretical and Blasphemous contrary in many things to the Holy Scripture and therefore he rejected them But as to any Liberty in varying the Prayers Lessons or Hymns that were established or altering the Roman Forms This great Bishop was so far from it that he enjoyns the old Gregorian Office and imposes that prescribed Form together with the Lessons and the Hymns and opposes those Innovations and Alterations which some attempted to make because the Forms and Order then established were agreeable both to the Rule of Faith and to the acient Ecclesiastical Laws upon which occasion he produceth that African Canon before cited (x) Part. i. Cent. 4. §. 24. pag. 257. in these Words viz. That no Supplications and Prayers be said unless they have been approved in a Council nor shall any of these at all be Sung in the Church till they have been considered by the Prudent and approved of in a Synod lest any thing against the Faith be composed either my mistake or by design (y) Canon Afric ap Agob de correct Antiph §. ii p. 92. And now the Reader shall judge whether this Author be for my Adversaries purpose or no since he imposes Books of prescribed Prayers Lessons and Hymns and thinks the keeping strictly to them is
descended so low but since his Fancy for a bad Cause puts him upon these poor shifts I was not willing to leave any thing that might amuse a common Reader But now as to these later Ages the Point is clear certain and undeniable that Liturgies were every where imposed and no Church permitted its own Clergy to vary from their own way It is true many Corruptions and Superstitions in these Ages crept into the Liturgies of all Churches but they grafted still upon the old Stock kept the Primitive way of Praying Yea retained so many of the ancient and pure Forms as do frequently confute divers of these Corruptions and Innovations So that it is no difficult thing to disprove many of the Romish Modern Opinions by some parts of their ancient Missals but that is not my busisiness It is sufficient to my purpose that I have made it Evident there were prescribed Forms used in the public Service even from the beginning of Christianity and that the way of Serving God by Liturgies was the Practice of all Regular Churches and had the Approbation of all Eminent Fathers and of very many Councils all along in every Century since the time of the Apostles and from the beginning of setling Christianity CHAP. IV. Of the Arguments against the Antiquity of LITVRGIES THERE are some things relating to the Antiquity of Prescribed Forms and Liturgies which are dispersed up and down my Adversary's Book and would not easily be brought under the order of Time in the History and yet must be considered that no Scruple may remain concerning this great Truth And though some of these have been briefly examined before yet we will here put them together and give a fuller Answer to all that looks like an Objection § 1. First He thinks to disprove the ancient use of Prescribed Forms by affirming That of old they had no more but a certain Order wherein divers Churches agreed to administer the several Parts of Worship particularly the Severals in the Sacrament so as each had its known and fixed place This he finds in many Fathers and he saith the 19th Canon of Laodicea An. 365. was a Rule for this Order (f) Disc of Lit. pag. 4 5. which elsewhere he makes to be no more than a Rubric or a Directory (g) Ib. pag. 174. But this should have been proved not only by the word Ordo which we have shewed signifies a Liturgy containing not only the Method but the very Forms themselves He should have produced some such ancient Rubric or Directory which had nothing but the Method of the several Parts of Divine-Service without any Forms For we have produced Liturgies at least as ancient as that Canon of Laodicea viz. That of Jerusalem and that in the Apostolical Constitutions having all the Forms at large and if he cannot shew one of these Directories he only dreams of such a thing Now though it be hard to make out a Negative yet we may go far to prove there was no such thing distinct from a Liturgy For these Severals in the Sacrament were Prayers Intercessions Giving of Thanks Prefaces Hymns and the like Now these must be called by some distinguishing Names in this pretended Rubric and that they could not well be unless they were Forms Now if the Severals were all Forms as the Prefaces and Hymns certainly were then they might have proper Names for each of them and might easily describe them by some of the first words as Our Father Lord have mercy Lift up your Hearts c. and then if the Forms were known by those short Names that makes this Rubric become a shorter Liturgy Besides He tells us This Order was certain and agreed on by several Churches and made some kind of Vniformity among them in praying for the same things But it is hard to conceive how Extempore Prayers could be agreed on by distant Churches to be used in one certain Order or how this agreement could produce Uniformity if the Words of the Prayers every where differed and the Phrases in the same place daily varied No Canons of Councils not written Rule nor ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã can suffice to make an Uniformity out of such diversity He finds but one Canon till the beginning of the Sixth Age to direct this Order viz. the 19th Canon of Laodicea and that is a very short one which only mentions Six Prayers as known by their proper Names therefore to be sure that Canon was not all the Rule the Church had for this Agreement and Uniformity And for the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã it was that which the Deacon lifted up at the end of every Collect when the Bishop or Priest came to say Through Jesus Christ our Lord to give Notice to the People to say Amen or to make some Response And sometimes to call them off from their Knees to joyn in Hymns or the like which supposes known Forms when so slight a Signal served a great Congregation to make them ready for all Parts of the Service in which they had any share Therefore there must be more to make this Uniformity in distant Churches and in very large Congregations and that was Prescribed Liturgies which we have made out to be much elder than his imaginary Rubric or Directory But for once let us suppose That they had in those Early Ages no more than some Canons or Written Rubric prescribing and enjoyning the certain Order of the several Parts of Worship and this so exact as to make divers Churches agree to pray for the same things and in the same Method Would not this be as much an abridgment of the Liberty which is claimed and a stinting of the Spirit as if the Words were prescribed If Ministers then had the Gift of Prayer could not that one Spirit which inspired them teach them the Order and Method as well as the Words and Phrases Would not this Gift have made them as Uniform as Written Canons or Rubrics and rendred a Directory as needless as a Liturgy It must be so unless my Adversary will say the only use of the Spirit is to furnish Men with Phrases and Expressions in Prayer but that he cannot say without contradicting himself and blaspheming the Spirit because he saith God minds not so much the Expressions as the inward Affections (h) Disc of Lit. pag. 132. and proves this by a Set of Golden-Sayings out of the Fathers (i) Ibid. pag. 50. Wherefore at this rate the Gift of Prayer would only enable Men for that part of our Prayer which God doth not much mind So that this imaginary Order of his devised to protect the Gift of Praying Extempore overthrows it as much as a Common-Prayer-Book And if he could make it out Wise Men could not but see That so soon as there was need to agree upon his sort of Order and to write down the Method and the Things to be prayed for so soon the Gif of Prayer was ceased and so soon
Antioch especially when it was conveyed for the most part of that time only by Oral Tradition To conclude The Apostles shewed the way of making Forms of the things to be believed and if the Parallel hold between Creeds and Liturgies then we have reason to believe they first Composed Forms also for the things to be asked of God in Prayer and to be spoken to his Honour in Praises Which first and Apostolical Forms are the foundation and ground of all the several Liturgies in great and eminent Churches which like their Creeds agree in the main Essential parts and have so much likeness as to persuade us they all came from one Original Form at first but tract of Time and distacne of Place caused some differences in the Order and Phrases in distant Churches But so that all the Members of every great Church were obliged to learn the Creed of that Church where they received their Baptism and also to use the Forms of that same Church in whose Communion they lived And this may suffice for his Consequences drawn from the Primitive Creeds because it is nothing to our purpose when they came to be used first in the Communion Office forasmuch as he grants they were used in the Office of Baptism from the beginning § 11. He concludes this Set of Arguments by a large and tedious digression about the Variety used in the Form of Renouncing the Devil in Baptism and here again he fills his Margen with the Names of near twenty Ancients who speak of this Form of Renunciation in different Words by which he hopes to prove That this Form was arbitrary since not only divers Churches differed therein but the Authors who lived in the same Church yea the same Author in several places of his Works expresses it variously And then comes his Inference That if they were not limited to a Set Form of Words in this Sentence none can believe they were or would have suffered themselves to be confined to an invariable Form of Words in Praying at Baptism (b) Disc of Lit. pag. 105 106 107 108 109. Now if we should grant his Consequence did follow from these Premisses then we must expect at least that the Premisses shall be fully proved but we shall shew that he hath not made them out sufficiently For first the greater part of his Authors do not pretend to recite the Form but are only applying the Duty in occasional Discourses for which I need no other Evidence but to desire the Reader to consult the Places he produceth out of Origen Ephrem Syrus S. Basil Cyril of Alexandria Pseudo Dionysius Justinian Optatus S. Cyprian S. Augustin in the two later places and S. Hierom These Fathers in Homilies and practical Discourses speak of the thing and press the Obligation but do not pretend to repeat the words they express them in their own Phrases and therefore no wonder if they differ Secondly Many of these Witnesses do not speak of the whole Renunciation but some of the Renouncing the Devil only others only of Renouncing the World as the Subject upon which they were treating required and it is strange that he should cite these Authors to make out a difference in the whole Form when one speaks of one part of it and another Author treats of another part Thirdly Most of these Authors not only lived in several Ages but belonged to several distant Countries and were Members of Churches which had some difference in the Phrases and Order of their whole Liturgy and therefore their differing in the Words or Syllables of this Renunciation doth not prove they had no Set Forms of Prayer in any Church but only that several great Churches had some Variety in their Forms which we freely grant and it cannot hurt our Cause since all were limited to use the Forms of their own Church Thus Origen belonged to Alexandria Constantine's Edict was forged at Rome Cyril was of Palaestina Basil of Cappadocia Salvian of France Pseudo-Dionysius of Laodicea Clemens of Antioch Justinian of Constantinople Tertullian of Africa and S. Ambrose of Milan Now we have proved that there was a Variety between the Liturgies of these distant Churches in many particulars and therefore it is not strange they should differ in expressing the Syllables of the Renunciation supposing every one of them had been repeating the Form of his own Church Yet Fourthly Those of the same Country and espcially those of the same Church do either agree or come as near one another as can be expected from Men who are rather describing than repeating the Form Thus Ephrem-Syrus and Cyril of Jerusalem do agree exactly both of them no doubt referring to the Form used in Palaestina Salvian twice mentions this Form in the same words referring to the Liturgy of the Gallican Church and S. Chrysostom differs very little from Justinian because both had respect to the Constantinopolitan Form and that of Antioch related in the Constitutions is very near it So Tertullian and S. Augustin where they speak closely do exactly agree in the African Form And it is very probable that Constantine's Edict refers to the Roman Form Basil to that of Naeocoesarea and S. Ambrose to that of Milan Now if each of these great Churches had a certain Form to the use of which all that belonged to it were obliged then probably they had also such a Form for other Prayers And Fifthly it is very plain that every great Church had such a Form because the Fathers do very often charge those who were Baptized to remember the very words in which they made this Renunciation so doth S. Ambrose (c) Quid interrogatus es recognosce Quid responderis Ambros de iis quae initiant cap 2. and S. Chrysostom (d) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Chrys in 2 Cor. hom 2. p. 555. Now this Charge had been ridiculous and had required an Impossibility if the Words were arbitrary and every one of them had made the Renunciation in a different Form of Words I conclude therefore That every Great Church had one certain Form and all of them were so like that they must come from one Original at first and it was only length of Time and distance of Place that had made the small Variations between the Forms of several eminent Churches Which also was the Case of Liturgies in general and of the whole Baptismal Office as well as of this peculiar part of it We have now done with all his Arguments of this kind and will leave the Reader to judge of the Modesty and Truth of those mighty Brags which he makes of the narrow search he hath made into Antiquity and the full Answer he hath given to all that either he could meet with or that others had produced on Behalf of Liturgies whose Primitive Original and general Use is but more cleared by all his Objections against them § 12. My Adversary concludes his Book first by fixing the Period when Liturgies did come
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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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
and for all the Occasional Offices which Book so translated was Printed at Leiden An. 1648. To this I may add another Book put out by Jo. Alasco a Noble Polonian Protestant in the days of King Edward the Sixth the Title whereof runs thus The Form and Manner of the whole Ecclesiastical Ministration in the Church for Strangers and especially Germans appointed at London by the most Religious King Edward the Sixth An. 1550 (q) Forma ratio tota Ecclesiastici ministerii c. Lond. An. 1550. Wherein there are also divers Set Forms of Prayer and Thanksgiving to be used in the several Offices of their Church And to name no more I have in my possession a Scotch-Common-Prayer-Book said to be Composed by Mr. Knox containing A Kalendar with Holy-days The Psalms of David in Meeter Forms of Prayer in the Visitation of the Sick Forms of Confession of Sin A Form of Intercession for all Estates of Men A Form of Prayer for the King Forms for Administring the Lords Supper and Baptism The Form of Matrimony and other occasional Offices c. for the use of the Kirk of Scotland Imprinted at Middleburgh An. 1594. I do not cite these Books as if there were no other or no more Protestant Liturgies but because I have seen all these lately and have most of them by me and because these are sufficient to convince any man That all established Protestant Churches do approve of and use Prescribed Forms so that if we should cast off ours to oblige that sort of Dissenters whom Mr. Clarkson Patronizes we must act contrary to the judgment and practice of the most famous Protestant Churches abroad and the most eminent Reformed Divines of all Nations and therefore I refer it to any Man to consider if this be a probable way to unite us with all Forein Protestants as some vainly discourse § 4. I know nothing can remain to be objected now unless it be That there are some great and just Exceptions lye against our Liturgy in particular To which I shall not now Reply by Repeating what I have said in my Larger Discourses upon the Common-Prayer where every one of the Objections that I have ever met with are considered and answered already But I shall now shew what esteem our Common-Prayer-Book hath been in among the most learned and judicious Protestant Writers ever since it was first Compos'd And I begin with Alexander Alesius an eminent Scotch Divine who Translated King Edward's Common-Prayer Book into Latin and in his Preface to it he saith He did this that it might be seen and read by many for the honour of the English Church whose care and diligence herein he doubted not would be for the example and comfort of some and for the shame of others and he hoped it might provoke the rest of the Reformed to imitate this most noble and divine Work in setling the Church believing that God put it into his hands to publish it at that time for the General Good (r) Praef. ad Libr. precum per Alex. Aâes inter Buceri script Anglicaâ pag. 373 3â5 c. with much more to the same purpose And here I must note that probably this was that Interpretation of our English Service Book which the judicious and modest Mr. Bucer looked over so diligently to satisfie himself whether he ought to conform to it And upon this he saith When I throughly understood it I gave Thanks to God who had granted to this Church to Reform her Rites to that degree of Purity For I found nothing in them which was not taken out of the Word of God or at least which was contrary thereunto if it were candidly expounded (s) Buceri censura super Libr. Sâcroâ praef pag. 456. And when by Archbishop Cranmer's special Command he had perused the whole Book in order to his censuring what he thought was to be amended He declares his Judgment thus In the prescript Form for the Communion and the daily Prayers I see nothing writ in this Book which is not taken out of the Word of God if not in express Words as the Psalms and Lessons yet in Sense as the Collects and also the Order of these Lessons and Prayers and the Times when they are to be used are very agreeable to the Word of God and to the Constitution observed in the Ancient Church (t) Buceri censura c. cap. 1. p. 457. And afterwards he is for writing down all holy Rites and the Words of the sacred Administrations and he owns that the Church of England hath done this very purely and conformable to Christ's Institution As for the things which he modestly supposed might be altered for the better it is evident That most of them were regulated afterwards and many of them were rectified according to his Advice there so that we not only see he was clearly for the use of prescribed Forms but liked the Book of King Edward with some few Amendments and had he seen our present Common-Prayer no doubt he would have wholly approved it The next Evidence shall be the most learned Archbishop of Spalato who affirms against Suarez That the English Liturgy containeth nothing in it which is not holy which is not pious and truly Christian as well as Catholic (u) Ant. de Dom. Spalat osteus error Fran. Suarez cap. 6. §. 82. pag. 340. And a little after The Form of Divine Offices that is of Public Prayers for all England which as I have said is taken out of the most ancient and most laudable Liturgies approved even by the Roman Church collected with great Judgment so as to leave out those things which the Romanists themselves are not very ready to defend (w) Ibid §. 37. pag. 342. Thus this Great Man stops the Mouth of a Malicious Enemy to our Liturgy And Causabon at the same time had as great an esteem for it For in his Epistle to King James the First he saith Your Majesty hath such a Church in your Kingdoms partly so instituted of Old and partly so regulated by your Endeavours that none at this day comes nearer to the Form of the most Flourishing Ages of the Ancient Church following a middle way between those who have offended both in the Excess and the Defect (x) Causaâ Ep. ad Reg. jac praeâix ad exerc Baron And in an Epistle to Salmasius he saith If his Conjecture do not fail the soundest part of the whole Reformation is in England (y) Id. Ep. ad Salmas qu. 709. Moreover Salmasius himself though in some Points he differed from our Church yet relates it as a Reason of King Charles the Martyrs constancy to our Liturgy That the Form of it was long since approved by most of the Reformed Pastors and those Men of the first Rank both in France and elsewhere and as being a Book which seemed to contain nothing but what agreed to Piety and to the Evangelical Doctrin (z)
Salmâs 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 â4 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 â 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
rate concerning it As to what relates to stinted Forms of Prayer the Judicious Mr. Clerkson in his excellent Dicourse of Liturgies having so Learnedly and fully discussed it he needs only commend its perusal to the Candid Reader with an Assurance That until it be cleared that stinted Liturgies are Ancienter than that Learned Person represents them to be they shall be Freed from a strict Imposition Thus far he Who hath been so grosly mistaken in his Character of this Discourse that I know not how he can make satisfaction for being so Confident in his Error but by giving us another assurance that if we prove Liturgies are much more Ancient than his Friend represents them to be He and those who have been misled with him will no longer disturb the peace of the Church and Nation by opposing them but will quietly submit to the strict imposition of them since it is no more but to be obliged to Serve God in public by the most Primitive and Prudent way of Worship ERRATA PAg. 3. lin 13. Marg. read Philo p. 34. l. 20. Marg. r. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã p. 35. l. 28. Marg. r. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã p. 48. l. 9. r. of praying ãâã the Pagan way p. 63. l. 3. r. assign no p. 85. l. 23. r. this cause p. 96. l. 3. r. Cardinal Bona p. 101. l. 25. r. eldest Fathers p. 109. l. 16. r. cannot be p. 115. l. 22. stop thus parts for the Heathen Worship p. 123. l. 8. r. Liturgy is put for p. 139. l. 22. Marg. verbum praedicet p. 154. l. 28. Marg. r. pag. 161. p. 156. l. 24. Marg. r. Coci censura p. 176. l. 27 177. l. 16. r. Constitutions p. 190. l. 7. r. Public Service p. 195. l. 3. stop thus provââ before there p. 202. l. 19. r. is in the Manner p. 207. l. 19. Marg. r. de bapt Servator p. 211. l. 21. r. that the words p. 212. l. â r. giving us many p. 228. l. 8. Marg. r. mundo p. 243. l. 18. r. a Solecism p. 251. l. 17. r. such Mistakes With some other literal Errors which the Judicious Reader can easily correct A Scholastical History OF THE PRIMITIVE ORIGINAL And general Use of LITURGIES IN THE Christian Church The Introduction concerning the Grounds for Liturgies in Holy Scripture § 1. THough LITURGIES have great reputation from their Ancient use in the Church and the principal design of this Tract be to prove that yet since a late Author is so bold to say They pretend not to Scripture (a) Discourse concerning Liturgy p. 1. I shall introduce my Discourse by shewing That Liturgies have a great reputation also for the testimony which the Scripture bears to them not only as the Phrases and main parts of them are the words of Scripture but because the Holy Bible makes it appear That the People of God from the beginning did generally use Forms of Prayer and Praises in their public Worship The Learned Fagius thinks they are as old as the time of Enosh when Men began publickly to call upon the Name of the Lord (b) Gen. iv 26. but it is certain that the first piece of solemn Worship among the Israelites recorded in Scripture is a Form of Praise sung in parts by the Men and Women after their deliverance from the Egyptians (c) Exod. xv ver 1. compar'd with ver 21. Soon after God himself prescribed a Form of Words by which the Priest was to bless the People (d) Num 6.23 and Forms of Prayer for those who offered their First-fruits and Tithes (e) Deut. xxvi ver 5 13. yea God prescribes a Form of Prayer for the Penitent Jews and charges them to Take words with them and turn to the Lord and say Take away all Iniquity c. and upon their using this Form He promises to heal their backslidings c. (f) Hos xiv 2 3 4. The Psalms of David were Forms of Prayer and Praise endited by the Spirit of God not only for his private use but for the publick service of the Temple (g) 1 Chron. xvi 7. 2 Chro. xxix 30. Chap. v. 13. And I could bring innumerable Proofs both out of Jewish and Christian Writers if it were needful to shew that the Jews did worship God by Set Forms and had a fixed Liturgy (h) Josephus Philo P. Fagius Scaliger Buxtorf Synag Seld. in Eutych but I shall only refer to two Great Men Doctor Hammond who proves both that they had Forms and that their Forms were in the same Method with our Common-Prayer (i) Dr. Hamm. View of Direct p. 136. Oxford Papers p. 260. Vol. 1. And Dr. Lightfoot who not only asserts they had stated Forms (k) Dr. Lightfoot Vol. 2. p. 158. p. 1139. but sets down the order both of their Hymns and Supplications gives us the Words which they used (l) Idem Vol. l. p. 922 942 946. and learnedly demonstrates that these Forms continued even to our Saviours time and long after (m) Ibid. p. 157 Exp on Mutiâ vi 9. Now from this short but full Evidence we thus argue If the Jews who were Gods only People and the best among them even such as were inspired and in the purest times of that Church did worship God acceptably by Set Forms of Prayer in their public Devotions then a Liturgy is no argument of a corrupted Church no hindrance to servency no way displeasing to God nor unfit for public Assemblies as our Adversary pretends But neither he nor his Friends are able to produce one instance where either God disliked Forms or good Men complained of them under the legal Dispensation Therefore I may conclude That Liturgies are very agreeable to the Scriptures of the Old Testament and may be justified from many places thereof § 2. To this it may be objected That though this Method of Praying was agreeable to the old Law it is not suitable to Gospel-times To which I reply First That this yields the Cause as to the Jewish Church and is a clear acknowledgment that the Faithful did then Worship God by Forms But Secondly Since the Duties of Prayer and Praise are grounded on the same Reason now that they were then and neither are nor were intended to be abrogated they who say this must assign some satisfactory Reason why these Duties may not be performed now in the same manner that they were performed then otherwise it is not probable that a Form as such is unsuitable to the Gospel way of Worship especially since Christ and his Apostles who duly frequented the Temple-Worship where these Men grant Forms were used did never shew any dislike of that way of Worshiping and though they taxed their other Corruptions very freely they joyned in these Forms and never reproved the Jews for using them Thirdly This way of serving God having been so anciently and universally used if Jesus had designed to alter it and set up the new
