pray in a strange tongue my spirit prayeth but mine vnderstanding is without fruite And a little after I will pray with the spirit but I will pray with the vnderstanding also I wil sing with the spirit but I wil sing with the vnderstanding also Else when thou blessest with the spirit how shall he that occupieth the roome of the vnlearned say Amen to thy blessing when he knoweth not what thou sayest These words are most direct against the Latine seruice of the Papists shewing first that the priest speaking in Latine when the people vnderstandeth nothing taketh a barbarcus course Secondly that songs and prayers without vnderstanding profit nothing And lastly that it is ridiculous for the people to say Amen to the priest when they vnderstand not his prayer or blessing Vt quid loquatur saith S. Ambrose in 1. Cor. 14. quem nemo intelligit Why should he speake whom no man can vnderstand And againe What profite can he reape that vnderstandeth not what he speaketh And afterward An vnlearned man saith he hearing but not vnderstanding knoweth not the end of the prayer nor answereth Amen that is true that the blessing may be confirmed And finally Si ad edificandam Ecclesiam conuenistis ea dici debent quae intelligant audientes that is if ye be come together to edifie the church then must such things be spoken as the hearers vnderstand Omnis sermo qui non intelligitur saith S. Hierome in 1. Cor. 14. barbarus est that is Euery language that is notvnderstood is barbarous And againe If any speake with tongues not vnderstood of others his vnderstanding is made without fruite if not to himselfe yet to others And lastly Sic est loquendum vt intelligant alij We must so speake that others vnderstand Saint Augustine expounding these words of the Psalmist Beatus populus sciens iubilationem nullo modo beatus es saith he nisi intelligas iubilationem that is thou art no way blessed vnlesse thou vnderstand thy song of reioycing or iubilation And againe in Psal. 99. he mistiketh that our voice should only sing a song of reioycing or iubilation and not our heart Vt vox nostra solae iubilet cor non iubilet which is iust the case of Papists chanting with a loud voice and not vnderstanding what they chaunt or pray This place our aduersary encont 1. c. 9. nu 8. would take from vs by saying that S. Augustine doth not speake of any corporall singing psalmes but rather of inward iubilation But S. Augustine mentioning our voice and speaking of those that sing and exhorting men in this and such like psalmes to praise God doth refute the fellowes foolery Beside that if iubilation be with vnderstanding of the hart then by S. Augustines iudgement those cannot reioyce or vse iubilation that vnderstand not what they say as the Papists do in their iubilations and iubilies chanting like pies and parrots they know not what and not conceiuing any inward ioy of any thing is spoken by the priest that is as well vnderstood as a Monkie chattering with his téeth and squealing out an indistinct voice Theophylact also and Oecumenius writing vpon the first to the Corinthians c. 14. confirme our cause and ouerthrow the aduersaries Dicit quod expediat saith Oecumenius eum qui alia lingna loquitur siue in psalmodia siue in oratione siue in doctrina aut ipsum interpretari intelligere quid dicat ad vtilitatem auditorum aut aliū hoc facere conuenit He saith that it behoueth him that vseth a strange tongue either in singing praier or teaching either to interprete himselfe and to vnderstand what he saith for the profit of the hearers or that it is fitting another should do it Theophy lact saith that the Apostle in the whole course of his speech doth shew that he that speaketh with a tongue not vnderstood profiteth himselfe nothing Iustine in his apologie and Dionysius in his Ecclesiastical hierarchie describing the practise of the Primitiue Church do plainely shew that the people vnderstood the Bishop answered him and concurred with him Hierome in prolog 2. in Epist. ad Galat. and Gregorie Nazianzene in orat in laudem Basilij do testifie that the people did answer Amen to the priests prayer But how could they say Amen to his prayer not vnderstanding what he said Ephrem made diuers praiers and songs in the Syriake tongue which were frequently vsed in the Churches of Syria Iustinian the Emperor made a law that the prayers vsed at the celebration of the sacrament should be pronounced with an audible voice But to what purpose if it were sufficient that the people should be present onely and not vnderstand what is said or praid This practise is clearely testified by Nicholas Lyra writing vpon the fourtéenth Chapter of the first to the Corintmans In the primitiue Church blessings and other common thing viz. in the Liturgie were in the vulgar tongues saith he The aduersaries also enforced by the euidence of truth confesse it were more profitable to haue prayers and the publike Liturgie of the Church in tongues vnderstood of the people rather then otherwise as may be gathered out of the words of Strabus Lyra Caietane and others