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 Lâ—nd 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
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. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 35. l. 28. Marg. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 48. l. 9. r. of praying 〈◊〉 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 provâ—â— 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
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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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
them repeated Again he cites this Father to prove that those who were Baptized were taught the Words of the Lords Prayer (u) Isid lib 4. ep 24. Disc of Lit. pag. 2. Which shews that Forms were not held unlawful in that Age. But if my Adversary had not been obliged to keep back all that makes for Liturgies it is not easy to be imagined why he should never mention that Famous Epistle which Isidore Writ on purpose to expound that old piece of Liturgy Pronounced by the Bishop in the public Forms as we saw in the Constitutions S. Chrysostom and others that is Peace be with you unto which as Isidore tells us the people answered and with thy Spirit (w) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isid lib. 1. ep 122. This Form so well explained by this Father gives us reason to believe that the rest of those Liturgies wherein this known Form is found were used in his time and that when he advises a Clergy-Man not to abuse the Holy Liturgy (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. lib. 1. ep 313. he means that he ought not to profane and desecrate the sacred Forms by a most unholy Life and Conversation especially since he was not only a Scholar of S. Chrysostoms who made a Liturgy but also tells us (y) Id. lib. 1. ep 90. that the Women in his time Sung their part of the Church Service and when they were deservedly Excommunicate they were not all wed this great Priviledge which sufficiently shews there were Forms prescribed in his days wherein all the People had their share § 4. His Contemporary was the Learned Synesius Synesius An. Dom. 412. who lived also in the same Country he was bred among the Gentile Philosophers and not Converted till he was come to be of a good Age So that he had learned before he became a Christian what silence and secrecy was due to Mysteries and therefore he furnishes my Adversary with divers Passages concerning the Heathens care to conceal them (z) Disc of Lit. pag. 34. but since he hath owned the Pagans writ their Mysteries down He must not conclude that the Christians had no written Prayers in this Age wherein they called them Mysteries for though they were concealed from the Infidels and Uninitiated they were daily used among the Faithful And that they were Forms prescribed hath been fully proved However though we cannot expect that Synesius should write down the Sacred Words in his Books or Epistles which might fall into common or profane Hands yet there are intimations in him that there were Forms of Prayer in his time and long before For when he speaks of the Worship of God he saith The Sacred Prayers of our Fore-fathers in the holy Mysteries do cry unto that God who is above all not so much setting forth his Power as reverencing his Providence (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Synes de Regno pag. 9. Now these Sacred Prayers could not be Extempore since they were delivered down to them by their Fore-fathers therefore they must be ancient Forms Extempore Devotions are properly our own Prayers but the Prayers of our Fathers are Forms received from the Ages before us Besides we may note that he describes the Service in which these Prayers were used by this Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and elsewhere he styles it The hidden Mysteries (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes Ep. 57. pag. 194. And Nicephorus his Scholiast explains 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be such things as are mystically delivered both as to the words and actions (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nâ—ceph Scholia id Synes p. 401. That is in a Form of Words and an order of Ceremonies which are the two essential parts of a Liturgy Which Name also we have in Synesius where he is reciting the Injuries done to him by Andronicus for he saith The Devil endeavoured by this Mans means to make him fly from the Liturgy of the Altar (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. 67. p. 193. that is as he explains himself afterwards to make him omit the celebration of the Sacrament and give over reciting the public Offices which were then performed by a Liturgy in all regular Churches And though he be very nice of writing down any of the Forms in his common Writings yet he gives us either the Substance or the Words of one of his Prayers which he used not only in private but in the public Offices viz. That Justice might overcome Injustice and that the City might he purged from all Wickedness (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. Ep. 121. p. 258. Which Passage probably was a part of the Liturgy then used in his Country there being something very like it in other ancient Liturgies which were used elsewhere in that Age. However our Adversary who cites Synesius so often and to no purpose about Mysteries could not or would not see any of these places which shew there were ancient and prescribed Forms in his days Celestinus Ep. Rom. A.D. 423. § 5. Pope Celestine as is affirmed by many Authors ordered the Psalms to be sung in the Communion Office by the whole Congregation in the way of Antiphone (f) Vita Celest ap Bin. Tom. 1. par 1. pag 732. Bena. rerum Liturg. lib. 2. cap. 3. p 502. That is as Isidore expounds it with reciprocal Voices each side of the Choir alternately answering the other (g) Isâ—â—â—r Orig. lib. 6. cap. 19. And Platina adds That he put some particulars into the Offices then in use (h) Platin vita Celest pag. 61. Which shews That the Roman Church was accustomed to Forms in his days Yet my contentious Adversary twice produces this Popes Testimony to shew that in his Time at Rome there was no more than an Order and Uniformity as to the persons and things prayed for but that they did not pray for them in the same Words (i) Disc of Lit. pag 6. p 29. and he cites the same place again to prove that Forms cannot be justified from that Passage (k) Ibid. p. 138. But to manifest his Mistake I will first transcribe and then explain these Words of Celestine from whence he makes this false Conclusion The Words are these Let us look upon the Mysteries of the Priests Prayers which being delivered by the Apostles are uniformly celebrated in all the World and in every Orthodox Church That so the Rule for Praying may fix the Rule of Believing For when the Bishops of the Faithful perform their enjoyned Embassy they plead with the Divine Mercy for all Mankind the whole Church Praying with them They intreat and pray That Faith may be granted to Vnbelievers that Idolaters may be delivered from their impious Errors that the light of Truth may appear to the Jews by the removing of the Veil from their Hearts that Hereticks may repent and receive the Catholic Faith that Schismatics may be revived by the Spirit