Extempore Way there ought to have been an express abrogation of the Old Way and a positive institution of the New one left upon Record either in the Gospels or Epistles But it is so far from that that we can prove our Lord and his Apostles allowed made and used Forms of Prayer For according to the custom of the great Rabbies of that Age Jesus taught his Disciples a divine Form of Prayer to be added to their other Forms as the peculiar mark of their being his Scholars (n) Dr Lightf Vol. 2. p. 158. And it is observed by learned Men that Christ took every sentence of this Form out of the Jewish Prayers then in use (o) Idem Exp. in Math. vi 9. Grotii Com. in locum So far saith Grotius was the Lord of the Church from all affectation of unnecessary Innovation And we may note that when they desired he would teach them to pray that was a proper occasion to have reformed the old method of praying by Forms if Christ had intended such a thing but instead of any such intimation he gives them a new Form and copies the several Petitions out of the Jewish Liturgy shewing thereby his approbation of praying to God in a prescribed Form Which is also manifest from our Lords Hymn which he and his Apostles sang together after his last Supper p ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Math. xxvi 30. and if this were not the Paschal Hymn as the best Authors think (q) Du-Plessis of the Mass lib. I. chap. I. pag. 4. yet it could not be an Extempore Psalm as Grotius fancies because the Apostles sang with him and so must know the words of it before (q) Vid. Bez. not in Matth. xxvi 30. Again His Prayer in the Garden which was offered up as S. Paul notes (r) Hebr. v. 7. with extraordinary Devotion was a Form because he thrice repeated the very same Words (s) Math. xxvi 44. and by the way this shews the folly of those who pretend None can pray devoutly unless they vary the phrase every time they pray To proceed It is very probable that our Saviour used a Form of Prayer on the Cross extracted out of the XXIIth Psalm which begins My God my God why hast thou forsaken me (t) Math. xxvii 46. yet he had the same Spirit in the highest Manner by which those Psalms were indited and therefore of pure choice used Forms even on extraordinary occasions The Apostles observed the Jewish hours of Prayer and worshiped God with them both in their Temple and their Synagogues but there is no account that they set up a New way of Praying or disliked the old and S. Augustine affirms that they used the Lords Prayer even after they had received the Spirit of God and repeated that Form every day even when they were in their greatest state of perfection (u) Aâg Hilar. Ep. 89. p. 82. G. And Beza whose Authority will sway much with our Adversaries tells us That S. Paul promised to come and settle Forms of Prayer at Corinth in the Church which he had planted there for when he expounds those words The rest will I set in order when I come he saith That is to settle those things which pertained to order as Place Time and FORMS OF PRAYER (w) Beza not minor in 1 Cor. xi 34. I only note he had this Exposition out of S. Augustine (x) Aug. Januar. Ep. 118. p. 116. c. who saith S. Paul intimates It was too long for an Epistle to set down that whole order of Celebration which the Vniversal Church observes so that he would leave that to be setled till he came And hence the Dutch Divines who writ to the Assembly at London in the Civil Wars say They dare not condemn all those godly Churches who from the Apostolical and Primitive times celebrated Gods public Worship by prescribed and certain Forms (y) Class Walach ap Falkn libert Eccles pag. 111. So that they also thought Forms were setled in some Churches even from the Apostles times which I could prove by many other Authorities but these may suffice § 3. There are some Objections against these Proofs from the New Testament dispersed up and down the discourse of Liturgies and other Writings of that party which I will here consider before I proceed First Our Adversary brings many Quotations to prove that the Ancients did not believe the Lords Prayer was intended for a Form but for a direction what things they should pray for (z) Discourse of Lit. p. 3 4. But all that heap of Authors which he cites affirm no more than that it was not only to be a Form but also a direction Which we freely grant for if it were intended at all to be used as a Form then Forms are agreeable to the Gospel way of Worship and the using it as a Form doth not hinder it from being a direction to draw up other Forms by for all Authentic Liturgies and ours especially are grounded on and drawn up by the Lord's Prayer The Collects for Grace being grounded on the three first Petitions The Prayers for all Earthly Blessings are grounded upon the Request for our daily Bread The Confessions and Litanies for pardon and deliverance from Sin and all other kinds of evil upon the three last Petitions and The Thanksgivings Hymns and Praises upon the Doxology So that I cannot but wonder at this Authors impertinent filling a whole Page with Quotations to prove it lawful to use other Words in Prayer while he is disputing against us who allow and use Liturgies which are other Words but such as are agreeable to it both as to the Form and Matter of them His business was to prove the Lord's Prayer was never intended by Christ nor used by the Church as a Form But almost every one of his Authors grant it was a Form even in the places he produces Saint Augustine and Saint Chrysostom do so in him and in an hundred places more as I shall shew when I come to them in Order Calvin in his Quotation calls it A Form dictated by Christ and elsewhere saith That holy Men daily repeat it by Christ's Command (a) Calv. Instit lib. 4. cap. 1. § 23. Maldonat only tells us We are not always bound to use these very Words Grotius owns it may profitably be repeated in those very Words Causabon in the place cited is not speaking of the Lord's Prayer (b) Causab exercit 14. num 14. p. 235. And it was hardily done to cite Mr. Mede for his Opinion who in the place which he cites doth not only prove the Lord's Prayer was a Form but also that the use of Forms under the Gospel is lawful and profitable (c) Mede Diatrib 1. on Math. vi 9. Jansenius doth not dislike the use of the Words of our Lord's Prayer as a Form but the minding only the Words and not the Sense he justly reproves I shall add
That his Friend Du-Plessis saith The Lord's Prayer was commended to the Apostles for their ordinary Prayer (d) Du-Plessis of the Mass Book I. chap. 1. pag. 9. I have been more particular in clearing this point that I may shew the Reader to how little purpose this Author usually fills his Margen and may now conclude That Christ did intend this Prayer for a Form and so it was used by the Church in all Ages Secondly We are often told of a Gift of Prayer which was in the Apostolick Church and this Gift enabling Persons as they suppose to express their wants in Extempore Phrases made Forms in that Age however useless I Answer That this Gift is not expresly mentioned in Scripture nor in any ancient Author but S. Chrysostom and he holds it was a Miraculous Gift peculiar to the Pastors of the Church and saith it was ceased long before his time so that in S. Chrysostom's Opinion our Dissenters Extempore Prayers cannot proceed from this Gift and it is plain they pervert all the places of Scripture which they produce to prove their claim to this Gift of Prayer Christ indeed saith When the Apostles Martyrs or Confessors were brought before their Enemies and Persecutors They need take no thought how or what they should speak for it should be given them in that hour what they should speak (e) Math. x. 19. But What is this saith a Learned Father to speaking before our Friends where premeditation is enjoyned (f) Isidor Peleus lib. 4. ep 218. or what reason is there to apply this to the Prayers we make to God to whom we must not say any thing which we have not well considered on before we speak it (g) Eccles v. 1 2. Secondly They alledge that place of S. Paul Rom. VIII 26. The Spirit also helpeth our infirmities for we know not what to pray for as we ought c But this place cannot be meant of the infirmity of wanting Words because it is here said The Spirit maketh intercession for us with groans which cannot be uttered and the Context shews that S. Paul is speaking of the infirmity of Impatience under present Afflictions and praying for immediate deliverance even when it is not pleasing to God nor profitable for us Now this Infirmity the Spirit helpeth and teacheth us to bear them patiently and submit to Gods Will yea to pray his Will may be done yet in the mean time the Spirit pleads with God to deliver us and that with inexpressible ardency So that this place is no ground for any to expect the extraordinary assistance of the Spirit to teach them new Words and Phrases in ordinary Cases and for their daily Prayers Thirdly They tell us S. Paul speaks of praying with the Spirit and praying with understanding (h) 1 Cor. xiv 15. I Answer He is discoursing of praying in an unknown Tongue which since none of our Adversaries can do now this place is nothing to their purpose and I much question whether they who pray Extempore can be said to pray with understanding as to their own particulars because they neither know before what they are to say nor can remember afterward what they have said However the strict Meaning of this place is no More but that if a Man who had the Gift of Tongues prayed in a Congregation which understood not the Language he prayed in he must Make the People understand the meaning of his Prayer or be silent but whether his Prayer were a Form or Extempore is not said in this place which refers to the Gift of Tongues and not to the Gift of Prayer But our Adversary hath a peculiar Notion of this Gift of Prayer viz. That it was an ordinary Gift common to all Christians and continuing to this day which he proves because all to whom the Apostles writ are exhorted to Pray in the Spirit (i) Ephes vi 18. and to pray in the Holy Ghost (k) Jude ver 20. by which he understands that they were all able to conceive their own Prayers and therefore he thinks if they made use of Prayers formed by others they did not exercise their own Gift nor pray as they were able (l) Discourse of Liturg. p. 128 129. To which I Reply That the absurd consequences of this Exposition ought to make our Author ashamed of it since it would follow from hence That no Man in their public Assemblies except the Minister did Pray in the Spirit because the Minister alone conceives the Prayer and though it be Extempore to him yet it is a Form to the whole Congregation who must pray in his Words and not exercise their own Gift of Praying by the Spirit in his Sense which is to invent the Words by the Spirit Rejecting therefore this absurd Exposition that leads to so ridiculous a Conclusion we shall note That praying with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit Ephes vi 18. signifies no more than praying fervently and heartily as loving in the Spirit (m) Coloss I. ver 8. is put for loving fervently ex animo from the Heart Thus Grotius expounds it Praying not only with the Voice but from the Heart (n) Grot. Com. in Ephes vi 18. And thus Praying in the Holy Ghost Jude ver 20. implies Praying with that devotion and fervency which we are moved to by the Holy Spirit but then this is no extraordinary Gift this is no more than what both Then and Now every good Man by the ordinary assistance of the Spirit might and may do even by a Form for he that repeats that so as to attend the Sense and heartily desires every Petition may be granted he prays by the Spirit or in the Spirit as these Scriptures exhort and thus the People as well as the Priest in public or private may and ought to pray in the Spirit Which shews that these places rightly expounded are nothing at all to our Dissenters pretended gift of Inventing new Words every time they Pray We will grant there was such a Gift in the Apostles times But we judge St. Chrysostom knew much better than they what it was and he thinks it was as Miraculous as the gift of Tongues with which St. Paul joyns it He saith it was given only to one and affirms it was ceased long before his time and seems to imply that the Forms which were made in his Days had their Original from the Prayers which were made at first by these inspired Men Whose Prayers thus conceived were written down and so preserved and used when the Gift it self failed And when we consider the agreeableness of all Ancient Liturgies in the Method and even in many of the Phrases and Forms and their neer Resemblance to each other we may Rationally believe they were all derived at first from that One Spirit which directed all Inspired Men in their new planted Churches to ask fit and proper things almost in the very same Words And thus the
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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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
(q) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Orig. in Cels l. 8. p. 402. And again speaking of all Christians he saith they Worshiped God and his only Son according to their ability with Prayers and Praises (r) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Ibid. pag. 386. Not that every private Christian invented his Prayers and Praises Extempore but used the Forms made for them in public especially with Vigorous affections and Fervent Devotion And if these places of Origen do at all belong to Christians public Worship as they must do if they be to the purpose in this dispute then we may be sure private Christians were not allowed to make their own Prayers and Praises Extempore there that would have bred such confusion as St. Paul forbids expresly (s) 1 Cor. xiv 26. and yet Origen assures us they offered them up ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã therefore that Phrase must not be restrained to Extempore Prayer No nor ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which he cites out of Nazianzen where also all Christians are exhorted As well as they were able to Sing that Triumphant Hymn upon Julians being cut off which Israel Sang when the Egyptians were drowned in the Red Sea (t) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. Naz. Orat. 3 pag. 54. For Nazianzen there sets down the very Words which he would have them all Sing being indeed that same Hymn which is Recorded Exod. xv only adapted and fitted for this Occasion Now if this Form was to be Sung ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as well as they were able then the Phrase means no more here but as Devoutly as they could and cannot be applied to Extempore inventions to which he would gladly restrain it I grant when this Phrase is applied to another subject matter such as writing Books or Preaching it sometimes signifies doing these things as their Fancy and parts enable them but all his Quotations of this kind are nothing to this dispute where we are only to consider the Phrase as it is applied to praying and praising God * So pro viribus in S. Augustine signifies the strength of Devotion not the strength of Fancy And there we have shewed it never signifies doing these Extempore but doing them very Devoutly wherefore that we may not tire the Reader as he doth with numberless Quotations which are not to the point we conclude that the Bishop in Justin Martyr did pray as earnestly as he was able but not Extempore I have been the larger in refuting this Exposition because it is his main Argument which he repeats and urges over and over and triumphs in as sufficient to carry the whole Cause whereas for any thing appears it rather proves the Christians had Forms of Prayer and Praise at the Celebration of the Eucharist in Justin Martyrs time § 3. Irenaeus is as wary as Justin Martyr S. Irenaeus An. Dom. 179 not to publish any of the Words used in the Christian Offices though he speak both of Baptism and the Eucharist and of the Prayers and Praises there in general Only when some of those Hereticks made an Argument from the conclusion of a Form of Doxology to prove their Fancies by on that occasion he is forced to mention it and say They alledge saith he also that we in our Thanksgivings do say World without end (u) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Iren. adv haer l. 1. c. 1. p. 16. Now these words are the very Conclusion of the Gloria Patri and being urged by the Hereticks in way of Argument against the Orthodox it must be a known constant and never varied Form of common use in the Church and therefore we may infer from thence that in Irenaeus his time the Christians praised God in public by this very Form which we now use Glory be to the Father to the Son and to the Holy Ghost As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be world without end Amen And as we shall shew presently the same Argument and grounded upon the same public Form is mentioned in Tertullian (w) Tertul. de speââac p. 83. in this same Age which proves that the Gloria Patri was a Form not only in the Gallican but also in the African Church Clemens Alex. An. Dom. 192. In this Century lived Clemens of Alexandria who tells us The Church is not only the Name of the Place for public Worship but the Congregation prostrating themselves in Prayers having all as it were one common Voice and one Mind (x) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. alluding no doubt to those words of S. Paul That ye may with one Mind and one Mouth glorifie God (y) Rom. xv 6. that is saith Grotius That when ye praise God and pray to him ye may do it not only with the same sound of Words as Doxologies and Litanies use to be said but also with a Mind full of mutual Love (z) Grot. in loc So that praying and praising God as it were with one Mind and one Mouth signifies performing these Offices by responsory Prayers and Praises as they did in their Litanies and Doxologies of old which must be in known Forms because the People not only joyned in heart with the Minister but vocally answered in their turns they and the Priest often making up the Sentence between them and therefore are said to have as it were One common Voice So that this passage is a Paraphrase upon Ignatius his One Prayer and One Supplication and upon Justin Martyr's Common Prayers and it shews there were Forms mutually repeated between Priest and People in Clemens Alex. his Time Our Adversary would evade this by pretending This one common Voice is meant of the Minister who is the Peoples Mouth to God (a) Discourse of Liturg. p. 136. but let it be noted that Clemens is not speaking of the Minister alone but of him and the whole Congregation together and if the Minister had said all the Prayers he must save said plainly They had one common Mouth or Voice but his Words are Having as it were one common Voice which notes that they joyned Voices in responsory Forms and so made many Voices like unto one Voice and this uniting of the Minister and People in putting up their Common-Prayers shewed also the union of their Minds and Affection Moreover we may the more reasonably believe that the Christians had Forms in Clemens his Time because he saith They allotted certain hours for Prayer the Third the Sixth and the Ninth in imitation of Daniel and the Jews (b) Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. Now the Jews used Forms and it is likely those who imitated them in the Times would do it also in the Manner of Praying Nor can we think that they who prayed so often would vary the Phrase every time What were the Words of their Forms then Clemens no way relates but the main Petitions were First For the pardon of Sin Secondly For deliverance from Temptation Thirdly For ability to
how they should do (m) Math. viii 4. Mark i. 44. Luke v. 14. and the Word whence it is derived signifies to methodize put in order and to place Souldiers in their Ranks (n) Cor. 15.23 so to do all things ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã according to Order (o) 1 Cor. xiv 40. is to act according to a prescribed Rule which Rule S. Paul saith he will make or prescribe when he came (p) 1 Cor. xi 34. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã This then being the proper and natural signification of this Word we may reasonably expound it of Prescribed Forms of Prayer both for Morning and Evening of which as the Centuriators observe Origen speaks in other places (q) Magdeb. Cent. 3. cap. 6. pag. 134. But our Adversary would shift off this proof also First By asking If these were not private Prayers (r) Disc of Liturg pag 140. I Answer The Words are general not restrained either to public or private Prayers expresly but it being certain the Christians had a custom to assemble Morning and Evening to Prayers the phrase of using these Prayers Night and Day seems chiefly to be referred to public Offices Secondly He asks If no Prayers can be commanded but in Set Forms I Reply The Word doth not barely signifie Prayers commanded but enjoyned according to a prescribed Order as I have proved Now Prayers left to the Invention of Men to be daily made new cannot properly be called Ordered Prayers And therefore though Christian Ministers were commanded to preach yet the Words and Method being left to their invention or choice our Adversary can no where find ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã made use of as an Epithet for a Sermon or Homily Note also Origen doth not say The Christians made these enjoyned Prayers but used them which supposes they were made into a prescribed Form before Thirdly He enquires If there be no Commands for Praying frequently but Human Prescriptions and I must ask what is this to the purpose Origen is not speaking of Commanding Men to pray nor declaring whether the Duty of Prayer be prescribed by God or the Church He is speaking of the Prayers themselves and gives them this Character that they were Ordered or Prescribed so that he is very impertinent to tell us of Divine Commands to pray frequently since Origen's Words are not about Obeying a Precept to Pray but using ordered enjoyned or prescribed Prayers which all ingenuous Men must own to be in Forms and that proves a Liturgy because it is Prayers in the plural Number Thirdly in the same Books against Celsus when Origen cites some certain passages out of the Psalms âe brings them in with these Prefaces We ând in the Prayers or We say often in the Prayer (s) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Orig. in Cels lib. 4. p. 178 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ibid. pag. 197. And thus it is said in the Prayer or The prudent when he prayeth âaith (t) Idem lib. 6. pag. 285. lib. 7. pag. 354. Now when we consider that the Psalms were the main part of the Jewish Liturgy and that the Christians in the first Ages inclined to imitate their Forms and above all the Old Testament admired and frequently used the Book of Psalms and took their Forms of Praise from thence we may conclude they borrowed many Forms of Prayer also from the Psalms and transcribed them into their Liturgy so that Origen appeals to these passages as being known by the Christians to be a part of their Prayers Which will still be clearer when we observe that the Abassine Christians who are very tenacious of primitive Rites and derived most of their Usages from the Ancient Church of Alexandria as Ludolfus relates Take most of their daily Prayers out of the Psalter (u) Ludolf hist Ethiop lib. 2. cap. 12. And therefore Origen who belonged to Alexandria no doubt refers by these Prefaces to the public and known Liturgy then used in that famous Church Our Adversary is not pleased at this Inference and whereas his own Eyes are so blinded with his Extempore Way that he cannot see the clearest light for Forms he saith it argues a Fancy deeply tinctured with Liturgies to suppose this to be any proof of them But let it be noted he barely asserts it is no proof and most falsly represents the matter for he saith When Origen quotes any passage out of the Psalms he thus speaks c. (w) Discourse of Liturg. p. 139. Now this is not true because first Origen in that very Book cites an hundred passages out of the Psalms without any such Preface without saying They are found in the Prayers c. Secondly The places which he doth cite with such a Preface are always very proper to be used in a Liturgy as Forms of Praise or Prayer Such as these The Earth is full of the Goodness of the Lord and Open thou mine Eyes that I may see the wondrous things of thy Law Create in me a clean Heart O God and the like So that these and no other passages being said to be found in the Prayers c. no doubt we have all imaginable cause to think that these very words of the Psalms were in Origen 's time used in the Churches Liturgy and prescribed in the Forms of Public Prayer Especially since he can ascribe no sufficient Reason but the peculiar use made of these Select places in the public Offices which made Origen quote them with such a Preface and cite other passages of the Psalms as he doth other Scriptures without any Preface at all Fourthly Our Adversary cites another place out of Origen's Homilies taken at the second hand from Dailé to prove they used no Forms of Prayer in that Age because it is said Our Thoughts must not wander after our Senses in Prayer but be wholly intent and fixed on God not being disturbed by the Idea of any External appearance (y) Orig. in Num. hom XI I shall not here need to fly to his help at a dead lift that possibly Ruffinus the Translator did put in these Words For allowing them to be genuine it must be more unlawful to let our Minds wander after new Phrases and our Fancy rove about for Matter Order and Words which is the case in Extempore Prayer than it is to repeat the Words of a known Form which we can say by heart or read without disturbance because the actings of the Fancy and Invention in Extempore Prayer do much more hinder the Mind from steddy thinking upon God than having a Book before us in the recital of a common and usual Form Lastly I hope it is needless to repeat what was shewed before viz. That Origen's Phrases of Praising God as well as we are able (z) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Orig. in Cels l. 8. pag. 402. and Praying to him with all the might we have (a) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Id. ib. pag. 386. See the Discourse of Liturg