writing vpon the first to the Corinthians chap. 14. Finally reason maketh against the vse of a tongue not vnderstood in publike prayers For if such are condemned as come neare to God with their lippes hauing their hearts farre from him then are not they to be allowed that in their prayers ioyne not their heart with their words Secondly the Apostle sheweth that it is a curse laid vpon infidels when God speaketh to them in other tongues Thirdly the tongue seruing to vtter our conceipts it is a most ridiculous thing for men to vtter things neither conceiued nor meant Lastly if the Romaines and Greekes in auncient time might vse vulgar tongues in their publike Liturgies why is not the same both lawfull and commendable now Friar Robert Encont 1. cap. 8. endeuoureth to shew reason to the contrarie But his reason is weak and friuolous Compating prayers with Scriptures he saith there is much lesse necessitie of publike seruice in vulgar tongues But if he had meant to defend the Popes cause and his owne and to propound the state of the contreuersie betwixt vs aright he should haue said that there is no profit or vse at all of vulgar tongues in the publike seruice in the Church and that it is rather inconuenient and hurtfull then otherwise For if it be profitable and no way inconuenient why should not the publike Liturgie of the Church be in vulgar tongues Notwithstanding let vs sée how he proueth that which himselfe propoundeth albeit not the point in question First he saith that publike seruice is appointed to be said or sung to the praise of God and in the name of all the people by publike Priests and other ecclesiasticall officers appointed thereunto But if publike seruice be appointed
to be said or song to the praise of God then vnlesse he exclude the people from the praises of God the people also is to concurre with the Priests in praysing of God which they cannot do vnlesse they vnderstand the language of the seruice But I trow he will not denie but that the people ought to ioyne in singing Psalmes and giuing thankes to God in the open congregation And therefore the Psalme 95. Come let vs sing vnto the Lord is commonly vsed in the beginning of Gods seruice and the people in auncient Liturgies were wont oftentimes to answer the Priest Againe it is false that publike seruice was appointed to be said and sung onely by ecclesiasticall officers and that the people did not as well pray for things necessarie as praise God for benefites receiued But how could they do this not knowing what they sayd or prayed If a man should present himselfe before the Pope and speake ghibrish or a language not vnderstood by the partie would he not thinke himselfe mocked He addeth further that it is not needfull for the people to be alwaies present at publike seruice but onely in spirit and consent of heart But the fellow doth plainely contradict himselfe For how can a man be present in spirit and consent of heart when he is absent with his vnderstanding and knoweth not what is done or said Beside that he ouerthroweth that which he would proue For if consent of spirit and heart be requisite in publike seruice then is it requisite the people should vnderstand what is said without which vnderstanding he cannot consent Lastly if it be profitable that the people be present in the congregation where God is serued that is sufficient for vs to proue our assertion For why should not the people meete to celebrate the praises of God being commaunded to keepe his Sabboths And why should they rather be enioyned to heare Masse which is a profanation of Gods seruice then to come to the Church to praise God and to pray vnto him and to heare his holy word And if the people ought to do this then is it not sufficient that in time of seruice they should gape on the Priest or patter their Pater nosters or Aue Mariaes or rattle their beades as the ignorant Papistes vse to do Thirdly he supposeth he can proue seruice in an vnknowne tongue out of the ceremoniall law of Moyses For because it is said Luk. 1. That all the multitude of the people was praying without at the houre of incense while Zacharie offered incense within he would inferre very willingly that it is not necessarie the people should pray with the Priest in a tongue vnderstood But if this might be applyed to the Masse then would it also follow that the Priest might offer the sacrifice of the Masse without a Clerke and the people attend without in the church yard It would also follow that the people might not heare nor see Masse For that the people might not enter within nor see what was done in the sanctuarie Against vs this example fitteth not For neither can any strong argument be drawne from the ceremonies of the law that are now abrogated nor can Frier Robert shew that the Priests of the law prayed in a tongue not vnderstood or that they vsed any publike prayer which the people heard not Fourthly he alleageth that the three learned languages of Hebrew Greeke and Latine were sanctified by Christ in the title of his crosse But neither is he able to