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 â—everal 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 â—xcept against the Authority of them we are sure they must be prescribed â—orms made long before this time I will not deny but that both Innocent and Celestine might stretch their Tradiâ—ion something too far when they â—scribed the Original of these Forms to â—he 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 â—t 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
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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epâ—â— 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 â—ur God Give us Peace fâ—r thou art the Giver of all things to us (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. pag 428. Nothing can be plainer thâ—n 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 Câ—rysologus 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 Linceriâ—ius 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 Sacâ—r â—talem quis vestrum resignare audeat signatum a Comessoriâ—â—s multerum â—am Martyrio consâ—cratum Iâ—r 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 Lâ—o 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 Natâ—v 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. 〈◊〉 Sept. 〈◊〉 pag 240. These must be Prayers made â—â— such Forms as made up one Office wherein all the People could bear a part and all joyn in the Responses c. And these Forms thus unanimously recited he thinks must needs be very prevalent with Almighty God At the same Time lived Abbot Nilus Nilus Abbas An Dom. 440. who calls the public Prayers The fixed Laws of the Church (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nâ—â— â—â—â—aenes 10â— So that in his days doubtless they were not left arbitrary to the Fancy of every Man who was to Officiate He would have his Monks receive the Sacrament in the Church but if there was not any celebration of the Eucharist he allows them to depart after the singing of the Epistle and Gospel (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. 105. Bibl. Patr. edit Paris Tom. 2. p. 1172. Which shews they used at that Time to Sing those portions of Scripture in the Communion-Office and implies that the rest of that Service was agreeable to our Forms in other things as well as in the Epistles and Gospels but these Passages fell not under my Adversaries observation § 10. Socrates Sozomenus Theodoritus Histor Encles Cire Ann. 440. The Church Historians who writ after Eusebius within little more than one hundred year after the setling of Christianity viz. Socrates Sozomen and Theodoret are next to be considered And in them we find divers passages to confirm us that prescribed forms were used both in and long before their Times and this we shall make out by some instances both as to Praises and Prayers contenting our selves of many to select only a few Testimonies And First No sort of Prayer is more ancient nor more certainly a Form than the Litany Yet of this we have express Testimony in Socrates who relates the Story of that great Storm which happened at Constantinople when Theodosius the younger and the People were beholding the sports of the Hippodrome saying that the Emperor Commanded the People to give over their sport and to joyn all of them in one Common Litany to God adding that they obeyed him and all of them with great alacrity said the Litany and with agreeing Voices sent up Hymns to God So that the whole City was but as one Church and the Emperor began the Hymn himself After which devout recital of these Offices the Storm ceased (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 22. pag. 749. Where we see the Litany and Hymns were such known Forms that all the People on a sudden could say and sing their part of them which can be no Wonder because we have shewed before that in the elder Theodosius his time it was usual to repeat the Litany in procession at Constantinople in times of Common Danger Yea I doubt not but Litanies are mentioned by Eusebius as used in Constantine's Time For he saith the Bishops at Jerusalem offered up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Supplicatory Prayers For the Peace of the whole World For the Church of God For the Emperor himself and for his Children beloved of God (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb vit Constant lib. 4. cap. 45. p. 405. Which are almost the very Words of those ancient Litanick Forms yet extant in the Constitutions and alluded to by many of the ancient Fathers although Eusebius here rather describes than cites these ancient Forms Theodoret speaking of the same Emperor saith Constantine prepared a Chappel in his Camp where they might Sing Hymns to God and Pray and receive the Mysteries For there were Priests and Deacons following the Army who according to the Law of the Church performed the Order for these things (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. lib. 1. cap. 8. p. 205. In which passage we have express mention of an Order for Hymns for Prayers and for the Eucharist which was setled by the Law of the Church and this amounts to no less than a Common Prayer enjoyned by Law For this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Constitution or Order no doubt contained those prescribed Prayers which Socrates calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (m) Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 15. that is prescribed Forms of Prayer which we may learn from Sozomen also who speaking of Nectarius that from a Lay-man was suddenly advanced to be Bishop of Constantinople saith He was sent to Ciriacus an ancient Bishop of Adana that he might learn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Order of officiating used by the Bishops which plainly signifies learning his Book of offices (n) Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 10. p. 420. it being one Requisite in a Bishop to be very exact in that point As for those short Prayers which the Monks of Egypt used mentioned in my Adversary it is Evident they were Forms though he is not willing to confess so much (o) Sozomen p. 397. in the Disc of Liturg. pag. 75. For that place of Sozomen which he cites concerning Paulus who said 