p. 127 c. do not at all prove Extempore Praising or Praying was then in use Or shew That Ministers then used no Forms in the public Worship both because Origen saith this of all the People who cannot be supposed universally to have had this Gift of Praising God and Praying to him Extempore nor if any of them had it were they allowed ordinarily to exercise it in public Assemblies And also because the Phrases do signifie no more than Praying or Praising God by Forms with all possible fervency and devotion Origen therefore is a good Witness for Liturgies and all his Sophistry cannot draw one Argument from him against the use of them in his time § 4. The holy Martyr S. Cyprian S. Cyprian An. Dom. 248. witnesseth the very same thing For that he was not against the use of Forms of Prayer may appear from his allowing the Lords Prayer to be used as a Form of Prayer which Christ himself gave us (b) Cypr. de orat Dom. §. 1. pag. 309. And he would have us repeat the very Words of it because we may be assured The Father will know the Words which were made by his own Son (c) Id. ibid. § 2. Yea from the manner of drawing up this Prayer so as all the People are supposed to repeat it with the Minister he justifies the use of Set Forms wherein the Congregation bears a part for he observes That the Christians had a public and Common-Prayer (d) Publica est nobis communis oratio ibid. §. 5. p. 310. and that Christ Commanded us to Pray for all Men in a Common Prayer wherein all agreed (e) Oratione communi concordi prece pro omnibus jussit orare Cypr. ad cler pleb ep 8. pag. 24. Now suppose we grant that he speaks this of the Lords Prayer yet since all other Prayers were to be drawn up by this pattern this will prove that their other Prayers were in all things like to this that is that they were not made Extempore but were put into a Form as the Lords Prayer is and repeated by all the Congregation either with or after the Minister But there are still more evident Proofs in him not only of Forms but of a Liturgy viz. where he cites and explains those very Words of common-Common-Prayer in the Prefaces which were used in all Churches in the same Words for he persuades Christians to attend to their Prayers in public by putting them in mind that the Priest before the Prayer prepares the Hearts of the Brethren by a Preface premised saying Lift up your Hearts so that when they answer We Lift them up unto the Lord they may be admonished to think upon God alone (f) Ideo sacerdos ante Orationem praefatione praemissà parat fratrum mentes dicendo Surium corda ut dum respondeat plebi habenus ad Dominum admoâeatur se nihil aliud quam Dominum debere cogitare Id de orat Dom. §. 22. Now here we have a Form of Words used in the Eucharist not only in Africa but both in the Eastern and Western Churches and this also used by way of Response and divided between the Priest and People which is impossible to be done in any thing that the Priest saith Extempore And though he cites no more of this Preface than the first Words yet other Authors both in the African and Greek Church mention the rest of this primitive Form viz. It is meet and right so to do c. Even as it is yet in so many Words Transcribed in our Communion Service wherefore the Judicious Centuriators do rightly infer from hence That there were undoubtedly Set Forms of Prayer in S. Cyprians time (g) Magd. Cent. 3. cap. 6 p. 135. which they prove by citing this Preface Yea B. Bilson concludes from this and other passages that Christs Church taking her direction from S. Pauls Doctrin framed her public Prayers in such order that the Pastor and People both joyntly and interchangeably Praised God and Prayed to him each with other and each for other (h) Bilson of Christian Subjection Part. 4. pag. 435. Now how could there be these fixed places for Responses if the Priest had made only one long Extempore Prayer as our Dissenters do It is plain from this very method of Responses that there were then public Forms allowed and used And we may observe not only by this Preface but also by another passage that the African Church and the Eastern did hugely agree in these Liturgick Forms because as the Greeks say Give holy things to those that are holy (i) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Lit. â Basil Chrysost Clem. Constit So it seems they did at Carthage where as S. Cyprians Notes they were daily charged to keep that which was holy in a pure Conscience according to our Lords command not to cast that which is holy to Dogs (k) Cypr. ad Demetr p. 324. That is in the Eucharist which they then daily celebrated they used that Phrase Give holy things to holy Persons For though S. Cyprian writing to a Heathen will not express the very Form it self yet he comes so near it that he can mean nothing else being obliged to conceal the sacred Offices from Demetrian And that is the reason also why when he hath occasion to mention the Christian Litany he doth it only by setting down these general Heads of things desired therein viz. For driving away Enemies for procuring Rain and either for removing or moderating adversities we always pour out our Supplications and Prayers as well as for your peace and safety (l) Cypr. ad Demetr p. 324. so that our Adversary is very weak in despising those who urge this of as a Form of Prayer (m) Disc of Liturg. p. 137. because none of us think it was the very Words of the African Liturgy and we know Tertullian describes it when he also writes to Heathens in different Words but if we compare the two Fathers or both of them with the ancient Litanies wherein the general Heads of Evils which were to be Prayed against were named by the Priest and the People answered O Lord hear us or O Lord deliver us we may conclude they had a certain Form but concealed the Phrases of it from Unbelievers But the disputer against Liturgies who fraudulently conceals all but the last of these Testimonies picks up another passage or two by which he hopes to shew there were no Forms used in S. Cyprians time The first is in his Epistle to Pope Lucius where he saith we cease not in our Prayers and Sacrifices to give thanks to God the Father and to his Son Christ our Lord Praying and requesting that he who is perfect and makes us perfect would keep for you and perfect in you the glorious Crown of a Confessor (n) Cypr. Epist 58. p. 163. Hence he infers that being at liberty to put up any occasional Petition
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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 Subjeât 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) Athân 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 ââvianus 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
ancient Form of the Gloria Patri used to repeat it in a low Voice to conceal that alteration but as soon as the Orthodox perceived the Fraud Flavianus and Others would not communicate with this Leontius but worshiped God in a separate Congregation And in this Assembly Flavianus and Diodorus divided the Choir into two parts and made them sing the Psalms of David alternately which Custom as Theodoret saith beginning first at Antioch was soon received all the World over (z) Theodoret. hist lib. 2. c. 24. Now from hence our Adversary infers that the way of singing alternately which necessarily supposes a Form to sing by came but late into the Church and he charges Socrates with downright Falshood who ascribes the Original of this way of Singing to Ignatius (a) Discourse of Liturg. p. 167. But first if all our Adversary saith were true this Age cannot be accounted very late for Christianity had not been setled Twenty years in Peace when this practice began at Antioch But he wrongs Theodoret by his Inference the Historian doth not say this way of Singing began then for we have shewed out of Eusebius concerning the Essenes and out of Pliny Tertullian c. that Hymns and Anthems were sung alternately and therefore in Forms from the very beginning of Christianity and the Gloria Patri as Theodoret here notes was at this time so ancient and so known a Form at Antioch that the Orthodox would not endure the least word of it to be changed Wherefore he only saith That the Custom of singing David's Psalms alternately did then first begin at Antioch which may be true and yet Ignatius for all that might long before bring in the way of singing Hymns alternately (b) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã apud ãâã lib. 6. âââ And if we consider that Paulus Samosatenus had put down the Hymns made in Honour of Christ soon after Ignatius his time and that divers of Leontius his Predecessors in this See of Antioch were Hereticks ââââdoret ãâã 22. ãâã âap 10. it is not improbable these Bishops might alter not only the Hymns but the Old way of singing them so that Flavianus did rather restore than invent this Alternate Singing However this is certain that he applied it to David's Psalms and that S. Basil S. Ambrose and all eminent Bishops every where began to sing the Psalms that way ãâã we still do in our Cathedral ãâã nor did any Christians before ãâã ââssenters appeared ever find any fault with it Yea this way of Singing by turns was so taking at Antioch that it drew all the People from Leontius so that he was forced to beg of Flavianus to come back to the Church And perform the same Liturgy there (d) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Theodor. lib. 2. cap. 24. For we must observe that in these separate Assemblies the Orthodox did more than barely sing Psalms they had all the public Service which is here called A Liturgy And that consisted of Praise and Prayer The Praises were the Psalms Gloria Patri and other ancient Hymns which were restored by this Congregation of True Believers and were all certainly in Forms as we may conclude from the way of singing them The Prayers are not mentioned here by either of these Historians But Socrates relates that soon after this in opposition to the Arians S. Chrysostom enlarged the Evening Prayers (e) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 7. which must be by adding to the Forms because if it had been in every Ministers Breast to make those Evening Prayers longer or shorter as he pleased in his Extempore Way there could have been no addition made to them And if Flavianus in his time used Prayers as well as Psalms in his Congregation as the word Liturgy imports it is very unlikely that the Prayers should be of one fashion and the Praises of another therefore we shall conclude That both their Prayers and Praises were celebrated by known Forms as they were wont to be in other Orthodox Churches where we have seen that the People had their Responses and bore their parts as well in the Prayers as they did in the Praises Nor can we think the Arians would have omitted to charge the Orthodox with Innovation both in Praises and Prayers if they had now first begun in so divided a Church as Antioch to use prescribed Forms in either of these Duties Cyrillus Hieros An. Dom. 350. § 5. S. CYRIL was made Bishop of Jerusalem in the midst of this Century but his Catechetical Discourses were composed long before And they are of two sorts First His Catecheses to the Unbaptized wherein we can expect no account of Liturgy because in that Age they thought it profaned the Mysteries of Divine Worship to teach Unbelievers the Things or Words used there which they conceived none but the Baptized or the Faithful ought to know So that our Adversary is very impertinent to cite these Discourses to the Unbaptized to prove There could be no Written Forms then used because they kept their Worship close as being a Mystery (f) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 34 For S. Cyril only saith They spake of these things covertly to the Catechumens that the Faithful who knew them might understand and those who knew them not might not be prejudiced (g) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Cyril Catec 6. pag. 60. Now if the Father speak of the Christian Worship as he supposes who cites him in this Dispute this only shews that the Strangers did not know it but it seems by Cyril that the Faithful knew it so well being a known Form of Words that if it were but darkly hinted at they presently understood the Ministers meaning which they could not have done if the Prayers used among the Faithful had been made Extempore and varied every day So again where he cites a Caution that S. Cyril gives the Faithful in his Preface Not to tell any thing to the Catechumens who as yet were out of the Church (h) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Cyril ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Disc of Liturg. pag. 41. I would only ask how the Faithful could remember the various and uncertain Phrases of Extempore Prayers so as to be able to repeat them again Indeed there might be danger of their doing this in constantly used Forms and the very Caution supposes they used such in those days But we need not fly to Suppositions we have our Adversaries Concessions as to the Second sort of Cyril's Catechetical Discourses viz. those to the Faithful which are called His Mystagogical Catechisings Our Author grants It appears by S. Cyril that the People had of old some part in the public Service (i) Disc of Liturg pag. 44. citing Cyril Catech. mystag 5. Now we have shewed that cannot be unless the Public Service be in known Forms so that it is an unparallelled Insolence in him to cite this very place of S. Cyril again afterwards (k)
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 âin Trullo can 32 An. Dom â80 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-Plâssis ãâã he Mass ãâã 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
these Offices because we see in Arnobius and others that this Usage was crept into the Christian Worship at least as early as the beginning of this Century Wherefore we conclude that these Constitutions and the Forms contained therein are a clear and convincing Evidence that a prescribed Liturgy was used in this Age. But Secondly our Adversary goes on to raise other Scruples For he tells us out of this Author that they were so strict in concealing their Mysteries that if a Catechumen by chance had been present they immediately Baptized him (p) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 43. Marg. I Answer It is very pleasant for him to cite a Book wherein all these Mysteries are written down at large to prove there were no Mysteries written down in that Age and it is very weak or something worse to say they concealed them from the Faithful because they kept them secret from the Catechumens He knew very well that in ââis Age they did write down their Offices but charged the Priests and Faithful to keep these Words and Writings from the Unbaptized Another Objection is That the Creed set down in the Constitutions is not the same with the Apostles Creed therefore there was no certain Form of Creed (w) Discourse of Liturg. p. 103. I Reply The Creed here set down was the Form then used in that Church of which this Author was a Member probably of Antioch And as new Heresies arose it was necessary for all Churches to make larger Paraphrases upon some Articles of the old Creed to secure all that were admitted into the Church against those Heresies But still this Creed thus Paraphrased was a Form prescribed to all that were Baptized in that Diocess and that is enough to prove there were Forms used in every Church nor do I see any thing that he can infer from hence but that since the Apostles made that Creed which goes by their Name and yet this Creed differs from it therefore the Apostles did not make these Constitutions themselves which we freely confess Like this is his Objection about the Form of renouncing the Devil in Baptism which is not set down in the same Words in these Constitutions as it is in other Fathers (x) Discourse of Liturg. p. 106. I Reply This was the Form at Antioch that in S. Cyril was the Form at Jerusalem that in S. Chrysostom the Form at Constantinople and the difference between them is so very small that it shews they all were taken from one Original and all Churches had Forms of this Renunciation yet in several Diocesses they had some diversity in expressing it but this doth not prove either that they had no Forms nor that any Inferiour Minister was left at liberty to express it as he pleased these being obliged to keep to the Form prescribed in their own Church I shall only desire the Reader to observe that in that large Margin where he hath heaped up variety of Forms of Renouncing the Devil one half of them are not the Words of any Churches Form but only short and occasional descriptions of it in lax Discourses and so are not to be urged as various Forms Lastly He picks up several Phrases dispersed up and down the Constitutions pretending that the Priest was at liberty to say those or such like Prayers and Praises (y) Discourse of Liturg. p. 110 111. But first He falsly expounds most of these Phrases for when that Author saith The Priest must pray or say thus or must say these Words or those which follow (z) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Constit Apostol l. 7. cap. 43 45. l. 8. c. 29 c. and then immediately subjoyns a Form it is clear to all that the Priest is to say that Form and no other And the same sense may very well be put upon those other Phrases of the Priests saying such a kind of Prayer or the Bishops giving such a kind of Blessing (a) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. Constit ibid. l. 7. cap. 45. lib. 8. cap. 16. viz. that these Phrases do intend no more than that they shall Pray and Bless in this wise or after this sort For it must be granted that we have a prescribed Form for the absolving of the Sick from which no Minister may vary and yet the Rubric before it saith The Priest shall absolve him after this sort (b) Rubric in Office for Visiting the Sick Wherefore the Author never meant by these Phrases to leave the Priest to say what Prayers he pleased in an Extempore way and indeed when he hath set down a Form a Prayer made Extempore is not such a like Prayer nor a Prayer after that sort But suppose we should grant which I do not think we need yield that these Phrases do signifie their making any other Form like this still this obliges them to Forms and being these Phrases are but four times in all that large Book of Offices it was no great matter to leave the Bishop especially at liberty to change the Form three or four times in so great variety of Prayers Praises and Benedictions And if all the rest were fixed and stated Forms from which none might vary that is enough to prove my Position and this Objection can no more weaken it than a Mans alledging that Canon of Praying before Sermon in this Form or to this effect (c) Book of Canons and that Rubric which bids us exhort the sick Man after this Form or other like (d) Rubric in Office for Visit Sick would prove there was no prescribed Liturgy in the Church of England because some liberty is left in a few Cases yet this is the most that can be made of this Toping Argument though we grant all he can desire I conclude therefore that there was prescribed Forms and a Liturgy used before the Middle of this Fourth Century and that these Forms in the Constitutions were the Liturgy of some eminent Eastern Church § 8. We have no less Authority than S. Hierom to prove that Hilary S. Hilary Bish of Poictiers An. Dom. 360. Bishop of Poictiers Made one Book of Hymns and another of Mysteries (e) Hieron Catalog Script pag 378. that is he composed a Liturgy and since he had lived in the East where Liturgies now were commonly used we may reasonably believe he brought the same Usage into the Gallican Church For he saith That those without may hear the Voice of the People Praying and singing Hymns within the Church and may perceive their making Responses to the devout Confessions in the Offices of the Divine Sacraments (f) Et inter divinorum quoque Sacramentorum officia responsionem devotae contessionis accipiat Hilar. Com. in Psal 65. Which shews they had an Office for the Holy Communion wherein the People bore a part as they did also in the Hymns and other Prayers for all which there were Forms appointed And these Forms
were used Morning and Evening for he tells us That the day began with Prayer and was closed up with Hymns (g) Idem in Psal 64. and blames those whose Lips murmured they knew not what and while their Thoughts roved and their Mind was busied about other things did not attend to the Office which they were reciting These and many other passages in him make it plain that the Gallican Church had Forms and a Liturgy in this Age. Yea it will appear That all Christian Churches had so if we consider the Method that Julian the Apostate Julian the Apostate An. Dom. 361. took to establish Paganism which was to accommodate it as much as possible to Christianity the Rites of which he saw were then very popular and taking And therefore he devised to make a Form of Prayers in parts for the Heathen Worship to set up Schools and Lectures of Philosophy and to enjoyn Penances to Offenders Which things saith Nazianzen are clearly agreeable to our good Order (h) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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. ââ 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 Beveâeg 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 Lituâg 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