shew why these three languages should be called learned rather then others nor doth it follow that in publike seruice we should vse only these three languages because they were vsed in the title of the crosse vnlesse our aduersarie will graunt that it also followeth because Chrift rode vpon an asse that he and his consorts are onely to ride vpon asses Fiftly he telleth vs that auncient Fathers testifie that it is not conuenient that all things that are handled in Church seruice praesertim in sacris mysterijs should be vnderstood by all vnlearned people in their owne vulgar languages And to prooue this he citeth Dionysius Origen S. Basil Chrysostome and Gregorie But herein he sheweth himselfe a shamelesse fellow albeit all men knew it before For none of these speaketh one word against vulgar languages Nay all of them shew that the people vnderstood the language of publike Liturgies Againe they deny not that it is conuenient that the people should vnderstand the mysteries of Christian religion but rather shew the difficultie of it But what is that to vulgar languages when the Priests themselues vnderstand not the mysteries of Christian religion A sixth argument he draweth from the practise of the Iewes supposing that in Iurie and Ierusalem the publike seruice was in Hebrew and that Hebrew was not vnderstood of the common people But neither was publike seruice in all Syria in Hebrew as appeareth by the songs and prayers of Ephrem in the Syrian tongue nor is it likely that the Iewes did not vnderstand Hebrew in Christs time seeing now all the Iewes as it is said teach their children Hebrew In Esdras lib. 2. cap. 8. it appeareth they vnderstood Hebrew Intellexerunt verba quae docuerat eos They vnderstood the words which he taught them That theresore which is spoken of interpretation is meant of the meaning and not of the words as very simply our aduersaries suppose His seuenth argument is taken from the example of the Apostles that as he saith appointed the order of seruice But this ouerthroweth our aduersaries cause For if the Apostles neuer appointed the Masse or the canon or that seruice should be said in a tongue not vnderstood but rather ordained another forme of celebration of Sacraments as I haue shewed in my bookes de Missa against Bellarmine and if it be a matter cleare that all should be done decently in the Church and to edification then is it not likely that they would allow or did appoint the seruice of God to be said in a tongue not vnderstood of the people and very hardly vnderstood of most Priests Here also he denyeth That it can be shewed out of any author of antiquitie whatsoeuer that any christian Catholike countrie since the Apostles time had publike seruice in any language but in one of these three viz. Hebrew Greeke or Latine except by some speciall dispensation from the Pope and vpon some speciall consideration for some limited time But first it maketh nothing for him or against vs if any nation had their seruice in Greek Latine or Hebrew if the same vnderstood the language of the publike Liturgie For we onely say that seruice ought not to be said in a language not vnderstood Secondly where he denyeth the vse of all other tongues beside these thrée he sheweth himselfe either very ignorant or very impudent If he haue not read auncient fathers and histories concerning the languages of publike Liturgies he is but an ignorant nouice in
Catholike Church doth beleeue them Alijs saith he qui sunt simplices vel laici sufficit quod credant eos scil Articulos fidei implicitè id est sicut docet credit sanctà Ecclesia catholica He saith also that such knowledge is sufficient for Clerkes that haue no meanes to maintaine themselues at schoole as some suppose But suppose they could say the articles of faith and beléeue them and the rest which Peccham in the constitution ignorantia de officio Archipres doth require at their hands yet should they be very ignorant For a man may beléeue as the Church beléeueth and yet know nothing nor be able to answer to any point of faith Thomas Aquinas 3. 2. q. 2. art 6. compareth Gods people to asses and their teachers to oxen holding that it is sufficient for them in matters of faith to adhere to their superiors because it is said Iob 1. Quòd boues arabant asinae pascebantur iuxta eos Whereby it appeareth he requireth no great knowledge at lay mens hands but would haue them beléeue as their teachers do without further enquiring He fetcheth his proofe out of Gregorie But whence soeuer he draweth it he vseth Gods people very rudely that compareth them to asses and oxen Yet thus much I am content to yéeld that the Masse-priests and their followers are like oxen and asses firmely linked together by the Popes cow-heards and muleters for the diuell their maisters seruice The same man 2. 