300 Prayers in a day and was forced to use 300 little Stones for Beads Foreheads saith his frontless Editor to count them by is taken from Palladius who writ Anno Dom. 401. and tells us that he had 300 prescribed Prayers (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pallad Hist Lausiac cap. 23. and because they were short Forms committed to Memory Paulus was constrained to use these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 little Stones that so he might know when he had repeated them all And since we have mentioned Palladius who wrote at the very begining of this Century we may Note here that he also affirms Maâ—arius another Monk said an hundred prescribed Prayers every day (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pallad ib. cap. 24. And another called from his Charity Eleemon used to go to the Church to say the accustomed Prayers (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. c. 115. By which we may see that the ancient Monks who lived before this Century began of whom Palladius Writes were accustomed to Forms of Prayer both in their Cells and in the Churches when they went thither nor can I find in any of these Historians an account of any that pretended to Pray in public in the Extempore way by the Spirit except those Hereticks called Euchites and Enthusiasts upon whom Theodoret is so severe as to say he believes they were inspired by the Devil (s) Theodoret. lib. 4. cap 10. pag. 116. And this may suffice for the Prayers Secondly As to the Praises the last cited Author assures us there was a known Form of Gloria Patria at Antioch concluding as it doth now World without end and this as early as the time of Leontius who because he altered the ancient Form repeated it with a low Voice but was soon discovered by the People who were well acquainted with the
it was used in the Third and in the beginning of the Fourth Century in all the Churches of the World 'T is true there was an Orthodox Addition made to it in the Time of that Theodocius grounded on a Miracle as Nicephorus reports (m) Niceph. Histor lib. 2. cap. 46. But the Original of this Hymn is taken from the Prophet Isaiah and it was used in that Form long before this Emperour was born yea it seems it was accounted to be a Form very Sacred since they durst not alter it but by the direction of a Miracle so tenacious was that Age of their ancient Forms of Worship Gelaâ— us Episc Rom. A.D. 492. § 14. Pope Gelasius was one of the most Learned of the Roman Bishops and though as we have seen in the Life of Damasus and of Innocent there was a Liturgy at Rome before yet he took great pains to polish and reform it For all Authors affirm That he made Hymns for his Church like to those of S. Ambrose (n) Pâ—ntifical vit â— las item Platâ—na in vit Cent. Magâ—eb 5 Cent. p. 1271. c. And that he Composed some Graduals Prefaces and Collects (o) Pontif cal ut supr item Câ—sâ—andr Liturg And Durandus affirms that this Gelasius the One and filtieth Bishop from S. Peter was he that principally put the Canon into that Order wherein we now see it (p) Durand â—at lib. 4. fol. 67. iâ—em Burnes v a Gelas pag. 55. and some add that he enlarged the Preface and put in It is meet and right so to do But let us hear the Learned Du-Plessis Gelasius came in the Year 490 and he ranged and set in order the Collects and Complâ—nds amongst the which are some that do yet stand and continue pure and uncorrupted (q) Mâ—rnay of the Mass Book l. cap. 60. So that if we regard the account which we had before in the Life of Pope Innocent (r) See the beginning of this Century §. 1. or the full Evidence of these Authors ancient and modern we must grant there were prescribed Forms at Rome long before Gelasius Time but being by continuance of Time and frequent Transcribing become somewhat imperfect he undertakes to rectifie them by some Alterations and by adding something of his own made the Offices more compleat His putting the Canon into Order adding to the Prefaces and his ranging the Collects into a Method shews there were Collects and a Preface and a Canon before so that the use of prescribed Forms did not begin in his Time and yet because he took so much pains about the Liturgy of the Roman Church That Book which he had Corrected and put in Order was called Codex Gelasianus The Gelasian Book And John the Deacon who writ the Life of Pope Gregory saith that He contracted this Gelasion Book and out of it compiled the Gregorian Office (s) Johan Diac. vit Gregor 1. lib. 2. cap. 17. yet so as it seems the Book still remained in some places for the Chronicle of the Abby of Saint Richerius (t) Chronic. S. Richerii apud Dacherii Spicileg Tom. 4. reckons up Nineteen Missals of Gelasius among the Volumes in their Library And it is plain enough that Pope Gregory took the same liberty with this Gelasian Office that he had done with those our of which he first extracted it For there were Forms from the beginning and none but great Bishops presumed to alter them which had been a very impertinent labour if after they had thus Corrected the Offices they had not imposed the use of them on their subordinate Clergy and doubtless they would never have taken this pains if every private Minister might vary the Office every day at his pleasure Which fancy this Book of Gelasius utterly confutes and proves there was a Canon for the Consecration of the Eucharist written down in a Book at least an hundred years before S. Gregories Time yea we see this very Book of Gelasius was taken out of elder Forms which makes it to be somewhat strange that my Adversary should cite and own this Gelasian Book and at the same time and in the same Page affirm There was no setled Form of Consecration at Rome before Gregory 's time (u) Disc of Liturgies p 83. But of this I shall have occasion to say more in the next Century And shall conclude this Age with observing That Clovis the first Christian King of France soon after his Conversion placed certain Monks in the City of Rheims giving them great Priviledges and Possessions and the Rule which they were governed by was that which Macarius had Composed about One hundred years before for his Monks of Nitria the Ninth Article whereof enjoyns them To love the Course of their own Monastery above all things (w) Cursum Monasterii super omnia diligas Reg. S. Macar art 9. ap Cointe Annal Eccles Franc. Tom. 1. pag. 178. An. â—96 That is That they should delight in that Form of Service which was prescribed for their Monastery for a Course signifies an Office for Divine-Service And therefore Gregory of Tours saith That he himself writ a Book of Ecclesiastical Courses (x) Gregor Turon lib. 10. cap. 31. that is of Divine Offices and the same Author calls Saying the whole Service Fulfilling the Course (y) Post impleâ—â—m in Oratione