the Sacrament or in saying his public Office of Prayers Wherefore we conclude that ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã when it is applied to praying or praising God doth very often signifie the Form prescribed and therefore it may very probably signifie so in this Laodicean Council wherein there are many Evidences that there was such a prescribed Form (n) See Can. 15 and 59 cited before And one Canon appropriates the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to the Deacons who as Balsamon notes were to observe the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or loud pronunciation of the last Words in the Collects by the Priest and with this ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã then they gave notice to the People to answer Amen or make their Responses as the Liturgy required Now these Responses at certain places signified by the Deacon to the People necessarily imply a written Form (o) Vid. Balsam in Concil Laod. Can. 22. Bever Tom. I. pag. 463. therefore in a Church where written Forms were used ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã must signifie the prescribed Office But this will be more clear if we consider the word joyned with it viz. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã The same Liturgy of Prayers this must be expounded of repeating the same Forms over again which is the sense we plead for And if we translate it The same ministration of Prayers as he desires still it cannot be meant of new and varied Extempore Prayers the Priest who prays so differently cannot properly be said to use the same Ministration and if this had been the Councils Sense then these words ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã signifie nothing in that Case it had been enough to say Let there be Prayers at Three and Six But when they say Let there be the same Liturgy or public Office of Prayers at Three and Six the meaning must be That they shall repeat the same Prayers and therefore the Office was a prescribed Form To this my Adversary Objects That if the Canon be so expounded then it decrees that one and the same Form shall be used at several Hours I Reply The Prayers at Three which is the beginning of the Evening when the Sun declines apace were then as they are now Prayers proper for the Evening and so might well enough be used when the Evening Hymns were sung especially by such as by necessary business were not at the Church at Three in the Afternoon And it is plain that though there were Forms of Hymns at Candle-lighting as my Adversary takes pains to prove yet there seems to have been no distinct Form of Prayer for this Season under which pretence some bold and zealous Men like our Dissenters would have brought in their own Composures which the Church here forbids and ties them up to the same Forms which were used at Three in the Afternoon We conclude therefore That this Council liked not Extempore Prayers nor Forms made by private Persons Laity or Clergy but obliged all to the same Liturgy when it was proper for the several Seasons I need not answer his Instances about the several stated Forms of Hymns and Prayers for the several Hours of Prayer since if this were in the Time of the Laodicean Council or before it makes against him and proves prescribed Forms were much Ancienter than he is willing to grant and yet these mentioned in the Canon being Evening Prayers might properly be said either in the beginning or the close of the Evening But if his Instances of such Forms be later than this Council they are impertinent since the following Ages made more Hours of Prayer and more proper Forms to them than were known in the Time of the Council of Laodicea which rather than it would endure such Prayers as our Adversary contends for made them say the same Office over again at Candle-lighting which some of them had repeated before at Three in the Afternoon And thus we see these Evening Prayers were Forms There is another Canon in this same Council Can. XIX Concil Laodicen which is a clear proof that the Morning Prayers when the Eucharist was administred were Forms also For the XIXth Canon exactly describes the Order of this Service as S. Cyril and the Author of the Constitutions had done saving that this Canon only mentions the Method but the very Words of the Forms named here are in the Constitutions And the Method both here and there and in S. Cyril and the Liturgies of S. Basil and S. Chrysostom do so exactly agree that we may be sure this Canon points to the Forms which were then commonly known and used After the Sermon this Canon saith First there was a Prayer for the Catechumens which Causabon tells us was a Form (p) Vid. Causab exerc in Baron XVI pag. 398. â and we may read the Words of it in the Apostolical Constitutions after which They were dismissed Then saith the Canon followed a Prayer for the Penitents which Albaspinaeus saith was made in set and appointed Words and it recited also every one of their Names (q) Certis destinatisque verbis pro âpsorum pâânitentiam salute supplicabatur corumque nomina inter ipsas orationes proferrebantur Albasp Obs iib. 1. cap. 25. And then they were dismissed as the Catechumens were before Then saith the Canon follows Three Prayers for the Faithful the first to be recited secretly the other two with a loud Voice or with Exclamation (r) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Cum exclamatione The first of these I take to be the Collect which the Bishop alone makes for the Faithful without any Response to be made by the People after it the Form of which we have in the Constitutions Lib. 8. cap. 14. and the saying this ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã doth not mean that it was whispered so as none could hear it but it signifies that there was no Exclamation at the end of this Prayer nor in any part of it were the People called upon aloud to joyn their Responses because it was said by the Bishop alone But the other two are the two Litanies set down in the Prayers of the Faithful (s) Constit Apostol lib. 8. cap. 13 18 19. which Litanies were always said ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã with loud Voice and an Exclamation especially at the end of every Petition to give notice to the People to be ready with their Responses Domine miserere or the like So that the Author of the Constitutions is the best Comment upon this Canon of Laodicea and both makes it very intelligible and proves the Offices were all done by a stated Liturgy and in set Forms I know my Adversary tells us This Canon is no more than a Rule for Order in placing the Prayers used at the Sacrament (t) Discourse of Liturg. pag â pag. 61. But if we grant this it will be no advantage to him because Forms of Prayer are more capable of being kept to one certain Order than Extempore Prayers can be And there is
one thing in this Canon which makes it more than probable that the Prayers for the Faithful were Forms and that is the Reason why as this Canon speaks they dismissed the Catechumens which seems to be for fear by daily hearing these Forms they should remember the Phrases of these Mysteries and discover them to profane and common Ears For if these Prayers had been Extempore and the Phrases varied every day as my Adversary pretends the Catechumens might safely have stayed there it being impossible they should so learn or remember those various Expressions as to relate them to any body after they were gone home Finally Why should we not believe this Order was the Method of the public Forms of Prayer there being the same Order exactly observed in all those Ancient Forms which are extant at this day and not one word that intimates any such thing as an Extempore Prayer or frequent variation of the Forms either in this Council or in any Father or Council about this time And this may suffice for these Canons which after all his shuffling Objections are good Evidence for a stated Liturgy in this Age. Optatus Milev An. Dom. 368. § 10. Optatus Milevitanus though he writ on a different Subject yet he hath divers Expressions which suppose and imply that there was in his time a Liturgy used in Africa For he mentions the Peoples joyning with the Priest in the Divine Service and blames the Donatists for shutting the mouths of all Christian Nations and forcing all the People to be silent (u) Optat. Milev lib. 2. pag. 47. which shews they used alternate Singing and Responses among the Orthodox and that Method cannot be but by Form Yea he declares there were some certain Words so established and enjoyned by Law in the celebration of the Sacrament that the Donatists themselves could not pass them by (w) Illud legitimum in Sacramentorum mysterio praeterire non posse Id. ibid. pag. 53. and from their using these Words he draws an Argument against their Schism which he could not have done if they had not been fixed and a Set Form My Adversary mistakes this passage and fancies that Optatus refers to the Prayer of Consecration which could never be omitted (x) Discourse of Liturgy p. 61. but the holy Father explains himself in the same Page and shews us that he means the Prayer For the Holy Catholic Church You say saith Optatus that you offer for that One Church which is diffused over the whole World (y) Offerre vos dicitis pro una Ecclesia quae sit in toto terrarum orbe diffusa Optat. ibid. Thus he saith the Orthodox prayed and this was so established that the Donatists in this exceeding our Dissenters that they had not thrown off the Churches Forms could not omit it And thus the Learned Fr. Baldwin expounds it He means saith he that Solemn Form of the Canonical Prayer in which it is said We offer unto thee this Sacrifice for that One Church which is diffused over all the World (z) Fr. Bald. notis in Optat. pag. 185. Which Words also are in the Mystical Prayer set down by the Author of the Apostostolical Constitutions (a) Constit Apostol lib. 8. cap. 13. cap 18. and are found with little variation in that very Prayer in all the ancient Liturgies Now by Legitimum Optatus cannot mean that these Words were enjoyned by the Law of Christ because this Form being not enjoyned by any Scripture therefore it must signifie a Form enjoyned by the Laws of the Church which in that Age did so strictly enjoyn this very Prayer that it seems None might omit or pass it by And there is another Form of Ecclesiastical Appointment in the same Author brought in with the same Preface You cannot omit saith he again to the Donatists that which is established by Law for certainly you say Peace be with you (b) Et non potuistis praetermittere quod legittimum est utique dixistis Pax vabiscum ic lib. 3. pag. 73. Now this was the Form of Episcopal Benediction we have it in all old Liturgies and it is plain by Optatus his raising an Argument from these Words That the African Church had them in their Liturgy which was so firmly established that none could omit any part of it No not so much as alter the order For Optatus again saith After you have absolved the Penitents presently you turn to the Altar and cannot omit the Lords Prayer (c) Mox ad altare conversi Dominicam Orationem praetermittere non potestis Idem lib. 2. pag. 57. So that the very order of repeating the Lord's Prayer at the Altar in the beginning of the Prayers for the Faithful which was but of Ecclesiastical Institution could not be changed Moreover we find in Optatus That there was a Rumor spread upon the coming of some from the Emperour that Alterations would be made in the Communion Service which startled the People but they were quieted again when they saw The Solemn Custom and wonted Rite observed and discerned that nothing was changed added or diminished in the Divine Sacrifice (d) Cum viderent in divinis Sacrificiis nec mutatum quicquam nec additum nec ablasum Id. lib. 3. pag. 75. From whence it appears there was a known Form for the Communion an Office so well understood by the People that they could perceive when it was altered in any particular So that doubtless those Christians were not used to variety of Phrases nor accustomed to the Extempore Man's Fancy to celebrate in a longer or shorter Form as he pleased Again he repeats the very Form of Exorcising those who came to be Baptized (e) Maledicte exi foras Optat. lib. 4. pag. 79. and the Form of the Responses when they renounced the Devil and repeated their Creed at Baptism (f) Id. lib. 5. pag 86 89. And when we put all this together concerning known Forms of Words which could not be altered nor omitted and were enjoyned by Law we may conclude they had a written Liturgy in Africa in his time And it is very probable that this Book of Prayers was one of those Books in the Plural Number which the Donatists as he complains took away from the Holy Altar from whence the Peoples Prayers were wont to be sent up to God (g) Idem lib. 7. pag. 98. And since they had a written Form as the Fore-cited passages shew it is probable that the Liturgy as well as the Bible was then lying upon the Altar Epiphanius An. Dom 369. § 11. We can expect no great account of the Sacred Forms in Epiphanius since he is so very nice in speaking of Mysteries that he will not repeat the Words of our Saviour's Institution but thus expresses them He took these things and giving Thanks said This is that of mine c. (h) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Eââphan in Anâorat p. 432. And he reckons it
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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. Nazââat 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã he draws a Line to conceal his being without a Pulpit c. and goes on thus ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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
Instance truly represented That Nazianzen's Father always used a Liturgy in the Church and that the Son means those public prescribed Forms when he tells us He was always better when he could get to the Church for the bare saying of the Liturgy cured him (q) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Naz. Orat. 19. pag. 313. And this may suffice for Gregory Nazianzen S âASIâ An Dom. 370. § 13. His contemporary and dear Friend was S. Basil who is not only a good Evidence for Liturgies but composed one himself so that our Adversary is forced first to conceal most of his Proofs for Publick Forms and then to hunt about for Objections against both Forms in general and his Liturgy in particular but with how little success shall now be shewed in this Method First we will produce the Proofs which he hath suppressed or laboured to pervert Secondly we will reply to his Objections and Thirdly justifie the main part of his Liturgy to be a genuine composure of S. Basils First We begin with his Evidence for Public Forms and the first shall be his vindication of that way of praising God which he had set up at Naeocesarea which we will give at large in its due place because our Adversary hath but an imperfect account of it and places it in the latter end of his Book (r) Discourse of Liturg. p. 166. The Words are these As to the Psalmody for which we are accused I answer That the Custom now set up is consonant and agreeable to all the Churches of God for the People rising while it is yet Night go early to the House of Prayer and with much pains and trouble yea with many Tears make their Confession to God and afterwards rising from Prayer they stand up to sing Psalms being divided into two parts they sing by Turns answering one another Then they comfort themselves by considering Gods Word and casting away all vain thoughts mind this alone After this one is ordered to begin the Hymn and the rest follow and thus with variety of Psalms and Prayers intermixed the Night is spent As soon as Day appears they offer to the Lord a Psalm of Confession all as it were with one Mouth and one Heart every one making these Penitential Words to be his own And if you reject this you must reject the Aegyptians those in both Lybia's in Thebais and Palestina the Arabians Phenicians Syrians and those near Euphrates yea in a word all among whom Watchings Prayers and common Psalmody is used (s) D. Basil Epist 63. ad Clor. Naeocâsar pag. 843 844. Now from hence it is plain that the People joyned with the Priest in the Prayers as well as in Singing of Psalms and Hymns and Bishop Bilson alledges this place to prove That the Service was common to the Priests and People and parted between them by Verses and Responds ãâã of Christ Subject paâ 4 pag. 434. with pag. 453. But Extempore Praying and Singing cannot be performed by alternate Responses therefore these Christians had known and prescribed Forms both for their Prayers and Hymns Yet Secondly This Very way of Praying was used then in most Churches of the Christian World Therefore Thirdly Most Churches in the World had Used Liturgies before S Basil's time and he highly approved that way of public Worship It may be some will object However this shews that there was no Liturgy at Naeocesarea before I Answer if it were so That was a particular Church and this was not above Forty five year after the setling of Christianity But if the Reader look back into the last Century it will appear they had a Form of Prayers and Hymns in this very Church above an Hundred year before even in the days of Gregory Thaumaturgus and S. Basil did not so much alter the Method or Words of that Liturgy as the way of Singing and Saying it and this the Clergy of Naeocesarea Accused him for Secondly In this very Epistle S. Basil mentions a Litany with Approbation which was brought into the Church of Naeocesarea long before his Time though after the days of Gregory Thaumaturgus so that in this Age that Litany probably might be near one Hundred year old (u) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Basil ep 63. pag. 844. But Litanies were Forms of Supplication for pardon of Sin and averting Judgments wherein the People always bare a part and to which they Answered Lord have mercy on us c. or Lord hear us or Grant this good Lord yea there are two Passages of this very Litany or some other as ancient which are mentioned in S. Basil's Epistles The first is this We pray that the rest of our Days may continue in peace We request that our Death may also be in peace (w) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Basil ep 68. pag. 856. We cannot be certain these are the very Words of the public Form because they are only occasionally spoken of in a Letter but they are certainly in the Litanick way and if we compare them with the Ancient Litanies we shall find them come so near the Words there used that we cannot doubt but he refers to some of these Forms Wherein they pray That they may pass the rest of their Life in peace and request That at their Death they may make a Christian end (x) Liturg. D. ãâã lio âatr pâg 4 5. Liturg. ãâã ââd pag 70. Câârâât Apostol âiâ 8. ca. 43. which are almost the very same Expressions differ no more than the Liturgies of several Churches are wont to do The second place in S. Basil is in an Epistle which he writ to a Friend that was gone into Seythia who feared he should be forgot in his Prayers S. Basil tells him This was impossible unless he should forget the Work which God appointed him for And you saith he being one of the Faithful cannot but remember the Offices of the Church wherein we intercede for our Brethren who are gone to Travel for the Souldiers for those who profess Christs Name and for them who bring fârth the Spiritual fruit of good Works (y) ãâ¦ã 141. pag. 1014. Now all that are acquainted with the Ancient Forms of Litany know they always pray'd for Christians travelling in strange Countries for such as believed in Christ and for those who brought forth the fruit of good Works for the whole Army c. (z) Liturg. Jaâââ ut suâr ââg 89. item Condit Apoââ â 8. cap. 13. cap. 18. Lit. ãâã Chris 'T is true these are mixt with divers other Intercessions but S. Basil picks out those Passages of the Litany which belonged to this Mans circumstances who seems to have been a Souldier gone on an Expedition into Scythia and to have been not only a Christian but to have been eminent for Charity and good Works Our Adversary indeed boldly affirms this Passage is not sufficient to prove the Use of Forms (a) Discourse of Liturg. p. 137. 138. But
plenty for deliverance from Sedition and for the prosperity of the Public He mentions also the Prayers for those in divers Necessities and the Thanksgivings for all the Mercies we daily receive from God (g) Ambros Com. in 1 Tim. cap. 2. Tom. 3. pag. 574. Which are the Heads of general Intercession used in all ancient Liturgies and come as near the Words of some of them as can be expected in a Commentary where he doth not cite the very Words but shew the agreement of these Forms to the Apostolical Rule In another place he refers to this Prayer briefly and notes that immediately before the Prayer of Consecration there is premised a Prayer for Kings and all others (h) Oratio praemittitur pro râgibus pro caeteris Id. de Sacram. l. b. 4. c. 4. p. 366. But as to the Prayer of Consecration it self He gives us the very Form of it Would you know saith he with what Heavenly Words it is consecrated Hear the very Words The Priest saith Make this Oblation ratified rational and acceptable that it may be for a Figure of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ who the day before he Suffered taking Bread into his holy Hands c. Then reciting the Words and Actions of the Institution He goes on to tell us that the Priest adds Wherefore we being mindful of his most glorious Passion of his Resurrection from the Dead and of his Ascension into Heaven do offer unto thee this immaculate rational and unbloody Sacrifice this holy Bread and Cup of Eternal Life desiring and praying thou wilt accept this Oblation upon thy Heavenly Altar by the hands of thy Angels as thou didst accept the gifts of thy Servant the Righteous Abel and the Sacrifice of our Father Abraham which was offered to thee by thy High-Priest Melchisedec (i) Ambros de Sacr. lib. 4. c. 5 6. pag. 367 c. Which is an express Form and the same with the primitive Roman Canon till the New Doctrins of a Propitiatory Sacrifice and Transubstantiation compelled them to alter their old Forms to suit it with their later Opinion He also declares the Form of Administration The Priest saith The Body of Christ and Thou saist Amen (k) Id. ib. p. 368. vide Const Apostol lib. 8. cap. 20. Ubi habemus eandem Formulam He also tells us That the Lord's Prayer concluded the Office (l) Ibid. lib. 5. cap. 4. pag. 370. And concerning that Ancient Hymn the Trisagion He saith That in most of the Eastern and divers Western Churches in the Oblation of that Sacrifice which is presented to God the Father the People and the Priest with one Voice say Holy Holy Holy Lord God of Hosts all the Earth is full of thy Majesty * Lib. de Spir. Sanct. Tom. 5. pag. 525. Moreover He mentions the old Form of the Bishops Saluting the People by Praying Peace might be with them (m) Ambr. de dign Sacerd. cap. 5. We have also in him The Form of renouncing the Devil (n) Id. de Sacr. lib. 1. c. 2 p. 354. and of Consecrating the Water in Baptism (o) Ib. lib. 2. cap. 5. pag. 359. and a Form of asking those who were to be Baptized concerning their Faith in the Holy Trinity (p) Ibid. cap. 7. pag. 360. He informs us also That the Church had ordered a Prayer for the Bishop (q) Id. Com. in Rom xv Tom. 3. pag. 331. And he prescribes the LI Psalm as a very proper Form of Prayer for a sincere Penitent to use in private (r) Tract ad Viâg laps T. 4. pag. 455. and recommends some Verses of the XLI Psalm as fit to be said when we go to Visit those that are Sick (s) Com. in Psal xli Tom. 2. pag 755. So that it is not only past all contradiction that S. Ambrose used and approved Forms but we might collect almost an intire Liturgy out of his Works And we have the Testimony of Walafridus Strabo who lived almost 900 year ago That S. Ambrose made not only a Communion Office but Composed all other Offices for his own Church and others which the Church of Milan retains to this very day (t) Walafrid Strab. de âeb Ecclâs cap. 22. An 840. There is also other ancient Evidence that he made such a Liturgy in Card. Bona de reb Liturg lib. 1. cap. 10. but this like all other ancieât Liturgies hath also been mixed with âome of the Modern Corruptions however his genuine Works give us Evidence enough that there were prescribed Forms of Prayer and Praise in his time Let us now examine what our Adversary hath gathered out of S. Ambrose to oppose this plain Proof First He is one of those Authors who calls the Prayer of Consecration A Mystery and this he tells us twice over (a) Discourse of Liturgy p. 28 29. But yet we have shewed that he hath actually writ it down so that it could not be his meaning That it was such a Mystery as might not be committed to Writing and that shews that our Author gets no advantage to his Cause by citing this place (b) Ambros de Fide ad Grat. lib. 4. cap. 5. Secondly He would prove that S. Ambrose counted Praying Extemporè to be praying by the Spirit and for this he quotes his Epistle to Horontianus (c) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 60. I Answer S. Ambrose is not speaking of the Public Service but of private Prayer in that place and therefore the Allegation is impertinent Besides He doth not say the Spirit furnishes us with Words and Phrases but helps us to apply our Minds to pray and keeps out Carnal thoughts making us content with such things as we naturally wish to be quit of because they are for our good And both here and elsewhere he explains that Phrase of the Spirits helping our infirmities Rom. viii 26. to be meant of the Spirits giving us such patience that we shall not desire to be presently freed from our Afflictions (d) Ambros ad Horont lib. 5. ep 4. pag. 290. Com. in Rom. viii Tom. 3. p. 293. which is nothing at all to his Notion of Extempore Prayer In another place He expounds those Words Praying always in the Spirit to signifie Praying with a pure Conscience and a sincere Faith which he who prays by a Form may do (e) Com. in Ephes vi p. 516. And certainly he who knew it was always his Duty to pray by or with the Spirit and yet used and approved a Form must believe it possible to pray in or by a Form and yet to pray by or with the Spirit Thirdly My Adversary objects a Passage out of S. Ambrose his Epistle to his Sister Marcellina viz. That while he was Celebrating he heard that the Arians had seized upon one Castulus just as he was performing the general Collect whereupon he ordered the Prayer suitable to that Occasion which one that had
