those forms which were then in use among the Jews in particular for the Scripture assures us that in a great extremity when as we may all think our Saviour would pray most fervently he used the same words three times viz. Father if it be possible let this cup pass from me And it is the opinion of many learned men that our Saviour on the Cross did repeat not onely the first verse of Psal. 22. but the whole Psalm throughout which undoubtedly is a form S. Hierom speaking of Christs prayer on the Cross repeats more as spoken by Christ then is recorded by S. Matthew Sic Christus or avit in Cruce My God my God why hast thou forsaken me why art thou so far from helping me and from the words of my roaring Sect. 10. Moreover it is proved by learned men beyond all contradiction that our Saviour in the dispensation of the New Testament did retain and practise several formes which were used by the Iewes under the Old Particularly in the Institution and administration of his last Supper our Saviour varied very little from the forms and customes used by them at the celebration of the Passeover of the truth whereof besides other reasons this in the opinion of learned men is a sufficient confirmation That as the Iewes were wont to shut up the solemnity of the Passeover by singing some of Davids Psalms so our Saviour after the celebration of the Sacrament of his body and bloud went out with his Disciples to the Mount of Olives 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having sung the Hymn which Hymn say the best Expositors was the same that the Iewes did ordinarily sing after the Passeover and is called by them the great Hallel which as Pau'us Brugensis sayes consisted of six Psalmes from Psal. 113. to Psal. 118. and he addes verisimile est hos à Domino decantatos it is most like that these were sung by our Saviour And Drusius sayes hunc hymnum hodieque canunt in nocte Paschatis The Iewes sing this Hymn in the evening of the Passeover to this day The learned Scaliger having largely described the formes and rites of celebrating the Passeover concludes thus This was the true rite of celebrating the Passeover in the times of the Messias No man will deny that this last was like unto the former and that Christ did celebrate them in the same manner as the Iewes viz. both of them in the manner expounded And he concludes thus They that object that Christ did not submit to the Iewish customes may be confuted by six hundred arguments if it were of moment and I believe that Drusius Capellus Doctor Lightfoot and others have made up the full number In the conference at Hampton Court we have this passage the Dean of the Chappel who I suppose was Bishop Mountague remembred the practice of the Iewes who unto the Institution of the Passeover prescribed unto them by Moses had as the Rabbines witnesse added both signes and words eating sowre herbs and drinking wine with these words Take eat these in remembrance c. And Drink this in remembrance c. upon which Addition and Tradition of theirs our Saviour instituted the Sacrament of his last Supper celebrating it with the same words and after the same manner thereby approving that fact of theirs in particular Scaliger tells us there was Bread also as well as Wine exhibited at the Passeover with these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is the bread of affliction which your fathers did eat in the land of Egypt let every one that hungreth come and eat let every one that hath need come and keep the Passeover ye were sometime servants there but now ye are in the land of Israel ye were sometime servants there but now ye are free in the land of Israel Now if our Saviour did accommodate the Iewish formes some of which were meerly of humane invention to the solemn administration of that most blessed Sacrament which is to continue in his Church until his coming again we may not think it strange that he should prescribe a form of prayer of his own composure and enjoyn his Disciples the frequent use of it in their solemn devotions Doctor Lightfoot descends to particular instances as that our Saviour after the cup of blessing took some of the unleavened bread and blessed and brake it and gave it to be eaten for his body from thenceforth in that sense that the flesh of the Paschal Lamb had been his body unto that time and that which was called the Cup of Hallel he taketh and ordaineth for the Cup of the New Testament in his bloud and after sung the Hallel throughout and so went out to the Mount of Olives And Arias Montanus notes that the use of this Hymn was an action and rite common and most familiar to all Mr. Trap gives also another instance of our Saviours using a form of thanksgiving by which as it is intimated in S. Luke his Disciples knew him I shall not insist on this but certainly the Iews had forms of blessing their meat and drink as these usual forms do evince The blessing of the bread was this Benedictus tu Domine Deus noster Rex Seculi