Câ—râ—um id de glor Confess cap. 38. So the Roman Course is put for the Roman Missal (z) Spâ—lm Concil Tom. I. pag 177. An. 680. And in one of our ancient Saxon Councils it is Ordained That in all Churches the Course shall be reverently performed at the Canonical hours (a) Concil Calcuth Can 7. An 787. ibid. p. 295. From which use of the word we may learn That the most ancient Monks long before the Time of Benedict had their prescribed Forms of Prayer which they used in their own Oratories though among these Men who did a little incline to Raptures and some degrees of Enthusiasm if any where we might have expected to have found Extempore Prayers I shut up this Century with the Words of Du-Plessis Thus we are come to the Five hundredth year after Christ finding in all this time One Service consisting of Confessions and Prayers Psalms Reading Preaching Blessing and Distributing the Sacraments according to the Institution of our Lord. Mornay of the Mass Book I. Chap. 6. pag 44. So that he did not think this Age was much corrupted And yet we have proved and he owns that Prescribed Forms were now generally used CHAP. II. Of LITVRGIES in the Sixth Century WE need go no Lower for Authorities to prove the Use of LITURGIES because our Adversary freely and frequently grants that they began in the end of the Former and the beginning of This Century But I must here note in general concerning this Concession First That if they began no sooner yet they prescribe to at least Twelve-hundred Years and to universal Practice and
Approbation for all that space of Time which cannot be proved concerning any thing that is a notorious Corruption Secondly That the gross Mistake of laying the Original of them so late is all along supported by perverting those places which speak of reducing some Countries which had been over-run by the Goths and Vandals Hunnes and Franks with other different sorts of People to one Form of Liturgy As if these were meant of the first imposing of Forms of Prayer in the Christian Church Whereas it is plain that some of these Countries needed a New Conversion and the various and different Inhabitants of other Provinces had brought in great variety of Rites which this Age strove to reduce to an Uniformity not by inventing a New Way but by following the Primitive Way of establishing One Liturgy for every Kingdom or Province Thirdly I must note That my Adversary frequently repents of this despicable Concession and after he hath granted the use of Liturgies in this Age he omits all those Authorities which clearly prove the continuance of this ancient Practice and with all his might strives to wrest those Passages which he doth produce in this Period as if they did not prove so much as he hath granted So that I must first supply the wilful Omissions of his Discourse by setting down the Evidence which he conceals and then rescue the Places he doth cite from his Misinterpretations And first we will see what the industrious Centuriators say of this Age They have as was shewed owned that Forms of Prayer were generally used in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries and in this they take notice That the Nicene Creed was repeated in their Divine Service that The Lords Prayer was sung by all the People together in the Greek Church That the People at Constantinople did frequently use Litanies That Antiphons were usually Sung in the Gallican Church That we may see by the Histories of this Age that solemn Masses had now filled all places That they had public Prayers in their Temples and sometimes celebrated Litanies in the Night And they add That they had many Forms of Prayers One of which they reckon to be That Litany used in the Eastern Church wherein the Peoples part was to Sing Lord have mercy upon us (b) Magdebâ— Cent. 6. cap. 6. pag. 330 c. ad pag. 339. This was their Opinion of the Way of Praying and Praising God which had begun in former Ages and was continued in this to be performed by Prescribed Forms Caesarius Arelat An. D. 503. § 1. The first eminent Writer of this Age is Caesarius Bishop of Arles in France who was present at most of those Gallican Councils which enjoyn an Uniformity in the Public Offices and settle one and the same Liturgy and thence we may conclude he was for the use of Forms of Prayer Which may appear also by his Homilies where he intimates That the whole Service for the Communion the Prayers Lessons c. took up an hour or two yet he reckons those are very Criminal who for their Souls good will not stay till the whole Office was compleated that is till they had received the final Blessing after the Lords Prayer with which as we have shewn in former Centuries the Communion-Service was concluded (c) Caesarii hom 8. edit a. Baluz pag. 60. Now since the Office ended exactly as it had done in former Ages we may from thence infer it was the same ancient Form And we will observe further that when the Admonition given by a single Bishop would not reform this vile Custom of the Peoples going out of the Church before the Prayers were fully ended The Councils of this time began to make Canons to forbid the People to depart from the Divine Service before the Blessing was pronounced (d) Concil 1. Aurel. Can. 28. An. 507. Bin. Tom. 2. par 1. pag. 562. item Concil 3. Aurel. Can. 28. An. 540. ibid. par 2. p. 29. Which Blessing was an ancient and well known Form as also was the whole Office For this same Caesarius very clearly witnesseth in another place That the Preface Lift up your Hearts c. was still used in the Communion Office a Form which had been in all Churches down from the days of S. Cyprian and probably long before (e) Caesar hom 14. vid. Bona rer Liturg. pag. 552. and yet continued without any variation § 2. But because we have mentioned some Gallican Councils Concil Agatheus A.D. 506. we must here observe that after the Kings of France had received the Faith That Church was every where restored to that good Order and Regularity from which under Pagan Princes and in difficult Times it had fallen and this was the occasion of the many Councils held about this Time and of those Canons that do labour to reduce all the Gallican Church to one Order of Service So in the Council of Agatho of which Caesarius was President one of the Canons is in these Words Since it is convenient that the Order of the Church be equally kept by all We Ordain as it is every where That after the Antiphons the Collects shall be said in order by the Bishops or Priests And that the Morning and Evening Hymns shall be sung every day and in the conclusion of the Mattins Vespers and Masses the Sentences out of the Psalms shall be read And the People after the Common Prayer shall be dâ—smissed in the Evening with the Bishops Benediction (e) Et quia convenit Ordinem Ecclesiae ab omnibus