been Fettered with prescribed Forms could not have liberty to do (f) Discourse of Liturg pag. 67 68. And here first I shall observe He is to prove that the Inferiour Ministers ought to be at liberty to order all the Prayers as they please in the ordinary Service of God But his usage is to instance in some irregular Fact upon some single extraordinary occasion done by some great and eminent Bishop which if his Instances prove true will never justifie his Opinion And truly this was an Extraordinary Bishop who was fit to make a Liturgy and a very extraordinary Case The City being all in an Uproar and S. Ambrose was told in the middle of his Office That his Friend Castulus was like to be murthered by the enraged Arians upon which sad and sudden occasion he for that once put in One Petition which was only That God would help Castulus and there is nothing in the Original Relation to shew us he did it aloud so that possibly he might stop a minute and in his Heart pray to God to help the poor Man (g) Vid. Ambr. Ep. 14. ad Marcellin Sor. Tom. 5 p. 205. But whether this request were Mental or Vocal it was on so sudden and unusual occasion that for all this S. Ambrose might be as he calls it Fettered with a Form upon ordinary occasions yea we have proved he was so and that this general Collect was a Form also And if a great Bishop now should hear that his dearest Friend or nearest Relation was suddenly fallen into danger of Death while he was Praying for all Estates of Men at the Altar No Man would blame him if he did Mentally or Vocally put in such an Ejaculation as Lord help my dear Friend c. Nor would any whose understanding were not Fettered with strange prejudices Argue from thence either that this Bishop never used a prescribed Form or that all the Ministers in his Diocess were left at liberty on ordinary occasions to alter the Liturgy as they pleased But as to his Reflexion upon Forms I must observe that our Lord Jesus saw fit to bind us in such Fetters when he gave us a Form of Prayer and that which binds us to a regular performance of our Duty and assists us to do it better is like the Tackle of a Ship or the Cords which bounded each side of the Old Grecian Races helping us and directing us both at once There are some indeed who count their Vitious Appetites are too much Fettered by the Commandments of God and the Laws of the Land and like the Sarmatians fancy Licentious and Lawless Madness to be the only liberty (h) Licentem amentiam libertatem existimarent Am. Marcellin lib. 17. But neither God nor our Governours for all this do see sit to take off these useful Chains and Aristotle hath taught us that to Live as the Goverment requires us is no Slavery (i) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Arist Pol. 9. Liberty is not a Power to do what we list but what we ought to do Now Laws and Forms direct what we ought to do and hinder us only from what is Evil or Dangerous and therefore do not prejudice our Liberty but guide us to use it so as may be consistent with the Common-Good And wise Men do not desire to be at liberty to talk Nonsense and Blasphemy nay nor to speak impertinently immethodically and rashly before God and a great Congregation but the Gospel teaches us that such as need Chains and Fetters most are most impatient of them and most apt to break them (k) Mark v. 4. But to return to our History § 18. Though S. Hierom S. Hieron An. Dom. 378. were no Bishop yet his learning and Authority was so great that as our Adversary seems to grant (l) Disc of Liturg. p. 171. he directed Pope Damasus in Regulating the public Offices at Rome so that what Marianus Victorius reports in his life is not improbable viz. That at his instance Hallelujah was sung at Rome after the custom of Hierusalem and the Gloria Patri in the end of each Psalm was also sung there after the manner of Antioch from him also Rome received a corrected Copy of the Septuagints Psalms to be read and sung in the Church (m) eo emendante Roma legendoâ canendosque in Ecclesia LXX interpretum Psalmos suscepit Marian. Victor in vit Hieron E. Gregor Mag. I note by the way that the ignorant Editor of Mt. Clarksons Book for I would not suspect the Author Ridiculously mistakes the Septuagints Translation of the Psalms and puts in 70 Psalmos suscepit viz. That Rome received Seventy Psalms from S. Hierom. risum teneatis amici But from the Quotation rightly stated we may observe that S. Hierom could not be against Forms of Praise in the Public Pervice when he prescribed both the Hallelujah and the Gloria Patri which are such Forms to the Roman Church or at least advised the Pope to prescribe them And his Works abound with Testimonies That Forms both of Prayer and Praise and alternate Singing of Psalms after the way of Antioch was used in Palestina and approved by him while he was there The Instances though but occasionally mentioned by S. Hierom are so many that we must cite them briefly He adviseth a pious Lady to bring up her young Daughter in Piety by accustoming her to rise before day to Prayers and singing Psalms and by teaching her to sing Hymns Morning and Evening and to Pray at the Hours of Nine Twelve and Three (n) Hieron ad Laet. Ep. 7. p. 59. Now this Child could not be taught either to Pray or Sing otherwise than by Forms He also gives advice to another Virgin to perform her Order of Psalms and Prayers at Nine Twelve and Three as also at Evening in the Night and the Morning (o) Id. ad Demetriad ep 8. pag. 74. Id. ad Eustach ep 22. p. 189. He also tells That he learned the Psalms by heart in his youth and daily repeated part of them as an Office of Devotion (p) Idem adv Ruffin lib. 2. Tom. 2. p 335. Moreover he directs those Religious persons who lived with him or consulted him to get every word of the Psalter by heart and to answer the Psalm in their Turn (q) Hieron ad Rustic ep 4. pag. 45 46. In his time also they had an Order of Singers whose Office was to Chant the Psalms and Hymns in the Church (r) Id Com. in V. Ephes Tom. 6 pag. 420. Yea it is very plain from him that they had a Choir which sang alternately and began always with Hallelujahs (s) Idem ad Sabin ep 48. pag. 305. Epitaph Paulae pag. 232. And that all the People at Funerals joyned in Singing Psalms and the Hallelujah till they made the gilded Roof of the Temple to shake and Eccho again (t) Idem in Epitaph Fabiolae Moreover he
mentions that so famous Form of Holy Holy Holy which the Greek call Trisagion (u) Id libr. de XLII Mansionibus And he speaks of the Morning and Evening Hymns wherewith God was delighted (w) Id. Com. in Psal 64. Tom. 7. pag. 158. Now it is certain all these were Forms of Praise and yet if these Christians had not sung them with the Spirit God would not have been delighted with them and therefore we may praise God devoutly acceptably and with the Spirit in and by Forms as S. Hirom and the holy Men and Women in his time did Nor have we less Evidence that they prayed by Forms For he occasionally mentions two Passages of their Litany The Church saith From thy remembring the Sins of our Forefathers (x) Hieron Com. in Psal 38. where Good Lord deliver us or the like must be added to make up the Sentence So again he tells us It is the Voice of the Church and he wishes God would hear her when she cries O Lord grant us thy Peace (y) Id ad Rustic ep 4 pag. 49. which very Phrase we know is used in all the ancient Litanies therefore he must refer to those public Forms when he cites those Words as the Voice of the Church As to the Communion Service no Man can doubt but that the People used there daily to repeat the Words of the Lords Prayer as a Form who considers that he saith Our Saviour taught his Apostles to appoint the Faithful every day in the Sacrifice of his Body to say Our Father c. (z) Idem adv Pelag. lib 3. pag. 469. He also calls the Prayer of Consecration The Solemn Prayer (a) Id Com. in Zeph. cap. 3. Tom. 5. p. 489. Now we shewed before that PRECES SOLENNES were always in a Set Form of Words He also mentions that Universal Form of receiving the Holy Sacrament and immediately saying Amen (b) Id. ad Theophil ep 62. Tom. 2. p. 270. which being used in the Eastern Churches in Africa and at Milan and prescribed by the ancient Offices of those several Churches those who followed them in this Rite probably did so in the rest of that Office Again It is evident from him that those who were Baptized were asked the very Words of the Apostles Creed (c) Idem adv Lucif Tom. 2. pag. 189. and he frequently refers to the Form of Renunciation there used Now considering S. Hierom did not write purposely of Liturgy these occasional Passages may suffice to shew us there was a Public Form used in his time and as we noted He commends S. Hilary for making a Liturgy and Book of Hymns (d) Hieron Catal. script in Hilario p. 378. and therefore could not dislike prescribed Forms yea Durandus doth not only say That he made an Order for reading the Scripture as our Adversary would have it (e) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 7â but his Words are He appointed what Psalms Lessons Epistles and Gospels should be read every day cantum ordinavit magna ex parte that is He ordered many of the Forms of Prayer and Praise both which were chanted or sung in Durandus his time (f) Durand âational lib. â cap. 1. sol 89. And he means no more but this which S. Gregory had Recorded before That the Missal of the Roman Church was corrected and set in order by S. Hierom in Pope Damasus his Time From whence we infer that S. Hierom was not like our Adversary for rejecting Liturgies but correcting them and sending them to such Bishops as had Authority to impose them Our Adversary though he pretends to have searched Antiquity very diligently could find nothing in S. Hierom which shewed the use of Forms and it seems he could discover but one Passage in him to urge against the use of them and it is a very slight one viz. That S. Hierom censures and reproves the Deacons because in the Offertory at the Communion they recited publicly the Names of such as offered and the Sums which they either gave or promised Now this Custom he thinks was not prescribed and therefore he infers that those who officiated were left to their Liberty to use what Expressions they thought sit (g) Disc of Liturg. p 65 66. ex Hieron Com. in Ezek xviii in Jer. xi To which I Reply That it hath been proved before there was a prescribed Form to pray for all Estates of Men and in this Collect they commemorated such Eminent Persons as died in the True Faith whose Names were read out of the Dypticks and this was a certain written Form which no Priest might alter Here also they mentioned the Names of such as had Offered at the Communion even from S. Cyprian's time who orders the Writing down and commemorating the Names of such as had contributed to redeem Captives (h) Cypr. Ep. 60. Epist 66. But the Names of these living Offerers varied every day and the Church could no more prescribe these Names than ours can prescribe what Sick shall be prayed for or what Christian Names shall be used in the Matrimonial Office And this miserable Logician may as well prove our Ministers are left to their liberty to use what Expressions they please in the general Prayer for the Sick because in some Churches they name twenty new Names there in one day Or in the Office of Matrimony because they put in William and Mary or John and Elizabeth as to pretend that the General Collect in the Primitive Church was not a prescribed Form from the Priests varying the Names of the Offerers As for their mentioning the Sums offered that was a Corruption no doubt but we see it came in at that part of the Office where the Church was forced to leave the Minister at liberty so that he hath spoiled his own Cause by this Instance which affords us a good Argument against Extempore Prayers and leaving Men at liberty in Divine Offices as being a dangerous Gap to let in Corruptions S. Chrysostom An. 397. § 19. The deservedly Famous S. Chrysostom hath left us so many rare memorials of his Piety and Learning and so many clear Evidences of his affection for Liturgies that he alone might be a sufficient Witness if our Adversary were not pertinacious And this Author is so dazeled with the brightness of his Testimonies that he grants enough to shew that Public Forms were used in his Time and approved by him though still according to the custom of his Party he denies they were used in this or the next Age holding the Conclusion when he is forced to quit the Promisses For he grants First That the Lord's Prayer is called by S. Chrysostom That Prayer which was established by Law and brought in by Christ (i) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Chrys hom 2. in 2 Cor. And that the very Words of it were taught to the Baptized and the Form it self repeated in the Daily Service of the
Church once at least in one Assembly (k) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 3. We note by the way that our Adversary means the Communion Office here by the Daily Service but takes no notice that the Christians had other daily Assemblies viz. at Six in the Morning Three in the Afternoon and at Candle-lighting Now if the Lord's Prayer were repeated but once at one Assembly yet still it might be repeated Four times in one day Secondly He grants there is in S. Chrysostom an Order visible that is a certain Method wherein they agreed to administer the several parts of Worship particularly in the Sacrament so as each had its known fixed place (l) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 5. Thirdly He cites S. Chrysostom to prove the People of old had a part in the Prayers (m) Ibid p. 44. Fourthly He owns That S. Chrysostom did bring in the usage of Singing alternately that is by Turns and Responses into the Church of Constantinople (x) Ibid. p. 168. Now let us put all this together and if they used the Lords Prayer so often every day as a Form and had a certain Order for the several parts of Worship so that every part had so known and fixed a place and so that the People could bear a share and make their Responses in this Worship both as to the Hymns and the Prayers doubtless this Order was a Liturgy because if the Words of it as well as the Method were not prescribed the People could not know where and when to come in with their Parts Thus then he hath given up the Cause and owned a Liturgy in the Fourth Century But we have better Arguments than his Concessions who never produces any one Evidence for Forms but what he hopes he can answer since S. Chrysostom abundantly assures us not only that there was a Liturgy in his time but sets out the Method and explains the Words and Phrases of those Forms as often as any occasion offers it self And First He tells us Their Office consisted of Prayers Litanies and Prefaces (o) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Chryâ hom 3. in Colost Tom. 4. p 106. more particularly He mentions one Prayer for the Catechumens (p) Hom. 2. in 2 Cor. p. 553. and three more The first is the Prayer full of Mercy when we pray for those that are Possessed The second is for those under the Censures of the Church to desire Mercy for them The third Prayer saith he is for our selves (q) Com. in Matth. hom 72. edit Front Vol. â p 768. that is for the Faithful And in another place he saith Both Priests and People make Common Prayers for the Possessed and the Penitents and all of them say that one Prayer the Prayer full of Mercy (r) Hom. 18. in 2 Cor. edit Savil. pag. 647. Now for the better understanding here of let it be considered that S. Chrysostom was bred up at Antioch before he came to Constantinople and therefore the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions who as we noted before hath set down the Liturgy of Antioch as it was used before S. Chrysostoms time must be the best Commentator upon S. Chrysostom for here he plainly alludes to some known Liturgy and probably to that in the Constitutions or one which had corrected it in some few things both in the Expressions and the Method yet they are so very like each other that both seem to have been but one Liturgy originally Now in that Liturgy in the Constitutions there are just so many Prayers and exactly in the same order The first for the Catechumens the second for those that are Possessed the third for the Penitents and the last Prayâr for the Faithful (s) ãâ¦ã Apolââ ãâã câp 5. âââp â câp 13 And this Author makes us understand what S Chrysostom means by The Prayers full of Mercy For these are the Forms of Litany which they made for these several sorts of Persons and when the Deacon hath repeated the Petition viz. For such and such things and let us pray to the Lord the People answer to every Petition Lord have mercy (t) ãâ¦ã Dâacâââ pepulââ ut pradâx ãâ¦ã Cân lit Aâostââ cap 5. From the frequent Repetition of which Sentence S. Chrysostom calls this the Prayer full of Mercy and to assure us he means this very Litanick Form he saith It is a Common Prayer made both by the Priests and People ââââstom ãâ¦ã pâg ââ And that it was enjoyned we may also be assured because when he is about to set down the very Form of this Prayer for the Catechumens he brings it in with this Preface The Laws of the Church command that the Prayers shall be made thus (w) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Id. hom 2. in 2 Cor. p. 553. which shews it was a Form established by Law and he there repeats the Words and expounds it as he goes on And though it be long yet to silence all that deny the use of prescribed Forms we shall here recite it First The Deacon saith Let us pray earnestly for the Catechumens And then he begins the Prayer Beseeching the All-merciful and Compassionate God to hear their Prayers To open the Ears of their Hearts To instruct them in the Word of Truth To plant his fear in them To confirm their Minds in the Faith To reveal to them the Gospel of Righteousness To give them an Heavenly Mind wise Reasoning and a vertuous Conversation To make them continue in his Law day and night To deliver them from all evil and absurd Actions And from all the Temptations of the Devil and Assaults of the Adversary To cloath them with the Garment of Immortality in his due time To bless their going out and their coming in To bless their Houses and their Servants To bless their Children and bring them to perfect age and understanding To make all things work together for their good After this the Catechumens who had kneeled while this Litany was said are bid to rise up and pray For an Angel of Peaâe (x) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã alio scil hom 3. in Coloss Tom. 4. p. 106. That their Affairs might prosper That this and all the days of their Lives might be peaceable And that they might make a Christian End After all they are bid To commend themselves to the living God by Christ Jesus and so to bow their Head and depart (y) Chrysost hom 2. in 2 Cor. pag 553 ad pag. 556. Here therefore we have a large Form in Words prescribed and enjoyned by the Church upon every Period of which this Holy Father makes a Comment which he could not have done had it been usually varied or had it been an Extempore Prayer The Form also is the manner of Litany room being left for the People to say Lord have mercy after every Petition And I must observe further that this very Litany is very short expressed in the Liturgies of S. Basil and S.
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 wâre 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 âp 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Chryâ 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
their Time were to be prayed for but the New Editions of these Liturgies have no Emperours or Bishops Name at all only ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã leaving it to the Priest to add the Names as Persons changed To conclude I have not seen one solid Objection against the main Body of S. Chrysostom's Liturgy and there is enough of that which we defend and is genuine to shew that Liturgies were used in this Age and there is clear Evidence and good Reason to believe not only that S. Chrysostom approved of Forms but that he Corrected the Ancient Office and made all that is Essential pure and primitive in this very Liturgy which now goes by his Name And this may suffice for this Father § 21. At the same time when S Chrysostom was Famous in the East S. Augustin S. Augustin An Dom. 3â flourished in the African Church and He also is a good Witness for us in this Age For it is impossible he could be against Forms of Prayer written in a Book and to be read out of it because he affirms That Christ therefore left us a Form of Prayer in writing knowing Words were necessary to moveâ us and that we might look upon that which we ask (a) Nobis ergo necessarâa sunt Verba quibus commoveanâur inspiciamus quid pâtamuâ Aug. ad Prob. Ep. 121. p. 129. Now for the Church to imitate Christ and write down our Prayers in a Book could not be a fault in the opinion of S. Augustin who owns the Lords Prayer to be a Form and in divers places affirms that the Faithful repeated it every day (b) Aug. de verb. Ap. Ser. 31. Item hom 42. alibi And therefore he will not grant that any Christians wanted the Spirit to help them with Words and Expressions that he saith cannot be the meaning of our not knowing what to Pray for as we ought Rom. viii 26. because it is not Credible that either the Apostle or those to whom he Writ were Ignorant of the Lords Prayer (c) Id. ad Prob. Ep. 121. pag 129. And therefore he goes on to expound the Spirits helping our infirmities of the Spirits giving us Patience so that we do not pray absolutely to be delivered out of our Afflictions as naturally we should do if the Spirit did not convince us they were for our good So that S. Augustin takes away the main Text on which our Adversaries ground their Extempore Prayers and thinks there is no need for the Spirit to furnish us with expressions We have now seen by other Fathers that they had a Liturgy in every Church by which care was taken for proper expressions and S. Augustin seems to have believed that the Original of these Liturgies the most essential parts wherein almost all Churches agreed was from S. Paul himself for he saith as my Adversary cites him (d) Disc of Liturg. Marg. pag. 173. The Apostle speaking of the Eucharist presently adds The rest will I set in order when I come giving us to understand that though it was too long for an Epistle to intimate all that order of Administration which the Vniversal Church observes yet he did ordain that which is every where observed without Variation (e) Aug. ad Januar. Ep. 118. p. 116. Now the use of Forms was every where observed and though there was some little variety in the Longer Forms of Prayer and Thanksgiving which were made afterwards yet the use of the Lords Prayer the Prefaces the Prayer of Consecration as to the Evangelical Words and some of the Hymns All which were Forms and of Universal use these S. Augustin affirms were ordered and ordained by the Apostle when he came to Corinth so that he maks the Original of using Forms of Prayer and Praise in the Sacrament to be Apostolical And the same thing he affirms in another place where he is arguing against Hereticks Let us look saith he upon the Mysteries of the Ecclesiastical Prayers which the whole World hath received by Tradition from the Apostles and which are uniformly Celebrated in every Orthodox Church that the Rule for our Prayers may fix the Rule of our Faith (f) Oâsecratiâârum quoque sacerdâtalium Sacramenta respiciamus quae ab Apostolis tradita in tâto modo atque in omni Catholicâ Ecclesiâ Uniformiter Celebrantur ââ legem credendi lex statuat supplicanâ Aug. de Eccles dog cap. ââ Tom. 3. pag. 4â He must mean this of Forms Extompore Prayers being invisible but these might be looked on yet these he saith were derived from Apostolical Tradition and uniformly Celebrated therefore there was then a written Liturgy appointed at first by the Apostles as S. Augustin thought and used by all Christians to the Words of which he appeals for Evidence against Hereticks in matters of Faith Now if the Prayers had been daily varied by the Extempore Gift he could not have appealed to the Words of them and if these Forms had been composed but a little before this time of S. Augustin he could not have urged their Authority in matters of dispute with Hereticks or others Therefore they had Forms written in former Ages and by their Antiquity become of great Authority in this Century Whereupon the same Father wishes that such as are weak and doubtful in the Question of perseverance would look upon those Prayers of theirs which the Church always had and ever will have (g) ut intuerentur Orationes suas quas semper habuit habebit Ecclesia Aug. de bon persev lib. 2. Tom. 7. pag. 279. That is upon the public Liturgy from the certain Words of which he draws Arguments to satisfy their doubts not fearing they would question the Authority of those Prayers which the Church ever had used from the beginning And therefore he boldly challenges Vitalis who hâed some Erroneous Opinions to dispute if he saw fit against the Prayers of the Church when he heard the Priest of God at the Altar Exhorting his People to Pray so and so c. (h) Aug. ad Vital Ep. 107. pag. 102. which shews not only that there were Forms because Extempore Prayers can never be urged for or alledged against the Church But it shews that these Forms were by long usage become so venerable that their Authority was esteemed sacred and indisputable And they were accounted the best Evidence of Apostolical Tradition after the holy Scripture The particulars of this African service agreeable to the parts of the Greek Liturgy S. Augustin saith were these The Singing of Hymns reading of Lessons and Sermons the Prayers made by the Bishop in an audible Voice and the Common-Prayer enjoyned by the Deacon (i) aut Antâstâtes clara voce deprecantuâ aut communis Oratio v ce Diaconi indicitur Aug. ad Januar. Ep. 11â p. 119. That is the Collects and the Litany to the First of which the People answered Amen To the Second they made Responses at the end of every Petition
which assures us they were Forms of Prayer And that Common-Prayer properly signifies such a Form in which both Minister and People have their several parts Of this Litany or Common-Prayer there are divers Petitions mentioned in S. Augustin upon occasion and though being writing Letters he doth not always cite them in the same Words yet the Phrases are so very much alike and the Sense and Order of them is so exactly the same that we may be sure he alludes to some known Form Thus he saith in one of the places afore cited the Church prays That Faith may be granted to unbelievers that Idolaters may be delivered from their ungodly Errors that the Vail may be taken away from the Hearts of the Jews so that the light of Truth may shine unto them that Hereticks may by Repenting receive the true Faith that Schismaticks may be restored by the Spirit of Charity that the lapsed may partake of the remedies of Repentance and that the Catechumens being brought to the Sacrament of Regeneration may have the Treasures of Heavenly mercy opened to them (k) Aug. de Eccles dogm cap. 30. p. 46. ut supra f In another place he describes so many of these Petitions more briefly as concern his present Question The Minister saith he prays For unbelievers that God would convert them to the Faith for the Catechumens that God would inspire them with the desire of Regeneration and for the Faithful that by his Gift they may persevere in that which they have begun (l) Idem ad Vital Epist 107. pag. 102. H and a little after The Faithful pray for themselves that they may presevere in that which they have begun (m) Id. ibid. pag. 103. H. eadem verba iterum ibid. p. 104. I. which Sentence is twice mentioned in one Epistle where also he saith When do you hear Gods Minister Praying with a loud Voice That God would make the unbelieving Gentiles come over to the Faith and do not answer Amen (n) Id. pag. 104. G. And in another Book When did not the Church use to Pray That unbelievers may believe And for the Faithful that God would grant they may persevere in him even to the End To which saith he the People answer Amen (o) Aâg de ãâ¦ã 7. ââg âââ Now my Adversary makes it an Argument against Liturgies that S. Augustin here speaking of the same Prayers cites them in various Words (p) Disc of ãâã pag. 21 22. But I have already observed he is writing Epistles and doth not pretend to quote the very Words but yet he describes the things Prayed in Phrases so very like each other that we may be sure he referred them to a common Form the Words of which were so well known that he need not strictly tye himself to repeat them As if I were writing to two several Persons and should prove the Church of Englands Charity by saying in one Letter that on Good Fryday she prays for the Conversion of Jews Turks Infidels and Hereticks and in another Letter by saying she Prays that God would convert the Jews convince the Turks and make Infidels and Hereticks become true Believers Supposing those I writ to were well acquainted with the Collect for Good Fryday None but such an Arguer as I have to deal with would gather from thence That the Church of England had no prescribed Collect for this day and this occasion And there is the less regard to be given to this Scruple because there are so many other clear Proofs in S. Augustin that there were certain Forms in his Time in the African and in other Churches He tells us That all Nations Grecians Latins and Barbarians used that Form Lord have mercy upon us (q) Aug. Pascentio Ep. 178. pag. 164. Now this we know was the Response in the ancient Litany And that same Preface before the Trisagion which we have anciently met with in S. Cyprian and many others is often mentioned and expounded in S. Augustin's Works So often as the Priest saith Lift up your Hearts the Spiritual Man can boldly and safely say We lift them up unto the Lord (r) Ei quoties Sacerdos dixerit sursum corda securè fidelitèr dicunt se habere ad Dominum De Temp. ser 54. pag 153. In another place Our Heart saith he is in Heaven and therefore it is not without cause that we hear those Words Lift up your Hearts (s) Id Com. in Psal 148. pag. 377. And again to shew it was of universal as well as daily use he saith All Mankind throughout the World do daily as it were with one Voice answer That they lift up their Hearts unto the Lord (t) Quotidiè per universum orbem genus humanum unà penè voce respondet sursum Corda se habere ad Dominum Id. de verâ Relig c. 3. p. 158. Moreover he gives us as clear Testimony of the rest of this Preface You know saith he to Dardanus in what Sacrifice it is said Let us give Thanks to our Lord God (u) Aug ad Dardan ep 57. pag. 57. and the like he writes to Honoratus (w) Id. ad Honorat ep 120. pag. 124. To which the Answer was then as it is now in our Common-Prayer It is meet and right so to do For thus S. Augustin discourses That which is said in the Sacrament by the Faithful Lift up your Hearts And We lift them up unto the Lord is intimated to be the Gift of God and therefore the Priest admonisheth those to whom he had spoken To give Thanks to our Lord God and they Answer It is meet and right (x) ut Gratias agant Domino Deo nostro Et dignum justum esse respondent Aug. de bon persev lib. 2. Tom. 7. p. 276. Item Aug de bono videit cap. 16. There can be nothing plainer therefore than that this very Form was used in the very same Words both in the Eastern and African Churches and it was also used in the Western Church so exactly in the same Form that we may justly look upon this as a piece of Primitive Liturgy which no Church presumed to alter He also speaks of a Prayer of Consecration by which the holy Elements were blessed The Petitions of which were concluded almost in every Church with the Lord's Prayer (y) Quam totam petitionom fere omnis Ecclesia dominica Oratione concludit Aug. Paulino ep 59. pag. 62. and he tells us that the Sacrament was delivered to the Faithful in these Words The Body or The Blood of Christ to which they always answered Amen (z) Aug. de verb. Ap. Ser. 31. pag. 87. enar in Psal 32. pag. 49. which very Form had been used in Africa ever since Tertullian's Time as we shewed before and we have also found it in the Eastern Churches and at Milan as well as here Finally He mentions a certain Vow in the Post-Communion wherein the Faithful do