qui educis panem è terra And Benedictus c. qui creas fructum vitis i. Blessed art thou O Lord our God everlasting King who dost bring forth bread out of the earth and blessed c. who createst the fruit of the vine But enough of this he that would see more of the former particulars let him view Cassander Morney of the Mass Beza Doctor Lightfoot Doctor Heylyn of Liturgies All my observations do concentre with that of a Reverend Divine in his book of singing Psalmes that this opinion is the constant vote of all the learned And here by the way that assertion of Grotius is sufficiently confuted Neque enim eo tempore syllabis adstringebantur for what he onely sayes in the Negative Scaliger and many others of great learning and integrity do not onely say but prove in the affirmative i. that the people were not in those dayes confined to words and syllables By what hath been said it appears that our Saviour was no such enemy to forms either of prayer or thanksgiving as those who now profess themselves to be his choice Disciples are known to be even to his own form of prayer Sect. 11. But I shall make an essay beyond this to prove that our Saviour in the composure of his prayer had respect unto the devotion prayers of the Church of the Jews then in use was pleased to compose his for marter and method like unto theirs And that I may allay the prejudice which this conjecture is like to create I offer these grounds for it 1. That our Saviour being to reconcile Iewes and Gentiles into one could not use a better medium to winne upon them both then by injoyning such an
Christ and his Apostles and their sense of them also being fresh in memory for this Language Christ did use and for this cause wise men would even equal it with the Greek fountain See also what Tremelius saith of it in his Preface to the New Testament And Chamier tells us the Syrians did use the Doxologie in their Liturgy as well as in the Gospel 2. Maldonate confesses that it is in the Hebrew copy also and he attempts to prove that St. Matthews Gospel was originally written in Hebrew and urgeth St. Hieroms testimony who had seen and made use of the Hebrew copy and therefore he concludes it to be not a temeritatis a note of rashness to deny it and answers Objections to the contrary if this be true it must needs be authentique however the antiquity of this Hebrew copy is beyond St. Hieroms time 3. It is also in some Arabick translations in that printed by Erpenius and a manuscript in Queens Colledge Library Certain it is that many of the books of the New Testament were translated into this Language in the Apostles dayes yea 't is said that they have certain Epistles of St. Paul and other Apostles which are not yet extant in any other Languages that St. Paul himself was among them appears from Gal. 1. 17. and this will help to justifie it against the Vulgate also 4. The learned Mr. Gregory gives two reasons more for its authority the first is that it was used by the Christians in Lucians dayes long before any of those books that omit it were extant 5. Because in all probability as our Saviour had respect unto the prayers of the Jewes in all other parts of his prayer so had he also in this and it appears that as they used the last Petition so they annexed the Doxology unto it as Libera nos à malo quia tuum est regnum regnà bis gloriose in secula seculorum i. Deliver us from evil for thine is the Kingdome and thou shalt reign in glory for ever and ever 6. It s conformitie with the analogy of Faith throughout the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament is an argument in the judgement of Sol. Glassius that it is authentique who thinks that our Saviour had respect to a like clause 1 Chron 29. see also 2 Tim. 4. 18. and sure I am it could not serve the design of any Heretick to insert it 7. The Prayer it self would be less perfect without it and therefore it was not originally wanting the Councel of Trent saith Orationis Dominicae duae sunt partes there are two parts of the Lords Praye Petition and Thanksgiving and as Morton saith Lest we should deprive God of one part of his worship which consists of thanksgiving this clause must be annexed for though the two first Petitions Thy Kingdome come c. seem to imply thanksgiving yet is it not actually performed except in the Doxologie Having thus confirmed the Protestant Tenet we shall also confute the Papists Objections against it 1. Bellarmine objects that the Latine Fathers do not expound it when they open all other parts of the Prayer To this it is briefly answered that this will conclude nothing against its authoritie seeing the Greek Fathers who in the Primitive times were more and had more advantages to know the truth did retain it in their Expositions for as Chamier saith Non à Latinis ad Graecos sed à Graecis ad Latinos scripturae pervenere The Scriptures were not delivered from the Latine to the Greeke but from the Greeke to the Latine Fathers 2. He saith Graeci