aequaliter custudiri c. Concil Agath Can. 30. Bin. Tom. II. par I. pag. 556 Before which Blessing the People are forbid to go out of the Church (f) Ibid. Can. 47. Here then we see there is an Order of the Church that is as the word then signified A Liturgy enjoyned to be observed by all in that Province as it seems it was now by other Councils setled every where Which Liturgy consisted of the Antiphons and Collects every one set in its proper place as also of Morning and Evening Hymns and Prayers together with the Communion-Service then called the Mass and the Responsory reading of the Psalms with a common or general Prayer for all Estates of Men and all was concluded with the Bishops Benediction Now it is certain that these Antiphons Collects Hymns and this General Prayer were Forms and the Canon supposes them all written down at large in that Order they were to be used by all Bishops and Priests and this is plainly a prescribed Liturgy But my Adversary who cites this Canon at large after he had falsified the Words of it (g) Disc of Lit. pag. 174. where he set down Collationes for Collectiones and leaves out per ordinem attempts to pervert the Sense and would perswade us it amounts to no more than a Rubric or Directory which is a gross and I doubt a wilful Mistake For though we should grant That the
Hereticks And so much was he in love with Forms that he made such for private and extraordinary occasions For when any came to him under outward afflictions and desired his Prayers he used this Form Lord thou knowest what is best for our Souls and therefore when we ask for such things as our necessity compels us to desire do thou only grant that which conduces to our Spiritual welfare therefore if our humble Prayer be expedient then let it be heard so that thy Will may happily be Accomplished (p) Vita Fulgent cap. 25. pag. 30. Another Form frequently repeated by this holy Bishop in his last Sickness was this O Lord give me patience here and thy Pardon at my End (q) Ibid. cap. 30. pag. 93. And the Writer of his Life remarks that these Prayers of his were graciously heard and answered by Almighty God who it seems is well pleased with Forms that are said with true Devotion and if he accept them we may justly despise the Censures of ignorant and prejudiced Men. I must not conclude this Period till I observe that there is in the Works of this Fulgentius a Book dedicated to him by Peter the Deacon which this holy Bishop highly commends wherein as we shewed before it is affirmed That the Liturgy of S. Basil was generally used in the Eastern Church and of so great Authority was it accounted that he cites a passage out of it against the Hereticks (r) In libel Petr Diac. de incarn grat Jesu Chr. inter op Fulg. Moreover in that same Book is quoted also that same Prayer for all Estates of Men as an Argument to confirm the Catholic Faith which we produced at Large before out of S. Augustin and Pope Celestine (s) Ibid. cap 8. pag 281. See Cent. 5. §. and since so many Fathers produce it in dispute it is Evident it was a part of the Churches Liturgy and had been so for many Ages otherwise it had been to no purpose to bring it for Evidence against the Enemies of the Catholic Faith And this may suffice to shew the continuance of Liturgy in the African Church in the time of Fulgentius Concil Valentin Ann. Dom. 524. § 4. To return into the West there is a Canon made at the Council of Valentia in Spain Which saith Before the Catechumens go out and the Office of the Faithful begin let the Epistle and Gospel be Read and the Sermon be Preached because by hearing of these many had been converted to the Faith (t) Concil Valent Can. 1. Bin. Tom. II. par 1. pag. 629. By which wee see the Offices of the Catechumens and the Faithful yet remained in two distinct Forms as they had been in the Primitive Ages but this Canon made way for joyning those Offices and admitting all sorts of People to the whole Service excepting only the holy Cummunion so that after this we rarely hear of dismissing the Catechumens or of keeping Mysteries secret because these parts of the World were now generally become professed Christians In France a little before this Sigismund one of their Kings had instituted a Society of Monks to sing the Daily Office (u) Gregor Turon lib 3. cap. 5. pag. 95. vid. Cointe Annal An. 522. Now that Office which is Sung by each side of a Choir can be no other than a prescribed Form And we shall shew presently that the Monks of France had a peculiar Office made up of ancient Forms of Praise and Prayer In the mean time we shall look upon the Canons of the Council of Vaison Concil Vasent 3. Ann. 529. by which we shall see that Liturgick Forms were used at this time also in all the Churches of the World and believed to have descended down to them from the most ancient Times For the Bishops in this Council say That since it was the custom in the East at Rome and in all Italy to repeat the Kyrie Eleeson Lord have Mercy upon us Therefore in all our Churches this holy Custom shall be introduced to say it in the Morning Prayer at the Communion and at Evening Prayer (w) ut in omnibus Ecclesiis nostris ista consuetudo sanct ad Matutinum Missas ad Vesperam Deo propitiante intromittatur Concil Vas Can. Bin. Tom. II. par 1. pag. 641. The Form was ancient and used in all the Primitive Litanies but in these Churches they had not begun to repeat these Words in the Daily Offices at the three great Hours of Prayer But since it was become a Custom in all other Countries so to use this holy Form they now prescribe it shall be so used in their Churches as it is still in our Liturgy immediately before the Lords Prayer Again the same Council ordains That the Communion Service shall never be said without the Hymn of Holy Holy Holy that is the Trisagion which though it was prescribed by their Liturgy before yet some in the time of Lent and in private Communions had thought fit to omit it (x) Ibid. Can. 4. so that the variations which Bishops had made from the old way were regulated by the Councils of this Age. The next Canon affirms That at Rome in the East in Africa and Italy they had for preventing Heresie added to the Gloria Patri these Words As it was in the beginning c. Wherefore they ordain that this Hymn shall be repeated with that addition in their Churches (y) Ibid. Can. 5. p. 642. The Form with this enlargment also had been long in use in other Churches but this Addition was first Established in France after its second Conversion by this Canon And we gather from hence that in this Age there is not only an assurance that every Nation had a Liturgy but that the lesser Churches laboured to imitate the greater and more famous Churches in order to the making as great an Uniformity as was possible in all the Liturgies then in the World And we shall finally note from this Councils Orders about these ancient Forms that private Bishops themselves in this Age were not allowed to correct or alter any thing relating to the Liturgy Nothing less than a Council might presume to make Orders in those Cases Wherefore we cannot imagin that Liturgies were lately set up in the end of the last Age or the beginning of this as my Adversary affirms much less can we think that private Ministers had leave to vary the Offices as they pleased Benedictus Monach. An. Dom. 529. § 5. About this time Flourished Benedict the Father of that numerous Order of Monks who within an Age or two had filled all the Western World and he writ his Rule not as my Adversary pretends in the middle (z) Disc of Lit. p. 178. but towards the beginning of the Sixth Age viz. Ann. Dom. 530. (a) Vid. Dr. Cave Cartoph Eccles p. 109. Which Rule is still extant (b) Vid. Cointe Annal. Eccles An. 536. And as to