promise to remain in Christ and adds That the whole Office is concluded with a solemn Thanksgiving (a) Aug. Paulin. Ep. 59. pag. 62. that is with a known Form in Words prescribed as Solemn plainly imports Now this is exactly agreeing to our Liturgy wherein we have a Prayer with a Vow to offer up our selves to Christ and conclude with that solemn Thanksgiving Glory be to God on high And as for the Praises of God S. Augustin highly commends the Custom of Milan For the Priest and People to sing Hymns in the Church alternately which can be no otherwise than by Forms (b) Aug. Confess lib. 10. cap. 33. pag. 41. ad Januar. Ep. 119. p. 119. He also approves and defends the Custom of Carthage in singing Hymns at the Altar taken out of the Psalms of David (c) Id retract lib. 2. cap. 11. pag. 10. And particularly he mentions the Usage of Singing the Hallelujah at the Altar every Lords-day (d) Id. ad Januar Ep. 119. pag. 119. ad Pascentium Ep. 178. p. 164. So that Africa in his Time had many Forms of Praise and therefore Possidonius among other effects of the Persecution that broke out after his Death laments this especially That it made the Hymns and Praises of God in the Church to cease (e) Pâssâââ vit D. Aug. prope finem To conclude This Holy Father was so great a lover of Forms that there is yet extant in his Works a very pious Form of Prayer which he used after his Sermons (f) Aug Oper. Tom. 8. p. ult so that where the Church had not prescribed to him he saw fit there to use a Form And if we had time to make a narrower search in the Works of this Learned Father no doubt we might trace out the whole African Liturgy used in his Time but those who will be satisfied with Reason and Truth will be abundantly satisfied by the Instances here produced That there were Forms both of Prayer and Praise daily used in that Church § 22. My Adversary who pretends to a narrow search into Antiquity had the ill Fortune to miss most of these obvious Passages but he hath found out divers that are more obscure which he urges to prove there were no prescribed Forms First he saith The Ancients did not think Christ enjoyned them to use the Lords Prayer in the Eucharistical Office and that S. Augustin declares Our Lord in delivering this Prayer did not teach his Disciples what words they should use but what things they should pray for (g) Disc of Liturg. p. 3. As to the first part of this Objection The Ancients generally expound that Petition of our daily Bread to be meant of the Sacramental Bread and most of them testifie They used the Lords Prayer as a Form in this Office Many of them and particularly S. Augustin call it The Prayer enjoyned by Christs Law (h) Aug. hom 42. de temp ser 126. and S. Hierom expresly saith That Christ taught the Apostles to appoint it to be said in the Sacrifice of his Body (i) Hieron adv Pelag. lib. 3. So that this Assertion of our Adversaries is a manifest Untruth And for the second part of the Objection S. Augustin is speaking of Mental Prayer as his own Quotation shews (k) cum in penetralibus mentis orarent Aug. lib. de Mag. cap. 1. Tom. 1. p. 122. Disc of Lit. pag. 3. and in that sort of Prayer wherein no Words are to be used he saith Christ by the Words of this Form taught them to whom and for what they should pray in secret But how impertinent is it in my Adversary to cite this as S. Augustin's Opinion about the use of this Form in public Offices and in Vocal Prayer about which alone we now dispute There are innumerable places in this Father to assure us he believed Christ did teach it to be used as a Form in Vocal and Public Prayer He calls it The daily Prayer which the Lord taught by daily saying whereof our daily Sins are blotted out (l) Id. de Civ Dei lib. 21. cap. 27. p. 232. yea he affirms The Faithful used to say these Words every day (m) Id. Hom. 14. pag. 79. and repeated them with united Voices among the holy Brethren and therefore he charges all both Men and Women to learn this Form (n) Id. de Temp. Serm. 126. pag. 191. and tells the Catechumens They must say this Prayer daily when they are Baptized because it was daily Repeated at the Altar in the Church the Faithful hearing it (o) Id. Hom. 42. pag. 116. So that the truth of this Matter is that S. Augustin plainly declares Christ taught it as a Form and so the Primitive Christians used it and he only intimates that it is also a direction to draw up other Prayers by to the same sense in other Words and they made that use of it also in drawing up Liturgies by that Pattern and in modelling their private Devotions into Forms agreeing in sense with this Divine Form which is the true meaning of that place (p) Discourse of Lit. pag. 5 6. pag. 60. ex Aug. ad Prob. Ep 12. which he twice cites viz. that it was lawful to use other Words in Prayer if it were to the same sense Secondly He saith S. Augustin complains that some of his Brethren used Heretical Prayers in their Sacramental Administrations which he supposes could not have been if they had then any allowed Liturgy Which Argument according to his Custom he urges in two several places (q) Disc of Liturg. p. 46. p. 113. ex Aug. de bapt contr Donat. lib. 6. cap. 25. I Answer That he ought not to have brought this in to prove there were no Forms for the Eucharist as he here doth See Discourse of Liturg. pag. 44. because the Father is only speaking of Prayers made at Baptism not of Prayers made at the Lords Supper so that he abuseth his Reader and S. Augustin both in applying this to the Eucharist But Secondly These Prayers were no essential parts of the Office of Baptism there was as S. Augustin in this place assures us a certain Form besides which none might vary from and these Bishops did use this Form which made the Baptism to be valid notwithstanding these additional Prayers newly thrust into the Old Office which were composed by Hereticks or Babling Persons (r) Certa illa Evangelica verba sine quibus non potest Baptismus consecrari Non est Baptismus Christi si verba Evangelica quibus symbolum constat illic defuerint Aug. de bapt contr Donat. But it seems these weak Brethren who were also Bishops and therefore Augustin who was a Bishop calls them Brethren designed to make the Office of Baptism more compleat by adding some Prayers before and after the essential Form of Baptism and wanting Judgment chose either silly or Heretical Prayers for the use of their
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) Disâourse of ââturg p. 173 Marg ex Aug. ad âanuar 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
or Synod and he adds they desire no more liberty than this I Answer The Canon enjoyns the Eucharistical Forms as having been established before and allows no Prayers but Forms in any other Office and there is nothing in the true Reading concerning the allowance of prudent Men that is his own Corruption And if his Bretheren are content to use Forms composed by prudent Men in former time and approved by a Synod the Common-Prayer is such a Form and therefore they must conform to it Secondly He saith No Prayers are forbid but such as are against the Faith (u) Disc of Liturg. pag. 50. I answer all Prayers but those which had been approved formerly in a Council are forbid in the Eucharist which was then daily Administred and so this was the only Solemn Office of Prayers And even at other times to prevent Heretical Prayers they forbid all new Forms from being brought into the Church Therefore if any then had pretended to the Gift of Prayer and had made new Forms for the Eucharist or the hours of Prayer though they were not against the Faith yet these Canons forbid them Thirdly He fills his Margen to shew in how many Offices imposition of hands were used (w) Disc of Liturg. p. 51. and then pretends that his feigned liberty was allowed in the Prayers used in all these several Offices I answer The imposition of Hands in this Canon must signify some part of the Eucharistical Office somthing done at the Altar in the Administration and it is expresly ordered that no Prayers shall be used in this laying on of Hands which I take to be the consecrating the Elements but such as had before been confirmed by a Synod Wherefore in this point there was no liberty at all left but every one was confined to the old established Form Fourthly He raises divers other scruples but they all rely upon his own false Translating of the Canon (x) Disc of Liturg. p. 53. 54 and may be here passed by because they are answered before Lastly He represents Chemnitius as falsly as he had done the Council saying that he cites these two Canons to prove the Order of Celebrating among the Ancients was Arbitrary (y) Disc of Liturg. p. 55. I answer Chemnitius is confuting the Roman Churches imposing her Canon of the Mass upon all Churches under pretence that no Consecration can be without it And he shews that in the ancient Church there was not one certain Form of Words which all the Churches in the World were bound to use under the peril of mortal Sin it being free for them to use any Form that agreed to the Faith which he proves by these two Canons and by this Argument because the Greeks had one Form in Dionysius his Church another in Basils and another in Chrysostoms In the West also S. Ambrose used one Form Isidore another and Gregory another who yet would not impose the Roman Form upon England from whence he concludes that the Papists now are unjust in imposing their Mass on all Churches and also in blaming the Lutherans who use Forms agreeing to the Ancients and the Analogy of Faith and tending to edification (z) Chemnitij exam Concil Trident. par 2. pag. 191. Therefore if this Author be a good Evidence he owns Liturgies in the Primitive Church and justifies the use of them in the Reformed Churches he condemns nothing but imposing one Liturgy upon all the Churches in the World to conceal which my Adversary in citing Chemenitius draws a line where these Words come in To which all Churches in the World were bound under the peril of mortal Sin Which words shew Chemnitius disliked mainly the binding all Churches to use one Churches Form But as to these two Canons Bellarmine justly reproves Chemnitius for applying those parts of them which forbid such Prayers as are against the Faith to the Eucharistical Prayers because they belong as we have shewed to Prayers used in the Church at other times (a) Bellarm. de Missâ lib. 2. cap. 18. And I dare say Chemnitius did not think That the public Prayers were Arbitrary in the Primitive Church in my Adversaries Sense that is that private Ministers were allowed to Pray Extempore or to make Forms of their own nor did he think it would be allowed to the inferior Clergy to use suppose Dionysius his Form in S. Basils Church it is plain from his Argument and the Lutheran Churches practice that the Clergy of every Province were bound to use the Forms prescribed by that Church whereof they were Members And this is the obligation which our Church puts upon all her Clergy which our Dissenters most unjustly complain of since we see it hath been always done by all the Regular and well setled national Churches in the World I have now done with this eminent Century and proved That as Christianity was first setled and established by Law in this Age so were Liturgies also So that we shall conclude this Period with our Adversaries Character of this Time Many there were saith he excellently accomplished in the Fourth Age and some till about the middle of the Fifth it may therefore seem something for the Credit of Liturgies if they can be found in the Church while there was any thing of such Eminency in it (b) Disc of Liturg. p. 55. Wherefore having made it appear that Liturgies were used even in the Three first Ages which he pretends so much to admire and being setled by Law and custom so firmly in this Age which abounded with more and more learned Fathers than all the Ages before it we may conclude That to Pray by a prescribed Liturgy is to pray according to the usage of the best Times of the Church and to pray agreeably to the Opinion and practice of the most Learned Pious and Eminent Fathers whose judgment if our Adversaries had any Reverence for they would certainly comply with so pure and Primitive a Liturgy as that which is prescribed by the Reformed Church of England the undoubtted Bulwark of the True Protestant Religion The End of the Fourth Century BOOKS newly Printed for and Published by Robert Clavell at the Peacock at the West-end of S. Pauls ROman Forgeries in the Councils during the first Four Centuries Together with an Appendix concerning the Forgeries and Errors in the Annals of Baronius By Thomas Comber D.D. Precentor of York Concio ad Synodum ab Episcopis Clero Provinciae Cantuariensis celebratam Habita in Aede Westmonasteriensi XII Kal. Decembr An. Dom. 1689. Per Guilielmum Beveregium Archidiaconum Colcestriensem Jussu Episcoporum A Sermon Preached to the Protestants of Ireland in and about the City of London at S. Mary le Bow in Cheapside Octob. 23. 1689. being the Day appointed by Act of Parliament in Ireland for an Anniversary Thanksgiving for the Deliverance of the Protestants of that Kingdom from the Bloody Massacre and Rebellion begun by the Irish Papists on the 23d of October 1641. By his Grace the Archbishop of Tuam A Sermon Preached before Their Majesties at Whitehall on the 5th Day of November 1689. being the Anniversary Day of Thanksgiving for the great Deliverance from the Gunpowder-Treason and also the Day of His Majesties happy Landing in England By the Bishop of S. Asaph Lord Almoner to their Majesties Seasonable Reflections on a late Pamphlet Entituled A History of Perfect Obedience since the Reformation wherein the true Notion of Passive Obedience is setled and secured from the malicious Interpretations of Ill designing Men. FINIS
enough for Innocent to settle that wherein the only difference lay which was variety of Rites not of Prayers Sixthly He adds that Innocent setled this Rubric rather for Imitation than strict conformity (l) Disc of Lit. pag. 80. I Answer This is not setling any thing at all for where every Priest is Arbitrary nothing is fixed But Innocent when he hath declared the custom of Rome expresly requires of this Bishop First to take care that his own Diocess and Ministring Clergy were well instructed in it and then that he should give a Form to other Bishops which they ought to imitate or follow (m) ut tuam Ecclesiam Clericos nostros qui sub tuo Pontificio divinis famulantur officiis bene instituas aliis formam tribuas quam debeant imitari Innoc. Ep. 1. vers fin Where we see he requires he should carefully instruct his own Clergy in order to their strict conformity no doubt for otherwise to what end did he teach them these Rules And then he doth expect he should give this Form to others that is to his neighbor Bishops and affirms it is their Duty to observe it For since he is speaking of Acts and Ceremonies there is no way to imitate them but by doing them there is no Medium between strict Conformity and total Non-conformity in these cases so that his distinction between Imitation and strict Conformity is nothing but Words without Sense I conclude this passage with my Adversaries censure of Pope Innocent out of Erasmus (n) Disc of Lit. p. 81. 82. as if he were fierce in his Nature and no good Orator And shall note that Erasmus doth not censure him for pressing an Uniformity nor doth he give any ill Character of him for this Epistle but for others which he Writ in the Pelagian Controversie (o) Vid. Aug. ep 91. ep 96. cum notis Erasm Coci censura p. 111. And what Erasmus saith of two other Epistles if it be never so true cannot prove that in this Epistle wherein he Writes of the Customs of his own Church he is not a good Evidence for matter of Fact and if that be granted then we have here this Popes Testimony that the Metropolis of Rome had certain Forms of Words for their several Offices and one way and Method both in their Service and Rites and that all Churches under her immediate Jurisdiction ought to be uniform even in their Ceremonies by conforming to their Mother Church which is sufficient to shew how falsly my Adversary affirms that in Italy in Innoconts time every one Consecrated as he though fit For the Question was not about all Italy but only about Eugubium and the neighboring Diocesses not about private Ministers but Bishops not about the Words or Forms of Consecrating c. but about Rites and Ceremonies in the Eucharist and other Offices yet even in these he labours to settle an Uniformity and gives sufficient indication not only that they ought to have but then had one prescribed Liturgy for the Offices themselves differing only in some Rubrics § 2. Prudentius the Famous Christian Poet Aurelius Prudentius Ann. Dom. 405. is but once cited by my Adversary who speaks of his Cathemerinon that is Hymns or Forms of Praise and Prayer suited to the several Hours of the Day and Night wherein the Christians then Solemnly worshiped God and he might have noted of many of them what he saith of one That they were afterwards made use of as Church Hymns (p) Disc of Lit. marg p. 161. Now that which I shall observe from hence is this That these Hymns consist of Petitions and Prayers as well as Praises and are drawn up in the Plural Number suitable to their intended use for a public Assembly to which soon after they were applied But if Prudentius had been of my Adversaries mind and thought Forms prescribed were unlawful it had been Ridiculous in him to draw up and sinful for the Christians in public to use these Written Forms of Praise and Prayer Again if the Gift of Extempore making Prayers and Praises for the several Hours of Devotion had then remained in the Church it had been not only lost labour but a very bold thing for Prudentius to compose Forms and if that Age as my Adversary pretends were utter strangers to prescribed Forms doubtless Prudentius had not answered his name rashly to undertake so novel and daring a thing without making any Apology We conclude therefore that Forms even in these very Hours of Prayer were customary and used in his time I could also here particularly shew that this Divine Poet frequently alludes to divers passages in the greater Offices and Liturgies then in use viz. The Amen Hallelujah the Trisagion which he calls the Hymn Sung by Cherubins and Seraphins c. But since Poetical strains are not so solid proofs in our Case I will only mention one place (q) Si quid trecenti bis novenis additis Possint figurâ noverimus mysticâ Mox ipse Christus qui sacerdos verus est Parente natus alto ineffabili Cibum beatis offerens Victoribus Parvam pudici cordis intrabit casam Prud. praef ad Psycomad pag. 228. where in a Mysterious way he intimates the repeating of the Nicene Creed immediately before the Celebration of the Eucharist comparing the 318 Fathers who composed this Creed to Abrahams 318 Servants with whom he met Melchisedec and the Sacramental Elements to the Bread and Wine which Abraham then received from that High Priest And Ant. Nebrissensis hath shewed that this passage is not any otherwise intelligible than by thus expounding it Not. in Prudent pag. 118. Which implies they used then as we do now to repeat the Nicene Creed in the Communion Office § 3. My Antagonist had diligently Read Isidore of Pelusium Isidor Peleusiota Ann. Dom. 412. as appears by his citing him for golden Sentences (r) Disc of Lit. p. 2. Title P. and also by his weeding this Author for all the hard things he saith of some bad Bishops in that time (s) Ibid. p. 182 185. c. ad pag. 195. and Maliciously applying it as the Character of the whole Order in this Age which I shall confute hereafter and now only observe that since he disparages Liturgies by their beginning as he pretends in so bad and corrupt a Time as he makes this to be it must follow that he believes Liturgies are as old as Isidore's Time or else his Allegations must be not only spiteful but impertinent And for his baffled Argument from Isidore's concealing the Words of the Mysteries and appealing to the Faithful as being acquainted with them (t) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Isid lib. 4. ep 162. lib. eod ep 40. cited under Synesius name Disc of L. p. 34. This plainly proves they did not Officiate then Extempore but in plain Words constantly used and well known to the Faithful who daily heard
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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Socr. lib. 2. c. 8. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 Histârians 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 wâom their Successors did receâve this variety and Writ it down for a Law to those who should come after them (f) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ââcrat 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 Sâzomen been of my Adversaries side they must have told us in short that there could be no agreement in Prayers any where bâcause 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 Nâvatians 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 dâciâââ ãâã vâl inâ ãâ¦ã Sacâ ãâ¦ã ârdo ãâ¦ã Ut sicut ãâã câm Trinitatis cânfâssionâ ãâã teneâatâ ãâã Ospââ ãâã reâulâm tâneamââ variatâ observâtione in alâ no observatio nostra discrepare creaaâur Concil Viâtet 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 oâher Canons and Writ to Victurius Biâhop 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 Cânon was made and Perpetuus the President of this Council was the Fifth Bishop after â Mârtin (n) ãâ¦ã §. 14. p. ââ and hold this Synod at least 30 Years before the Conversion of Clâvis 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