in sua liturgiâ recitant quidem haec verba c. The Greek Liturgies do recite these words after the Lords Prayer but doe not continue them with the Prayer To this Chamier Answers That they did continue it with the Prayer as in St. Basil and St. Chrysostome appears and it was the order of the Church then that the Priest onely should pronounce it which also is an argument of its authoritie the most solemn offices being alway performed by them So Montanus Sacerdoti duntaxat licere verba ista proferre It was lawfull for the Priest onely to pronounce these words and so Master Gregory the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is alway the Priests and it would be a strange inference to conclude that therefore it was less authentique or that it was not originally in the Greek books Yet again Huntly saith Istis Verbis respondebat Populus Sacerdotiâ—i post orationem Dominicam That in the Greek Liturgies the people did answer the Priest in these words But whether both of these be true or false they will conclude nothing against the authoritie of this clause as will appear in answer to the next Objection Some Protestants do joyn with the Papists objecting that this clause was inserted into the Greek copies from their Liturgies So Brugens Verisimile fit c. It is probable that this clause was added by the Grecians out of their Liturgy or some other solemn form into the Gospel of Matthew as also out of some such form these words are added to the Angelical Salutation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because thou hast born the Saviour of our souls But by the way be it known that we Protestants disown any such surreptitious addition to that place of St. Luke in the copies which we follow and therefore the Objection concludes not against them or us upon this account But to goe on with the Objection in which Grotius agrees with Brugensis thus Seeing this clause is not extant in some ancient Greek exemplars but is in the Syriack and Latine and Arabick it is an argument that not onely the Arabick and Latine but the Syriack translation also were made after that the Liturgies of the Church had received a certain form for this Doxologie rather then a part of Prayer was annexed according to a custome of Greece altogether unknown to the Latines And what Beza saith you have heard already that it did creep into the context c. And he and Grotius will not grant the Amen to be Canonical but that both it and the Doxology came in as a thing in use among those Primitive Christians Thus I have made the most of the Objection and shall now do my best endeavour to answer it And first whereas the Objectors suppose that the Doxology crept in from the Greek Liturgies into those many and ancient copies it will undeniably follow from this supposition that the use of the Liturgies and publick form of Prayer was of Apostolical authority and antiquity for so are many of the Greek Syriaeck Hebrew and Arabick copies that do retain this Doxology to say nothing of the Latine which Grotius also mentioneth And whoever he be that agrees with the Objectors in this supposition cannot possibly be at any great distance with me in my main proposition for if publick Prayers were by Apostolical
from the most and best copies and from the judgement of almost all Protestant Divines concerning the intireness of our Lords Prayer in Saint Luke Beza saith Haec non legit vetus interpres ut apparet ex Augustino The ancient Interpreter viz. the vulgate Latine doth not regard these things as appears out of Augustine and so Grotius Cùm non extet in Latinis antiquis illud Because it is not in the ancient Latine therefore he suspects it was not in the Greek But the reading of the Latines will not at all prejudice the more constant and unanimous readings of the Greek if we consider the rise and authority of it 1 There were in the Latine Church in the time of St. August and Hierom divers Latine Editions besides that which is now called the vulgate some of which did agree much better with the Greek but this was most approved by that Church This especially was so miserably corrupted that Pope Damasus sent to Saint Hierome to amend it by the Greeke and accordingly he sets about the work not to translate it de novo that the Pope would not have but to correct it where the greatest faults were and how he did that himself tells us in his Preface to the Evangelists Ita in hac commendatione calamo temperavimus ut his tantùm quae sensum mutare videbantur correctis reliqua manere permitteremus ut fuerant We have so guided our pen in this Edition that amending onely those things which did seem to alter the sense we have suffered other things to stand as they were and this was his rule as wel in the translating the Old Testament as in correcting the New Quod semel aures hominum occupaverat nascentis Ecclesiae roboraverat fidem justum erat etiam nostro silentio comprobari i. That which had once possessed the ears of men and had built