2. q. 2. art 5. teacheth that lay men are to beléeue all the articles of the Creed and no more explicitè The which is no point of deep learning yet his scholer Siluester in sum in verb. fides 6. will not allow so much saying that it is not necessarie for a lay man to beleeue all the articles of the faith but as much as is sufficient to direct vs to the last end Nec tamen necesse est cuilibet saith he explicitè credere omnes articulos fidei sed quantum sufficit ad dirigendum in vltimum finem The author of Summa Rosella saith that it is sufficient for simple people and percase for lay men comming to yeares and discretion to beleeue that God is a rewarder of all good and a punisher of all euill And that other articles are to be beléeued implicitè that is beléeuing all to be true which the catholike Church teacheth Simplicibus fortè omnibus laicis discernentibus adultis sufficit credere Deum esse praemiatorem bonorum omnium omnium malorum punitorem alios autem articulos sufficit credere implicite credendo scil verum quicquid Ecclesia catholica docet But beside that this is an argument to proue the aduersaries allowance of the peoples extreme ignorance it is false and blasphemous to say that any man may be saued without notice or beléeuing in Christ as the author of Summa Rosella his words imply Loth the Pope is that the people should know too much and therefore he forbiddeth Scriptures to be either translated or read in vulgar tongues without licence In publike Liturgies it is not the fashion of Papists to suffer the people to heare Scriptures read in vulgar tongues The Papists also that vnderstand not Latine pray with their lippes but not with their vnderstanding and spirit For the Popes pleasure is that the publike Liturgie of the Church shall not be read in vulgar tongues whereupon the people must néedes grow dull and ignorant Iohn Billet in prolog lib. de diuin cffic complaineth of this abuse Quid nostris tēporibus est agendū saith he speaking of reading of Latin seruice vbi nullus vel rarus reperitur legens vel audiēs qui intelligat videns vel agens-qui animaduertat iam videtur impletum quod à Propheta dicitur Et erit sacerdos quasi de populo vnus He saith that there are few or none that reade or heare that do vnderstand or marke what is read or heard and that the saying of the Prophet is fulfilled That the priest shall be like one of the people Costerus saith That God and the Saints vnderstand all languages and therefore that it is sufficient if the people pray in Latine Which as it is blasphemous making Saints present in all places so it is an argument that he requireth litle vnderstanding in the people Hosius commendeth the Coliars faith that could not tell one article of his beléefe but onely answered that he beleeued as the Church beleeueth which is an argument first of the commendation of ignorance among the Papists next of Hosius his blasphemie that would haue a man saued beléeuing as doth the Catholike church albeit he beleeued or knew nothing of Christ Iesus Seeing then the Papists require so litle knowledge in the people and will not suffer them either to pray or to haue Scriptures read publikely in vulgar tongues and preach so seldome and so leudly is it likely that they should prooue great clearkes Furthermore the Priests in England were commaunded to teach the people the worship of the crosse of images of reliques and how farre the same reacheth as appeareth by B. Arundels prouinciall constitution beginning nullus de haereticis They were also taught what manner of men were S. Austin of Canterburie S. Bernac S. Dunstane and such good fellowes And were wont to heare many good tales of the miracles of S. Audrey and S. Cuthburge and other she Saints But all this tended litle to instruction in faith or reformation in manners Finally in stend of true doctrine they were taught the traditions of men concerning worship of Saints crosses images reliques fasting on Saints Gigils pilgrimages indulgences purgatorie and such like Petrus de Alliac lib. dereform Ecclesiae wisheth That Apocryphall Scriptures and new hymnes and prayers and other voluntarie nouelties should not be read in churches Quòd in huiusmodi festis Scripturae Apocryphae aut hymninoui velorationes seu aliae voluntariae nouitates non legerentur but he preuailed not Nay further they do not onely teach false doctrines and Apocryphall nouelties but also most wickedly rehearsing the commaundements they haue left out the second commaundement that concerneth worship of images albeit S. Augustine quaest ex vet test 7. do set it downe for a distinct commandement from the first Being then taught very litle truth and much falshood it must néeds follow that the Papists were in time past very ignorant and that Iohn Billet in prolog de diuin off plainely confesseth Experience also teacheth the same and manifestly sheweth that they scarce vnderstood any article of the Créed Acertaine Italian being asked not many yeares since by his confessor in Rome whether he beleeued the holy Trinitie answered yea Being further demaunded what the Trinitie was VVhat said he but our Lord God and our Lady and you our masters the priests and Friers They are so brutish that they verily beléeue that images walke and talke and haue life Certaine parishioners of a village not