as soon as they had setled Christianity it self their very next care was to settle one Liturgy and probably other Provinces made the like Decree though this only for this Age be now extant in the Councils And if as he saith all things were so had here in this Country in the very beginning of their Conversion I would fain know when things were better there than when this Canon for an Uniform Liturgy was made and I desire it may be Noted that Gregory of Tours who lived within little more than ân hundred Years of this Council assures us That many of these very Bishops had the Gift of Miracles Yet did not pretend to that Gift of Extempore Praying which our Dissenters boast of but bound themselves and all their Subordinate Clergy to one and the same Rule of holy Offices and a Man would hope this Country was not so very bad nor this Age so wicked where the Bishops were enabled to work Miracles and while many of them were Confessors and Martyrs Thus much for the Authority of this Council And as to the meaning of the Canon my Adversary leaves out one half of it and recites no further than una sit consuetudo So that his Reader may not see the unam Officiorum Regulam One Rule for holy Offices nor observe their resolution to have one Form for their Offices as well as they had for their Creed nor discern their fear of having any remarks made if there were the least variation in their Worship This was all to be clapt under Hatches Then he puts Sacrorum Ordo together whereas Ordo is joyned with Psallendi But that is no great matter if he had not also falsly expounded this Word Ordo and told us it signifies no more than the disposing the Responsals Prayers Hymns and Psalms each in its proper place which he would prove by the Council of Agatho held he saith not long after where Ordo Ecclesiae is used only for a Rubric or Directory and therefore he thinks it cannot be inferred from hence that the same Expressions were used by them that did Officiate (o) Disc of Lit. pag. 174. This is the sum of his Arguing against the plain and genuine meaning of this Canon But I shall easily shew it is all mistake For first all those Prayers which had Responsals in them must necessarily be in known Forms otherwise the People could not make certain Answers to them in their proper places and that the Hymns and Psalms were Forms also is most certain Well then according to him Ordo must be the disposal of all the Responsory Prayers and Praises together with the Hymns and Psalms in that very Form of Words in which they were prescribed into their proper places So that according to him Ordo will signifie not only a bare Rubric but a direction containing âhe Forms themselves as well as the Order of them He can except nothing but the Prayers and gives no shadow of a Reason why they should not be put into Forms as well as the Responsals Hymns and Psalms And this is certain that The Litany which was the âongest Prayer in all the Offices and was in use at the Time of this Council as I will shew in the next Section was a Responsory Form so that if this Ordo did dispose of that into its proper place no doubt it also contained the very Form it self and he must need Hellebore who can imagine that when the Litany and the Hymns and Psalms were all prescribed Forms other Prayers should be left arbitrary Again I hope this Canon may be allowed to expound it self and then this Order is enjoyned to be done in one manner and after one Custom there was to be no more variety in it than in their Creed which was one constant Form of Words yea it is called One Rule of holy Offices and so made that none might observe the least variety in any Church throughout the Province Therefore if we joyn Ordo to Sacrorum it can mean nothing but a Prescription both of the Order and Forms also to be used in ââcred Administrations And that this is generally the sense of Ordo when it is applied to Divine Offices appears in those very Councils of Agatho and âamiers which he cites here but were not held till after the Sixth Century was begun In the former The Order of the Church equally to be observed by all is one Liturgy consisting of Antiphones and Collects with proper Hymns and Prayers for Morning and Evââing (p) Concil Agatâ Can. 30. Bân Tom. II. par 1. pag. 555. In the latter of these Synods it signifies so also for there all the Clergy of the Province are commanded to use the same Liturgy or Order of Prayer which was used in their Mâtropolitan Church (q) Concil Epanu Can. 27. ibid. pag. 53. as I shall more at large demonstrate when I come to these Councils in order of Time In the mean season I will here observe that Causabââ tells us the Latins call the Liturgy Ordinem agendi (r) Causab exercit 1â ad Annal. Eccles pag. 384. and every Man knows that Ordo Romanus is the Roman Missal And it is the proper Latin Word for ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which we have seen used by Sozomen and others in this Age for a Liturgy (s) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 10. and this Order is that Liber Sacerdotalis which Vincentius Lirinensis speaks of (t) Vincent Lirin adv haeres cap. 7. pag. 12. it was called sometimes Ordinale and as Spolmân defines it signified That Book wherein was appointed the manner of saying singing and celebrating the Divine Office after the manner of the Roman Church (u) Ordinale Liber quo Ordinatur modus dicendi decantandi celebrandique divinum Officium ex more Romanae Ecclesiae Spelm. Glossar pag. 440. yea after the manner of any other Church For the Missal of Sarum Composed by Osmund who was Bishop of that See is called The Ordinal of Salisbury (w) Hic quoque compâsuit librum Ordinalem Ecclesiastici officii quem Consuetudinarium vocant Ranulf Polychron An. 1077. Item Knighton de event Angl. lib. 2. cap. 3. col 2351. and did not agree in all things with the Roman Missal Yet these Orders or Ordinals had prescribed Forms of Prayers and Hymns as well as Rubrics to shew when and where to use them I confess there are some ancient Breviaries of the old Liturgies where the first words only of the Hymns and Prayers are set down and the order in which they are to be used is directed but these are an undeniable Proof that the Forms themselves were by long use become known and familiar in those days But for any such Order as is a bare Rubric for Method and hath no Forms neither largely set down nor briefly hinted at in it no Man ever saw such a Book or any thing like it in all Antiquity only
Gregory the Great Leontius Bizantin An. D. 594. § 13. Toward the End of this Century Leontius of Bizantium writ his Books against Nestorius and Eutyches wherein he complains of Theodorus of Mopsevestia the Master of Nestorius That he not only corrupted the Scripture but presumed to do another Evil equal to that viz. That he foolishly invented a New Liturgy besides that which the Fathers delivered to the Churches neither reverencing that of the Apostles nor that which the Great S. Basil writ by the same Spirit in which Liturgy of his he filled the Mystery of the Eucharist with Blasphemies rather than Prayers And can we now saith Leontius reasonably expect any other Antichrist since this Man so desperately hates Christ and changes the things that are Christs (f) Leont Bizan adver Nestor Eutych lib. 3. §. 18. Bib. Patr. Auctar. Tom. 2. col 619. I briefly pointed at this before (g) Cent. V. §. 8. But I produce this place here at large because it shews That in the Greek Church the Liturgy of S. James which is here called that of the Apostles and the Liturgy of S. Basil were believed in this Age to gave been endited by Inspiration and to deserve a Reverence almost equal to Holy Scripture So that for a private Bishop to despise or disuse them on conceit of his own Fancies was adjudged to be Blasphemy and he who did so was in this Century thought to be an Enemy to Christ himself Now this extraordinary Veneration for these Liturgies could proceed from nothing but their having been long used in the Eastern Church and their assurance of their great Antiquity and Excellency And if private Ministers had then enjoyed such a liberty in varying the public Prayers according to their own Fancies and Conceptions This Author could not have been so ridiculous as to represent this as so heinous a Crime in a Bishop So that we may conclude this Century also wherein we find the Use of Liturgies every where continued and by all the Fathers and Councils of this Age they are spoken of with much Reverence and represented as delivered from the Apostles and Primitive Bishops and as the ancient way of Serving God being no where first introduced in this Period but only in Countries newly Converted And the great business of many Councils in this Time was to reduce those Nations which had variety in their Offices to a Regular Uniformity CHAP. III. Of LITVRGIES in the Seventh and other Later Centuries TO gather up all the Evidence for LITURGIES in this and the following Ages would be a needless Trouble to the Reader and my self both because what I have so clearly made out to begin much sooner can receive no great strength from the Writers of this declining Age and because my Adversary doth confess they began to be imposed above one whole Century before the beginning of this Yet since he will go on to lower Times to plead for the continuance of his imaginary Liberty I shall follow him and not only confute his Objections but collect also which he hath omitted some of the most remarkable Proofs for the continuance of Liturgies in these Ages § 1. He that considers the Authorities before produced to prove Isidorus Ep. Hispalens An. Dom. 603. That Isidore who succeeded his Brother Leander in the Archbishopric of Sevil did perfect the Mozarabic Liturgy will not question but there was a setled Form of Prayer in Spain in his Time But if it be needful further to prove so plain a Matter we find in his Book of the Original of things one Chapter of Divine Offices wherein he explains the meaning of the several Liturgick Phrases such as The Evening Office The Morning Office The Mass A Choir Antiphons Responsals Canticles Psalms Hymns Allelujah Amen Hosanna the Offertory c. (h) Isidor orig lib. 6. cap. 19. pag. 80. Now these as we have seen are all parts of ancient Liturgy and he supposing the things to be known to all here gives the reason of the Names Moreover he hath also extant another Tract concerning The Offices wherein he shews what was the Original of every one of the Ecclesiastical Offices wherein he shews who were the Inventers of Canticles to be sung with Voices and Psalms to be sung to Musical Instruments as also who were the Authors of the Hymns used in the Church both Divine among which he reckons the Benedicite and Human the latter Composed by S. Hilary and S. Ambrose whose Hymns were used in all the Western Church He goes on to inform us That the Greeks first Composed Antiphons and that the Responsals were made in Italy in old Time As for Prayers he saith Christ was desired by his Disciples to compose them a Prayer which he did and thence the Church learned to use Prayers like to that which Christ made The Greeks being the first that composed such Forms of Supplication And a little after he treats of the Alleluja which by ancient Tradition was sung always in Spain except on Fasting-days and in Lent He explains also the Offertory which use to be made with Singing in his Time Then he reckons up Seven Prayers in the Mass that is saith he The Order of those Prayers by which the Sacrifice is Consecrated which being instituted by S. Peter is celebrated in one and the same Manner throughout the whole World The first is an Exhortation to the People to entreat the Lord that is a Litany The second is a Prayer That God would receive the Prayers and Alms of the Faithful The third respects the Offerers and Faithful deceased The fourth relates to the Kiss of Charity The fifth is for Sanctifying the Oblation and setting out Gods Praise exciting Heaven and Earth to joyn in it in which Hosannah is sung The sixth is the Prayer for the Holy Spirit to descend on the Sacrament The last is the Lords Prayer After which follows the Nicene Creed and the Benediction of the People (i) Isidor de Offic. Eccles lib. 1. cap. 4.5 6 7 8 9.13 14 15 16 17. pag. 581 582 c. All which several Prayers and Forms are yet to be seen in the Mozarabic Office to which Isidore here refers and so exactly follows the Order of it even where it differs from other Forms and Liturgies as particularly in giving the Benediction before the Distribution (k) Vid. Offic. Mozarab in Bib. Patr. Tom. xv edit Colon. cap. 27. pag. 779. Item vid. Concil Tolet. 4. Can. 17. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 350. that no Man can doubt but that Office was Extant then with all the Parts now contained in it except those which mention the Virgin Mary added since of which there is no mention in him I must transcribe this whole Book of Isidore's if I should produce all the other particulars about the Hours of Prayer the Vespers Completorium Vigils Matius c. In all which and all the rest of those Books such plain and
there was need also to agree upon the Words in which these Things should be asked if they would have any solid Agreement or Uniformity between distant Churches § 2. He Argues There were no Liturgies in the first Four or Five Ages at least because no Writers of that Time have any such Phrase as Reading of Prayers though they do speak of Reading the Lessons and the Passions of the Martyrs (k) Disc of Lit. pag. 7. I Reply First the force of this Argument turns upon himself For I may Argue There were no Extempore Prayers in all that time at least after the miraculous Gift of Prayer ceased because in all that Space he who hath so diligently searched Antiquity cannot produce any Writer who speaks plainly of Extempore Prayers He finds several Testimonies of the Fathers Preaching Extempore wherein that very Phrase is used (l) Disc of Lit. pag. 56 57 58. And since it would have been more to his purpose we may be sure had he met with Preces Extemporales or Extemporaneae or found ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which Phrases he meets with for their Sermons He would have produced them very triumphantly but his Silence assures us there are no such Phrases concerning Prayers and therefore in his way of Arguing we conclude there were no such Prayers in those Ages But Secondly It is certain there were Written Forms of Prayer very Early in the Church of God This we have proved out of many Writers of the first Four or Five Ages Now if there were Written Forms then doubtless they might be Read nay they must either be Read when used in public or be gotten by Heart and so in Tertullian's Phrase be repeated de Pectore by Memory even as Socrates saith the younger Theodosius could recite the Scripture out of his Breast (m) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 22. pag. 748. And it appears in S. Basil That the ancient Monks used to get both their Prayers and the Psalms by Heart Wherefore if they took this Method he cannot conclude from their not Reading Prayers that they had no prescribed Written Forms He himself hath cited the Hymns written by the Holy Brethren from the beginning (n) Disc of Lit. pag. 23. He found Written Forms of Prayer in the Council of Carthage (o) Ib. pag. 84. and cites the Prefaces before the Communion out of S. Cyril (p) Ib. pag. 147. and might have cited them out of S. Cyprian had he so pleased These he found in the Primitive Ages and we have found Litanies Prayers for all Estates of Men and Forms of Consecration within this Period So that being so sure of Written Forms whether they were Read or no is nothing to our purpose But Thirdly The Phrase for Offering up Our Desires to God both in these and the following Ages when Forms were most used and most common were To Pray To Make or To Say Prayers (q) Disc of Lit. ex Origen pag. 139. Which Phrases are more applicable to those who Pray by Forms than to such as Pray without them yet we do not urge them against the Extempore Way and he must not alledge them against Forms because we know the Jews certainly prayed by Prescribed Forms and yet I do not remember the Phrase of Reading Prayers is to be found in the Old Testament any more than in these ancient Writers And these Fathers imitated the Scripture-Phrase where Reading was appropriated to the Reading the Law and the Prophets as among these it was to the Reading of Lessons which were only Read and no more but using Holy Forms of Supplication though they were also Read is called Praying from the Principal design of them which was to petition Almighty God or ask him for what they wanted But whereas he would prove That the Primitive Christians could not Read their Prayers because while they Prayed they had their Eyes lifted up to Heaven (r) Disc of Lit. p. 9. This hath been answered before and I have proved That neither the Priest nor the People did always look upwards when they Prayed sometimes they Prayed with their Eyes looking down (s) See my 1st Part Cent. 2. §. 4. p. 46 47. And all Men know that after we are accustomed to a Form we may look upwards when we Repeat it for the greatest part of the time and many yea most of our Ministers do so in the use of the Common-Prayer and therefore the Primitive Bishops and Priests might Read their Prayers and yet look upwards frequently Though I must also note that there is not one of his Quotations brought to prove this to be the Posture of Prayer which relate to the Priest who did Officiate they all relate to the whole Congregation to the Christian People and I hope their looking upwards frequently will not be allowed for a good Proof that they much less that the Priest never looked on a Book of Prayers or read any prescribed Forms of Prayers or Responses And for the Presbyters and Deacons which he says could not Read if there were any such no doubt they got their Office by Heart for such Men he grants were not fit to make Extempore Prayers § 3. In the next place he goes about to disparage Reading of Forms of Prayer as a way which wants Life and Action and that is apt to dull the Auditory and this he proves by Pliny's refusing to read over one of his Orations to his Friends in private since he could not read it over with that life and vigour with which it was spoken at first in the Court (t) Disc of Lit. pag. 11. But to this I Answer That he twice mentions that Commendation which Pliny gave his Servant Zosimus and puts it in both in the Text and Margen of his Book (u) Ibid. pag. 8. p. 11. Marg. whom his Master there praises Because he could read a thing with as much life and vigour as either the Inventer of it or he who had got it by Heart could shew (w) Plin. epist l. 5. ep 19. Adding That he did this so rarely well as if he had learned to do nothing else Now this Instance confutes his Argument and shews it is possible for a Man to read a thing with great life and vigour and so as to affect his Auditory very much thereby And why should he uncharitably suppose that a Pagan Slave should take more care to read a Play or an Oration vigorusly before his Master than a Christian Priest to read a Prayer before his God Experience confutes this unworthy Reflection because many Clergy-men do read the Common-Prayer with as much spirit and life and as true Devotion as any of his Friends say their Extempore Prayers and I am sure their Tautologies Incoherences and tedious length tyre a Judicious Hearer much more than a well-read and acurate Form can do As for Pliny his Oration
Singular Number the Holy Bible to make his Reader suppose it was meant alone of that Book But the Original speaks of more Books and therefore since a Liturgy was then in use at Alexandria no doubt that was one of the Holy Books which they here falsly accused Macarius for Burning And since the Author calls them Holy not Divine Books it is more probable he meant it of the Books of Offices which were counted only Sacred than of the Scripture which they generally call Divine or Divinely inspired Books Which distinction is very evident in Eusebius where he relates how in the Persecution under Dioclesian They Burnt the Divine and Sacred Books in the Mârket places (g) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Euseb lib. 8. cap. 2. p. 217. In which place the Divine Books are the Holy Scriptures and the Sacred Books those which contained the Service of the Church The same Author in the Life of Constantine makes a plain distinction between these Books as being several Volums For he saith the Emperor took the Books for the explaining the Divinly inspired Scriptures and after for repeating the prescribed Prayers with those who dwelt in his Roy. al Palace (h) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Euseb vit Const lib. 4. cap. 17. First he took the Bible into his Hands and then after that it seems he took the other Book wherein the usual Established Prayers were written For ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the Books implies more Books than one Secondly As to the Books which Constantine sent to Eusebius into Palaestine to procure for his Churches at Constantinople he calls them Those Divine Books which he knew most necessary according to the Ecclesiastical Catalogue to be prepared and used (i) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Ibid. l. 4. cap. 35. And this might be expounded of Books of Offices as well as Bibles but suppose we grant this Catalogue here mentioned to be the Canon of Scripture agreed on by the Church and so the Books he sent for were only the Canonical Books of Scripture His inference that the Churches in Constantine's Time had no other Book will by no means follow Eusebius lived in Palaestine where the Scriptures were first written and best understood and there the best Copies were to be had and Eusebius who lived there was the fittest Judge of them therefore Constantine sent thither and to him perhaps for no more but Bibles Not because Churches were furnished then with no other Books but because we know Constantine had Prayer-Books at home and could get acurate Copies of the Service writ out at Constantinople and need not send so far as Palaestine for those Books but it was most proper to send thither for Copies of Canonical Scripture Thirdly The Council of Carthage also doth mention a Book of the Gospels held over the Bishops Head a Book of Exorcisms to be given to the Exorcist and a Book of Lessons to be delivered to the Reader at their Ordination But doth not mention the Service-Book delivered to any that entred into Orders (k) Concil 4. Carthag can 1. 7 8. But it is too much from thence to conclude there was no Service-Book there in the year 498 because we have proved by many Testimonies which are Positive that they had prescribed Prayers there long before And he may as well argue that we have no Common-Prayer-Book in England since it is not delivered either to any Bishop Priest or Deacon at their Ordination that is there is no more done here than was there and yet both we have and they had a Book of Offices for all that Optatus S. Augustin and others before cited do fully attest it Moreover these Books of Exorcisms were Forms of Prayer and of Catechising Collected out of Holy Scripture (l) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Cyril praef ad Catech. for those who were newly Converted to Christianity And such Books had been long time used in the Church before this Council though this formal delivery of them is not mentioned till this Council Orders it Fourthly As to the Persecutors not enquiring for or finding or the Christians delivering no other Books to them but only Bibles I reply the matter of Fact is not True and therefore his Consequence viz. that they had no Prayer-Books then is false Indeed the Bible was the most Eminent of all the Christian Books and the Foundation of their Faith their Worship and their Manners And in those Ages the Bible was in all Christians Hands the People Read it at Home whereas the Liturgy was only in the Priests Hands and upon the Notion they had of the necessity of concealing Mysteries from Pagans was kept very close By which means no doubt Bibles were oftner found by the Persecutors and better known to them than the Book of Offices the Dyptics the Book of Exorcisms the Book of Anthems written and composed to the Honour of Christ Yet we are sure they had these Books then though they are rarely or never mentioned singlâ only they come under the general Titles of Christian Writings Divine Sacred or Holy Books c. and no doubt sometimes the Persecutors found and Burned these as well as Bibles For we may observe that all Authors generally speak in the Plural Number The Divine and Holy Writings and the Writings The Books of the Church in Eusebius are said to be Burnt and Destroyed by the Persecutors (m) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Euseb lib. 8. cap. 2. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ibid. cap. 3. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Id. lib. 10. cap. 4. Why do our Writings deserve to be committed to the Flames saith Arnobius (n) Nââstrâ quidem Scripta cur ignibus merueruât dari Arnob. l 4. They Demanded the Divine Books for the Fire Saith Augustin (o) Peterent divinos câdices exurendos Aââ brevic Câl l. 3. So they ask the Holy Martyrs if they had any Writings in their keeping (p) Dicas aliquas Scripturas habeas âron An. 30â §. 53. And the Canon of Arles is general against all that had delivered up the Holy Writings (q) De his qui Scripturas Sanctas tradidisse dicuntur Concil Arcl. can 13. An. 316. Now why should they so Constantly and Unanimously speak of more Books if there had been no Book but a Bible But further some of the Acts of the Martyrs mention Volumes of Parchment and other folded Books besides the Bible (r) Baron An. 303. §. 10. In the Acts under Zenophilus the Persecutors demanded If they had any Writings of their Law or any thing else in their Library (s) Ibid. §. 13. 14. Now they had removed the Books before they came conveying them to the Readers House where at last they found 24 great and small Volums and in another House 8 Books and 4 folded Tomes Now certainly these were not all Bibles no doubt some of them were Books of Prayers Hymns and Passions or Names at least of Martyrs Writ out as S. Cyprian had directed Another
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. ââcââm de vât 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sometimes ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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
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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã (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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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