could not be satisfied unless the Bishops would put in the Names of the four General Councils into the Dyptics to be Read at the Altar And when these Names were put in as they desired the whole Multitude came together to observe and hear this new and grateful Addition And dividing themselves into two parts they Sang for a long time the Benedictus Blessed be the Lord God of Israel until the Choir began the Trisagion to which they all listned and after the Reading of the holy Gospel the Liturgy was performed according to the Custom that is the Office for Catechumens Then the Doors being shut and the holy accustomed Lessons read At the time for Reading the Dyptics all the People with silence drew neer to the Altar and upon hearing the Deacon recite those Names they all Cried with a Loud Voice Glory be to thee O Lord and then through Gods help the rest of the Liturgy was finished with all Decency (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Constant sub Men. Act. 5. Bin. Tom. 2. par 1. pag. 733. Now here we have not only the Name of Liturgy used in the sense we now take it but the several parts of it are set down and particular notice of divers Forms therein contained viz. The Benedictus The Trisagion and the Gloria tibi Domine The Prayers for the Catechumens the Dyptics c. And the Prayers themselves are called the accustomed Liturgy and said to be performed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with all good Order that is according to that excellent Order appointed by the ancient Liturgies § 7. Pope Vigilius lived in the time of this Emperor Vigilius Ep. Rom. An. Dom. 540. and writes an Epistle to him wherein he blesseth God for that Princes Religious care of the Church which requited him by her daily Prayers for him And Vigilius notes that Justinians affection to the Church was a sign that their usual Prayer for it was heard and Answered And when he comes to describe that Prayer he doth it in these Words All Bishops by an ancient Traditiâ—n in the Communion Office desire and Pray that the Lord would please to Vnite Govern and Preserve the Catholic Faith throughout the whole World (n) Omnes Pontifices antiâ—uâ in offerendo sâ—cripcio Traditione aepeâ—â—mus excrantes ut Catholicam fidem adunaâ—e regere Donamus custodire toto orâ—e dignetuâ— Vigil ep 4. ad Justin Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 5. Which Words are certainly the Roman Form as it was in the days of Vigilius being according to the Book of Gelasius his Correcting not much altered from the Liturgy ascribed to S. Clement or the old Roman Form before Gelasius (o) Pro Sanctà tuà Catâ—olicà Apostolicâ Ecâ—lesiâ ut pacificare custodire gubernare digneris omnes fines terrae Liturg. S. Clem. Bib. Patr. Tom. 2. edit Paris p. 119. And when Gregory the Great in the next Century corrected the Gelasian Office he evidently made his Form out of both those elder Liturgies (p) Pro Eccles â tuâ Sancta Catholicâ quam pacificare custodire adunare regâ—râ—â—igneris toto terrarum erbe Offâ—c Gregorian ibid. pag. 128. As the Reader will see by comparing the several ways of expressing this in these several Offices in divers Ages used in the Roman Church Which shews not only that there was a Form of Prayer for the Church professing the Catholic Faith in the time of Vigilius but that the Form was then believed to be from ancient Tradition and was made almost in the very Words which had been used for many hundred Years before Had Liturgies been newly set up as my Adversary pretends nothing had been more false nor more Ridiculous than to alledge an ancient Tradition for this Form and had all Ministers before this had the liberty to Pray in what Expressions they pleased nothing had been more imposible than this Harmony between these Offices which only differ in divers Ages by reason of the several Corrections of the Forms but were always in every Age done by a prescribed Form Which will be still more plain by the same Vigilius his Answer to the Consultations of Etherius whom he first informs concerning the certain Time on which Easter was to be kept for that year And because this Bishop was placed in a Country newly converted to the Catholic Faith and not yet well instructed in the regular way of performing Divine Offices he had it seems desired to know how they celebrated the Service at Rome on the greater Festivals To which Vigilius gives this Answer We also acquaint you that as to the Order of Prayer in celebrating the Communion it is not different at any time nor upon any Festival but we always consecrate the Gifts offered to God after the same Manner Then he goes on to tell him That they had indeed proper Prefaces for commemorating the Mercy peculiarly to be remembred in each of the greater Festivals And then adds these Words But the rest of the Service we perform according to the accustomed Order And therefore we have herewith sent you the Text it self of that Canonical Prayer which by Gods Mercy we have received from Apostolical Tradition And that you may know in what place to add proper things for each Festival we have also added the Prayers for Easter-day (q) Oâ—dinem quâ—que precum in celebritate M ssarar nullo nâ—s tâ—mpore nuâ—â—â 〈◊〉 sign â—uacaâ—â— habere aâ—vâ—â— sed semper â—â—aem tenore oblata Deo munera consecrare pp. Caetera vero Ordine consueto prosequimur Qua prepter ipsius Canonicae precis textum direximus subter adâ—â—ectâ—â— quaâ—â—â— Deo propitio ex Apostolicâ traditione suscepimus c. Vâ—gâ—l Ep. 2. ad Etherâ—um Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 4. Here we see the Communion-Service and especially the Prayer of Consecration was an ancient Form derived from Apostolical Tradition and the whole Office was written down in a Book and sent into that Country where Etherius was Bishop which some suppose to have been some parts of Spain lately Converted from Heresie (r) Baron Annal An. 538. pag. 278 279. And if so probably this was the foundation of that Office which is called the Mosarabick and was Composed by S. Leander about Fifty year after out of the old Gothic and African Forms compared with this Roman Office However it appears that though in some places where the Faith was newly planted they needed help to settle and correct their Offices yet both the New and Ancient Churches did all agree in the use of Forms And when a new Liturgy was to be made for a Newly Converted Nation the Bishops consulted the most Ancient Forms they could find in other Churches choosing out of them what they thought proper for their own Country and that Form they enjoyned upon all that were under their Jurisdiction We must also observe further That the Roman Office which was writ down and the very Words