up the faith of the growing Church was justly approved by our silence and upon this account he past over many things which he knew did greatly need amendment So that the ground-work of this edition is an old vulgar Latine used by Pope Damasus amended in some few things by St. Hierome but to this day differing from the Greek copies which translation was not received into the Church untill Gregories time i. about two hundred years after Saint Hierome as Bellarmine saith this is the rise of it now concerning its authority hear what Bellarmine saith Mirificè c. All the Hereticks i. Protestants do wonderfully agree against the Romish Church and the Lutherans and Zuinglians so he names the Calvinists urge this against its authority Innumerabiles in ea deprehenduntur errores That innumerable errours are found in it and this as it hath already and may more largely be proved by the Papists and especially by comparing the vulgate Latine with that of Montanus his interlineary version of the New Testament so more especially from the observation of Protestant Divines for although Sixtus Quintus boasted much of his Edition how many things he had reform'd yet Dr. James reckoneth 2000 faults mended in that Edition by Pope lement the Eighth and yet this Pope saith modestly divers things were still to be amended and the Councel of Trent did take some care for the effecting of it but still Brugensis observes six hundred faults more and when Bellarmine saw Brugensis his emendations he sends him this with his thanks You may know that the vulgate Bibles are not accurately mended by us for many things are purposely past by which seemed to need amendment which for just cause we did not amend this cause is so secret that we cannot judge how just it is But I remember Bellarmine falls foul with Calvine for saying of the vulgate Edition Adeo nullam esse in vulgatâ editione integram paginam nt vix tres sunt continui versus non insigni aliquo errore faedati That the vulgate Edition is so far from having any entire page that it hath scarce any three continued verses free from some gross errour This holds true of the New Testament as well as of the Old Whatever Bellarmine Huntly and other Jesuites have said in defence of it hath been confuted by Chamier Chemnitius Glassius and others One argument of Bellarm. for the defence of it I cannot but take notice of Because saith he it hath been used by the Latine Fathers for a thousand years this makes little for the authority of it if we consider the reason that he himself giveth why the Latine Fathers did so generally use this so faulty a translation in his fourth argument viz. that few of them did understand the Greek he instanceth in the six hundred Latine Bishops at the Councell of Ariminum whereof not one Nemo fuit understood the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for when the subtile Arians propounded to them An vellent Christum colere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they all answered nolumus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed Christum But what if the Latine Church and Fathers have used it for above a thousand years such a prescription as that is not a sufficient warrant for us to believe and practice all that was then believed and practised and when no Protestant doth acknowledge it to be a convincing proof that the Greek reading of the Old Testament is therefore authentique above the Hebrew because the Apostles themselves did use it much less will the use of the vulgate by the Latine Fathers convince any of its authority above the Greek wherein the several books were first written and which do generally accord in all necessary truths especially in the things which we have now controverted and Bellarmine saith Plus credendum uni testi loquentì quà m mille nihil dicentibus One witness that speaks out a truth is rather to be credited then a thousand that say nothing As for its purity having said some things in general from the writings of those that make it their Diana I shall onely adde a few particulars the absurdity of which should long since have made them intolerable among Christians Thus Luke 15. 8. the vulgate reads evertit domum the poor woman having lost a piece of silver c. overthrowes her house instead of sweeps it as the word is also used Luke 11. 25. So Luke 16. 22. mortuus est Dives sepultus in inferno they read thus the rich man also died and was buried in hell whereas Montanus reads as we do and ends that verse thus the rich man also died and was buried Romans 12. 19. Non vosmetipsos defendentes they read Not defending your selves the word signifies not revenging your selves They seem to make a great improvement of the precept but how contrary their practice is the Mysteries of Jesuitisme lately printed will inform us out of their own authors 1 Pet. 2. 23. where our Saviour is said to have committed himself to him that judgeth righteously they read se injustè judicanti that judgeth him