scattered and dispersed Fourthly His Quotations are not faithful for he frequently disguises the Evidence which he produces both by false Translating divers Passages and Citing them wrong So in the Council of Carthage he reads Quascunque for Quicunque (n) Disc of Lit. pag. 44. And in that of Milevis Cum prudentioribus collatae for à prudentioribus collectae (o) Ib. p. 49. So he Translates ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Cum his caeteris hujusmodi gratiarum actionibus (p) Ib. p. 76. pretending they used a diversity in their Praises whereas S. Chrysostom's Words only import That they did give Thanks for Variety of Blessings for these and all such like And it is very remarkable that he cites many Authors imperfectly drawing a Line thus and leaving out the most material Words if they seem to make against him So when he perverts Nazianzen as if he spake of Words in Extempore Prayer he draws a Line before ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and applies it falsly to ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã but in Nazianzen there are three Substantives The Throne the Altar and the Holy Things in that Sentence which he twice leaves out (q) Disc of Lit. pag. 60 pag. 77. to which Substantives ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã plainly belongs for it was not the Words but the Throne the Altar c. which were present to him by the Holy Ghost By the same Trick he draws a Line in S. Cyprian after Quidam dicunt (r) Ib. p. 98. to conceal the next Words which shew it was Hereticks only which said this My Answer hath variety of Instances of such like dealing which a Man might expect rather from the Disciples of Loyola than from Persons that pretend to Tenderness of Conscience Lastly Whereas he often saith He hath Answered all the Places of the Ancients which either others had alledged or He in his diligent search of Antiquity had met with which seem to make for Liturgies (s) Disc of Lit. p. 179 alibi I doubt not but to make it appear that he hath not only omitted but industriously concealed some Hundreds of Proofs for Liturgies which I shall produce in my Answer and by comparing that clear Evidence with the slight Testimonies which he produces to confute it will appear to every Intelligent Reader that he resolved to keep all Testimonies of this kind out of sight except only those which he hoped he could either blunder or pervert to some other Sense Having given this short but just Character of his Book I will say something of my own wherein I have taken Care that this Ill-dealing should not transport me into any Personal reflexions and am plainly content to shew my Adversary is either ignorantly or wilfully mistaken without giving the Epithets that properly belong to both kinds of Mistakes Nor will I make it my chief business to confute his Book but to render my Discourse more useful than it could possibly have been if I had only followed him through his various Windings and Turnings I have Collected in every Century as many Testimonies concerning Liturgies and their Antiquity Original and Use as my Time would permit or the Argument needs though not all which might have been found and I have placed these in the exact Order of time under the several Names of the Fathers and then reduced the scattered Pieces which he objects under every one of these Fathers as I go along giving a distinct answer to them all that are material which I judge to be the fairest way to find out the true Sense of Antiquity in this Question And by this distinct and regular proceeding I hope not only to discover the Weakness of my Adversaries pretended Evidence but to give a clearer and fuller account of the early beginning and general use of Liturgick Forms than hath yet been done by any who have Writ upon this Subject And the use hereof may be First to confirm the Devout Members of our own Church who are the greatest and most considerable part of the Nation in their just Veneration for those Holy Forms by which they daily serve God when they find them so very agreeable to pure and genuin Antiquity which the Romanists have deserted by new Additions to their Forms consonant to their Superstitious Innovations and Corruptions and so have our High-flown Separatists also by new pretences to a Gift of Prayer long since ceased and by Praying Extempore upon ordinary occasions in Public Assemblies a Method unknown to the Ancients ever since there was a setled Christian Church And Secondly I will not despair but those moderate Dissenters who honestly desire to serve God in the best manner and have been abused by False-Teachers into an ill Opinion of Forms may by perusing these Papers lay aside their Ill-grounded prejudices against Liturgies when they clearly discern that the most Pious and Learned of the Primitive Martyrs and Fathers in the best and purest Ages of the Church did always approve of and use prescribed Forms in their public Worship So that they cannot reject Liturgies as a corrupt carnal cold and formal way of Praying without condemming the Devotions of the best and dearest Servants of God in all Ages both of the Jewish and Christian Church Which is a censure as void of Truth and Modesty as it is of Charity and Humility It is certain Millions of Holy and Admirable Men have Prayed thus with wondrous Fervency and God hath heard such Prayers and if they be lawful in themselves aceptable to Heaven and sufficient to procure what we Pray for there can be no reason why this Church should not enjoyn them now as all other Modern regular Churches do and the Primitive Church also did I grant such as have had a false Notion of them cannot be expected to use them so devoutly as others do but if their Judgment were rectisied those prejudices would soon wear off and a little Time and Experience of the great benefit of Holy Forms would convince them That a Pure and Prudent Pious and proper Liturgie such as ours is the most rational and Advantageous way of Paying our public Service to Almighty God and the greatest help to true Devotion in the World I confess my first design was to have gon through every Century that can be called Ancient but my time not permitting me as yet to transcrible all my Observations in Vindication of the Antiquity of Liturgies from the unjust Cavils of my Adversary I have now published only the first Four Centuries till the rest be made ready because if we find them within that compass all Men must own they are Truly Primitive And it is not fit to delay a just Censure of this Fallacious Treatise Since that Party so extremely dote upon it as to think it unanswerable For one of them in his Book called The healing Attempt that is a project to heal the Dissenters by the Wounds of the established Church lately talks at this vain
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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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
a ridiculous thing in the Marcionites to celebrate their Mysteries before the Catechumens (i) Epipâau Panar contr Marcion p 136. For his own part he will say no more when he comes to describe the celebration of the Sacraments but this The other Mysteries of the Laver i. e. Baptism and the internal Mysteries i. e. the Eucharist are performed according to the Tradition of the Gospel and of the Apostles only he saith There were in the Church constantly Morning Hymns and Morning Prayers as also Prayers and Psalms at Evening or Candle lighting (k) Id. ibid. prope finem Labri But though he do not tell us what the several Forms were yet we may be assured they used Forms then in the Churches of Cyprus First because they did so in all the other Churches wherewith Epiphanius held Communion Secondly Because he doth so highly commend the Apostolical Constitutions as containing all regular Order and being agreeable to the true and Orthodox way of Worship (l) Epiphan Panar lib. 3. Tom. 1. haer 70. and yet we have seen there is a prescribed Liturgy and complete Forms of Prayer for all occasions set down in those Constitutions Thirdly Because he derides Montanus and other Hereticks for pretending to inspiration and such extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit as were then ceased Now though this being added to other testimonies of this Age be proof sufficient to those that are unprejudiced that Epiphanius allowed and used Set Forms of Hymns and Prayers yet our Adversary hath picked up a passage out of an Epistle of his Recorded by S. Hierom and extant only in Latin to prove that the Prayer for all Estates of Men in the Communion Office was not a prescribed Form because when Epiphanius was accused for Praying in that part of the Office for John Bishop of Jerusalem thus O Lord grant that John may believe aright he is not very sure what Words he used nor doth appeal to any certain Form and thence he concludes there was no Set Form for this Prayer in the time of Epiphanus (m) âisc of Lating pag. â2 63 c. And this Argument he triumphs in extremely To which I shall now reply That if all he supposes were true the act of one single Bishop upon an extraordinary occasion would not weigh down all the Evidence we have produced to the contrary and if so Eminent a Bishop as Epiphanius upon so great an occasion as a Metropolitan 's falling into Heresy had altered two or three Words of the usual Form this will not prove that the inferior Clergy were always left at liberty to Pray Extempore yet that is the liberty this Author pleads for But Secondly The very accusation which John of Jerusalem brings against Epiphanius strongly supposes there was a known Form by which they prayed for the great Bishops and that made his varying from it to be easily discerned and ill taken And Thirdly The answer of Epiphanius clears the matter For he first denies that he used those Words which were charged on him saying it would have been a rude thing to use such an expression of that Bishop in public though he owns he always prayed so for him in his Heart And Secondly He doth appeal to the public Forms and so tells him what Words he did use for he saith when we make that Prayer according to the Communion Office we say for all Bishops and for you also Keep him who Preacheth the Truth Or certainly thus Hear us Lord and keep him that he may Preach the Word of Truth as the occasion required and as the Office for Prayer directed (n) Quando autem complemus orationem secundum ritum Mysteriorum pro omnibus pro te quoque dâcimut custodi illum qui pradicat veritatem Vel certè ita Tu praesta Domine custodi ut ille verbum pradicit veritatis sicut occasio Sermonis se tulerit habuerit Oratio consequentiam Epist Epiphan ad Johan Hieros ap D. Hieron The right understanding of which Answer depends upon observing three things First That he affirms he performed this Prayer secundum ritum mysteriorum according to the usual Office for the Sacrament had the Greek been extant probably there it would have been ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Secondly That he saith it was one of the two ways mentioned as occasion required habuerit oratio consequentiam now ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which is literally translated here Consequentiam signifies an Order prescribed So that we must observe that there are two Prayers in Epiphanius his friend the Author of the Constitutions which are Forms by which they there pray for the Bishops at the time of the Sacrament (o) Constit Apostol lib. 8. cap. 13. cap. 18. Item in Liturg. D. Jacobi semel In Liturg. D. Basil âis orant pâo Episcopis ut recte tractent verbum veritatis the Sense of both Forms being much of the same with what Epiphanius saith he prayed but the Words are somewhat different And very likely the Forms for Hierusalem and Cyprus were also two and had both these ways prescribed Custodi illum c. and Tu praesta Domine So that Epiphanius who strictly kept to the Words of his Form to his ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Liturgy is confident he never prayed for John of Jerusalem but one of these ways either the former way in the beginning or the latter way in the midst of the Communion Service For Thirdly Had he taken that liberty which my Adversary pleads for and prayed Extempore or varied the Phrase dayly he could not be so confident that he never had used those Words which John of Jerusalem here charges him with Nor could he have been certain as we see he is that he did use one of these two Phrases each being part of a distinct Form in that Office So that this passage doth not disprove but confirm the use of a Liturgy by Epiphanius § 12. Greg. Nazianzen An. Dom. 370. We have very little in Gregory Nazianzen concerning Liturgy for he was very strict in requiring that none of the Christian Mysteries should be divulged to strangers and the most considerable of his works are Sermons made in the Church before the Catechumens went out so that there he is very cautious of publishing the Forms of Divine worship (p) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Nazianz. Orat. 40 p. 672 Item Orat. 42. pag. 687. c. Yet that passage concerning the Apostate Julians designing to imitate the Christians in their way of serving God and so making a Form of Prayers in part for his Pagan Temples which is related by Nazianzen (q) See before §. 8. An. 361. shews that in his time the Christian worship was performed by Forms of Prayer which had Responses and of which the People bore a part And we may be assured of two things First That this way of worship was more ancient than Julians time for he would not have
they also are now directed to the Father which Method none but Hereticks can be supposed to alter and lest any should bring in any Heretical Forms into these Offices the Council supposing still the Public Forms were thus made orders all Prayers at the Altar should be directed to the Father which is as much as to bind them to the old Forms I need only here observe the Reason why the public Prayers at the Altar were all to be directed to the Father which is because Jesus Christ is there set forth as the Propitiation for our Sins and our only Advocate it is by him and his Redemption there represented that we hope to engage the Father to hear us By Him therefore and not To Him these Prayers must be made Here we declare we only rely on his Interest and Intercession and by reason of His Death here represented the Sacrament hath been ever esteemed the most effectual way of prevailing with God the Father to whom therefore here our Prayers are most properly addressed And so they were then as I could prove if it were needful by many Passages of the Orthodox Fathers So that this Clause also supposes the public Forms were rightly drawn up and forbids any alteration to be made in them in this Point wherein some had been culpable by writing out Heretical Forms and prescribing them ignorantly to their own Diocesses As for the last Clause our Adversary reads it falsly the Words are (g) Quicunque sibi preces aliunde describit Vera Lectio Canonis At ille legit Quascunque sibi preces aliquis describit Confer Bin. ut supr cum libro isto pag. 44. Whoever writes out any Prayers from any other place for himself But he perverts it thus What-Prayers-soever any shall Copy out for himself where note he leaves out the main Word Aliunde From any other place which plainly refers to a public and prescribed Liturgy he that writ out any Prayers from thence need not shew them to any but whoever he were Bishop or private Man that writ out Prayers from any other Form he was not to use them in public or private till they had been viewed and judged of by the most able Bishops Whence we may justly infer First That there was a Written Liturgy throughly Orthodox out of which if any Man writ out any Forms he was sure they were right and need not shew them to any but boldly use them either in public or private Secondly That some itched after other Forms then as now also many do to restrain which dangerous humor this Council first obliges those who did this whatever they were to shew these Forms taken from other places to the more Judicious and within a few years another Council allowed no Prayers to be brought in but such as had been allowed by a Synod Thirdly That all this Clause may very well be referred to private Prayers because it is very probable that some for their private Devotions collected Forms out of the Liturgy Others transcribed them from some New Compositions but the Hereticks had been so busie that the liberty of using these was not to be allowed till some Judicious Men had viewed and approved them Lastly We may observe That this Clause wholly relates to Written Forms it supposes the Persons here spoken of did never pray otherwise than by Written Forms whether it be explained of public or private Prayers this is certain they writ them out of Forms and after they had Copied them out used them as such So that this utterly confutes my Adversary and shews That the general use of Africa was to pray by Forms This very plainly proves the Gift of Prayer was now ceased there and manifests their Folly who pretend in our days that it is a general Gift This shews that none did pretend to Extempore Prayer but all either writ out Forms from the public Liturgy or from some other place wherefore our Adversary had a singular assurance when he produced this Passage against Written Forms These were certainly Written Forms And he had best ask how these African Christians could look up to Heaven or mind God alone in Prayer when they were bound to look on their Books into which these Forms were transcribed or enquire how their Mysteries could be concealed being written down This Matter of Fact baffles all his far fetch'd Objections and let him interpret the whole Canon as he please it will shew the use of Written Forms and manifest the mischief of leaving Men at liberty to choose Forms for themselves even in his own way of expounding this shews so many ill Consequences of varying from the stated and established Forms that following Councils were forced to enjoyn them more strictly than ever And his Friends Smectymnuus were so honest to confess That as the Laodicean Canon Ordained None should vary but always use the same Form so the Carthaginian Canon further limited the Form (h) Smectymn Answer to Remonstr pag. 7. So that in their Opinion this Canon is an Evidence of the use of limited and prescribed Forms and a Restraint upon such as would vary from them § 24. Council of Africa Can 70. coâ temp The same also is the Sense of that 70th Canon in the African Collection the true Reading of which in all the eminent Editors of it is This Concerning the Prayers which ought to be said at the Altar it seemeth good that those Prayers which have been heretofore Confirmed in the Council whether Prefaces Commendations or Impositions of Hands shall be used by all and by no means at no time shall any Prayers against the Faith be brought in but let those Prayers be said which have been Collected by the more Discreet (i) Can. Aâric apud Bin. 103. Tom. 1. par 1. pag. 780. ita in Justel Cod. Tom. 1. p 385. in Beveridge dicitur Can. 106. Concil Carthag Tom. 1. pag 640. My Adversary could raise no Arguments from this Canon till he had falsified the Reading of it (k) Discourse of Liturg. p. 48 c. And therefore First He leaves out the first Words Concerning the Prayers which ought to be said at the Altar which though some Copies make the Title of the Canon yet none but my Adversary wholly omit them and Dr. Beveridge proves they are really a part of the Canon it self as even the next Words which depend on these do shew Concerning the Prayers c. It also seems good c. Secondly My Adversary translates ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and the Latin Preces quae probatae fuerint The Prayers which shall be allowed in a Council nay He argues from his own false Translation that these could not be a Liturgy established because they were not yet approved (l) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 53. Whereas every Man may see that both the Greek and Latin Words are of the Preterperfect-Tense and not the Future wherefore they refer to the time perfectly past And so S. Paul uses this very
of it sent to this Bishop is called An Order of Prayer Which therefore doth not signifie a bare Rubric for Method but a Book containing the Prefaces Hymns and Prayers themselves And thus it is used in the Life of S. Laetus a Monk who about this Time was ordained Deacon and He in a short time learned the Psalter and all that the Ecclesiast cal Order required so as to be more perfect in them than many were who had been longer used to them (s) Cointè Annal Eââles âraââ 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 âms 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 coâdemus as an Heretical Variation (t) Vââ 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
Gift of Prayer was so far from making Liturgies to be useless that it really was the first ground and Original of them being Forms first endited by the Spiritual and Inspired Men in the Apostolical Age and Transmitted down to us by their Successors For which reason we ought to Reverence Ancient and Primitive Forms many of which as will be proved are yet in our Liturgy far before those Extempore Prayers made by a pretended Gift which hath been ceased above 1300 years And if we compare the proper Phrases acurate Method and judicious well-weighed Composure of our Forms with the impertinence Tautologies Hesitation and Confusion so visible in their Extempore Prayers we shall be convinced that the latter cannot proceed from the Spirit of God nor ought to come in Competition with our excellent Forms And this may suffice for the Scripture Period which gives great Reputation to Liturgies and no Countenance to such as now pretend to Extempore Prayers CHAP. I. Of Liturgies in the first Century § 1. This first Period is very obscure because the Bishops and Pastors being almost wholly employed in converting the Nations did write very little and scarce any thing of that which they did write is come to our Hands So that we cannot expect much evidene for Liturgies in this Century wherein however this Author could find nothing that made against them and so hath past it over in silence but we shall observe âââlo judaens Ann. Dom. 60. First That Philo and Josephus do both so describe the Essenes that not only Eusebius of Old but divers learned Men of these Ages believe them to have been Christians or however that the first Christians exactly imitated their Rites (o) Philo de vit Contemplat Joseph bell jud lib. 2. cap. â Euseb hist lib. 2. cap. 16. Among which was this to rise before the arising of the Sun and to Worship God by certain Prayers received from their Fore-fathers as Josephus tells us Now these Prayers could be no other than Forms because they were delivered down to them from their Fathers Philo also relates that they had a Choir of two sides singing alternately so that when one had begun to Sing the rest answered him by repeating the ends of the Verses in imitation of those at the Red Sea Now this way of alternate Singing must be by some prescribed and known Forms or else the Choir could never answer one another Yet these kind of Prescribed Hymns sung in this manner Eusebius here calls The Hymns used among us Christians (p) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Euseb And that excellent Historian labours to prove these Essenes were Christians by this Argument among some others because they Prayed and Sung Hymns in set Forms early in the Morning as the Christians use to do Wherefore Eusebius who knew the first Age better than we did believe this at least that the Christians then had Forms of Prayer and Praise which are the main parts of a Liturgy Secondly Clemens Romanus Clemens Romanus An. Dom. 90. in his Genuine Epistle to the Corinthians for we need not cite any spurious Tracts intimates they then had a Liturgy for he saith We ought to do all those things in order which our Lord hath Commanded us to perform viz. To Celebrate our Oblations and Liturgies at certain times and a little after Let every one of you in his Order offer his Eucharist to God keeping a good Conscience with all Gravity and not Swerving from the Determined Rule of his Ministration (q) ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Epist ad Corinth edit Oxon. 1669. pag. 92. which Golden Remain of true primitive Antiquity shews that the public Service was then performed in order by our Lords own Command and that there was a determined Rule for the Administrations from which no Man might swerve which Rule being mentioned by this Writer who was a Companion to the Apostles could be setled by none but by our Lord himself or at least by the Apostles And if our Adversaries say this was only a Method not a prescribed Liturgy I râply they cannot prove this and yet if they could supposing they needed an order even while the Gifts of Prayer and Inspiration remained when these are ceased the Church may well be supposed to stand in as much need of prescribed Forms now as they did of a determined Order then Pâânâââuaââr An. Dom. â3 § 2. Soon after this we have an account of the Christian Worship from the Pen of Pliny who Writ to the Emperor Trajan what he had extorted by Methods of Severity from some of that profession viz. That the Christians used to meet on a certain day before it was Light and alternately sang an Hymn to Christ as God bââding themâelves by a Sacrament not to any wicked thing but that they would not Steal nor Rob nor commit Adultery nor break their Faith nor with-hold the Pledge (r) Carmenque Christo quasi Deo dicere secum in vicem Plin. lib. 10. ep Now if we remember Pliny was a Roman and a Heathen we must suppose him to speak in their Phrases and among them Carmen dicere was to repeat a Prayer in a set form of Words Vossius saith it was called Carmen though it were not Sung for the Romans called every thing Carmen which was in a set form of Words (s) Vossius comment in dictam Epist Plin. pag. 47. Brissonius also informs us That they Prayed to the Gods Solenni Carmine with a set Form of Words (t) Brisson de formul p. 97. and that the Prayer for the Comitia was called Solenne Carmen The solemn Prayer though it were not composed by any Poetick measures (u) Id. ibid. pag. 137. And Livy speaks of the Solemn Form of Prayer in the same Phrase (w) Solenne Carmen precationis Liv. lib. 39. cap. 15. Wherefore since Pliny uses the Word Dicere and not Canere he may well be thought to have meant They said a Prayer to Christ as God in a set Form of Words Yet because Tertullian when he cites this passage Paraphrases it by Singing to Christ and to God (x) Ad canendum Chr sto Deo Tertul. Ap. cap. 2. We will allow it to be Expounded of an Hymn but even so since it was sung alternately it is certain it must be a prescribed Form and since Christians were to Sing as well as to Pray by the Spirit we may be sure Forms are no hindrance to the Spirit because if they were it would be as unlawful to Sing as they pretend it is to Pray by a Form We also add that this account exactly agrees with that of the Essenes both in their beginning before Sunrising and their Singing by Turns Wherefore since those Essenes had Forms of Prayer as well as praise we must conclude the Christians had so also And we must either suppose that Pliny gave a very imperfect account of the Christian worship and absurdly imagine that