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
Scholasticus is not any Mans proper Name but a Title used in that Age for any Learned and Well-read Man and so applied to Gelasius who lived near an Hundred years before S. Gregory So the word Scholasticus is taken I am sure in many ancient Authors (i) Aug. Tract 7. in Johan Hieron de vir illustr Salvian praef ad libr. de gub Dei ap Bon. rerum Liturg. p. 557. And in that Sense of an elegant and learned Man it is that we find Capitolinus use it (k) Capitolin in vit Maximin junior and so doth Sulpitius Severus (l) Sulpic. Sev. dial 1. and Macarius (m) Macar hom 15. so Suidas calls Agathias by the Title of Scholasticus (n) Suid. in Agathiâ and Prudentius is called Hispaniarum Scholasticus by Walafridus Strabo (o) Walafr Strab. de reb Eccles cap. 25. yea Synesius long before gives that Title to a learned Friend of his (p) Synes op 155 156. and Elpidius hath the Name of Scholasticus in Leontius (q) Leont Mechan de Arat. sphaer Which is enough to prove That for divers Ages this had been a Title and in S. Gregory he plainly opposeth a Prayer composed by a Divine Person such as the Lords Prayer is to one made by an human Author by a Learned and Scholastical Man by which he means either in general all the old Popes who first put in the several Parts or rather Gelasius who setled the Canon made up of those Parts and so may be said to be the Author thereof And thus all my Adversaries dreams of a Man called Scholasticus contemporary to S. Gregory fall to the ground But still he persists in this Notion and saith Bellarmin thinks it is not improbable that Scholasticus was a Mans Name then alive I Reply Bellarmin (r) Bellarm. de Miss lib. 2. c. 19. only recites this as Chemnitius's Opinion but disputes against it and yet adds if he should yield this to gratifie his Adversary it would not follow that the Canon was made by him because S. Gregory's Words may be expounded not of the Canon but of some lesser Collects of later composure used in the Communion-Office and then adds Vtraque probabilis both Opinions viz. of the Canon being made by an ancient Learned Father entituled Scholasticus and of the Words signifying other Prayers are probable But my Adversary wilfully perverts Bellarmin as if he affirmed it was probable that Scholasticus Author of the Canon lived in Gregory's Time which the Cardinal utterly and with good Reason denies because there was a Canon at Rome divers Ages before and that which Gregory here speaks of was writ down by Gelasius before the End of the last Century And here let it be noted That though S. Gregory prefer the Lords Prayer whose Authority was Divine before this Prayer of Ecclesiastical and Human Composition yet he gives great regard to it for he calls the Elements only The Host or The Oblation before this Canon be repeated but after the pronouncing this Prayer over it he calls it Christs Body and Blood Which shews That he thought the Consecration was made by this very Prayer though it were only an Human Composure And this was not his Opinion alone but was believed generally in that Age as may appear by the Case of Januarius proposed to Gregory who was sometimes taken so ill even at the Sacrament that he was a great while before he could go on at the same place of the Canon where he left off which made many doubt whether or no they might receive the Communion from him because they feared that a Mistake in this Prayer would make the Consecration null (s) Gregor Epist 56. lib. 11. pag. Now it is no way probable that a Prayer lately made by an obscure and private Man should so suddenly gain the reputation of being a necessary part of the Office And therefore we may conclude this first Assertion of his to be false and no way deducible from S. Gregory's Words since it opposes so much Reason and so great Authority But Secondly Whoever made this Canon or whensoever it was made my Adversary saith That S. Gregory was not for imposing it which he hopes to prove by his not imposing this Canon upon Augustine the Monk whom he had sent to Convert the Saxons then in this Island For he advised him to a Course inconsistent with any restraint Now all this is to insinuate that it is ill done of our Church to impose her Liturgy upon her own Clergy because as he pretends Bede saith S. Gregory did not impose the Roman Canon on Austin the Monk An heavy Charge this and well proved as we shall see by the true Quotation of Bede's Words half of which my Adversary hath left out Augustine had enquired why since there was but One Faith there were divers Liturgies and in this case which he should chuse to establish here And Bede thus relates S. Gregory's Answer Your Brotherhood knows the Custom of the Roman Church in which you were brought up but I am content that whatever you can find in the Roman the Gallican or any Church which may best please Almighty God you do carefully chuse that here He fraudulently draws a Line But Bede goes on thus And infuse into your New Converted Church of England by a special Institution what you so gather from several Churches Here he comes in again For things are not to be beloved for the places sake but places are to be beloved for the good things that are there wherefore out of every Church choose such things as are pious religious and right Here he concludes but S. Gregory goes on and gathering these into one Collection deposit them for Customs in the Minds of the English Never was poor Author so mangled to serve an ill Cause two long Sentences left out one in the Middle and another at the End to find out which base and disingenuous Fallacy I desire the Reader will compare Gregory's full Answer as it is Recorded in Bede and Sir Henry Spelman (t) Bed hist lib. 1. cap 27. Spelm. Concil Vol. l. pag. with his circumcised Citation thereof (u) Disc of Lit. Marg. pag. 85◠and then he will discern his Fraud in concealing the directions for Augustin to make a special institution of the things he had so Collected into one Body of a Liturgy and then by a New Form daily to be used to fix them in the Minds of the English by a Custom Which utterly overthrows his pretended Liberty For S. Gregory supposes every Church had a Written Liturgy which Augustin might read over and compare And he advises Augustin to read over the several Liturgies of several Churches the Roman the Gallican c. and out of all these to compose One Form and then to enjoyn it on the English and by daily use to accustom them to it This is all the Restraint that is practised now Our Reformers did read over all
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 diâ—câ—ver 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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)
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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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
are full of Instances to shew That the Fathers used the Word Baptizo in all Three Persons I baptize thee Be thou baptized He is baptized and that they use Tingo Mergo and Mergito as well as Baptizo e Having borrowed all his Quotations by Whole-sale from Vossius and Vice comes (f) Voss Theses de Bapt. disp 2. pag. 372. â—â—câ—â—m de vâ—t Bapt. pag. 608. But indeed the Inference That therefore they took a Liberty to vary Christs Form is of his own inventing And it is like the rest of his Sophistry For the first Word viz. Baptize Christ doth not determine the Person in which it shall be used for he speaks not to one that he was Baptizing but to his Disciples and so expresses it by the Participle viz. Baptizing them c. upon which the Latin Churches used the First Person when they performed this Office I baptize thee the Greeks generally used the Third Person viz. M. or N. is Baptized as Theodorus notes but this was no altering Christ's Form for that very Author there tells us That the Water vanished out of the Font when an Arian Bishop altered the Gospel Form in Baptizing one Barbas (g) Theodor. Lect. collect pag. 187. Nor is this difference of the Greek and Latin Church any ground for the liberty which my Adversary pleads for viz. the liberty for private Ministers to vary the Forms of their own Church as they please For no Bishop or Priest in the Latin Church was allowed to use the Third Person nor did any in the Greek Church use the First so that every Clergy-man was bound to use the Forms prescribed in his own Country and the Church of England doth not impose any more Then as for his ridiculous ugring of the Fathers using Tingo Mergo c. for Baptizo we must note that not one of his Instances are any account of the words used in the Actual Administration of Baptism he cannot shew they used any word but Baptizo then But his Proofs are out of the Fathers occasional Discourses concerning Baptism which they describe in their own words and phrases as it happens even as we call this holy Action Christning or Sprinkling the Child as well as Baptizing in our ordinary Discourse But would any Man whose Head were right infer from thence That our Ministers in the Act of Baptizing took liberty to say I Christen thee or I Sprinkle thee c. I am ashamed to confute such mean Sophistry yet must add That our Lord neither spake Latin nor Greek but a Language which was Hebrew mixt with Syriack and it is strange when His Words are to be turned into any other Language in our common Discourse that we may not translate them by any significant Words But this Liberty in ordinary Converse or Writing is no manner of proof That the private Ministers of any Church may vary the Words used in their Offices when they Administer the Sacrament of Baptism But he goes on to prove this liberty of Variation by the Fathers sometimes saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so also In nomen or In nomine In or Into the Name of the Father c. (h) Disc of Lit. pag. 96. wherein the Fallacy is the same as before For his Authors cited are only discoursing of Baptism not citing or reporting the very Words which they used in Baptizing and therefore they take this liberty As if a Preacher or Catechist should in a Sermon or Exposition say Our Church Baptizes Men into the Faith of the Holy Trinity or in the Name of the Father the Creator the Son the Redeemer and the Holy Ghost the Sanctifier of all Men This would not prove that this Preacher or Catechist did not use the Words of the Churches Form when he actually Baptized nor shew that we have here no prescribed Form of Baptism This is meer trifling But his next Proof is disingenuous for he Argues That some Ancients thought they were not obliged to name the Persons of the Trinity for if it was done in the Name of Christ it was sufficient from whence he gathers That such Fathers would neither impose Forms of Prayer on others nor would observe what others had imposed on them (i) Disc of Lit. pag 97 98. Now here I must observe that he hath again taken all his Instances by which he proves this out of Vossius (k) Voss Thes de Baptism Disp 2. Thes 5. pag. 370 ad pag. 379. But that Learned Author was too generous to make any such false and frivolous Inference from those Premisses and doth not represent even the Premisses themselves as my Adversary doth for he tells us That Irenaeus is not speaking of Baptism in that place adâ— haer lib. 3 c. 20. which my Adversary cites and that Justin Martyr another of my Adversaries Witnesses pag. 99. is not repeating but only paraphrasing the Form of Baptism so that there are no Ancient Fathers who allow this but only S. Basil and S Ambrose who generally follows S. Basil in all things nor do they speak of any Church where such an Omission was permitted or where Men were left at liberty to Baptize in what words they pleased Only they put the case if a man were so Baptized in Christs name whether he ought to be Baptized again these two think he ought not because Factum valet quod fieri non debet But these two do not advise any so to Baptize nor doth it appear that ever they took this Liberty they only Argue for the validity of such a Baptism though it was done irregularly Therefore these Fathers and such later Men as followed them were not for any Mans having liberty to alter the Form of Baptism or the Prayers of the Church as my Adversary pretends Besides Vossius there declares which my Adversary conceals that more and greater Fathers held that this alteration of the Form made the Baptism invalid viz. Tertullian and Cyprian who saith they were Hereticks who altered the Form thus as also Didymus S. Augustin Fulgentius Epiphanius and others (l) Vossij Thes de Bapt. disp 2. c. p. 374 375. Now then the most and best of the Fathers held it utterly unlawful to alter the Form of Baptism and consequently by his way of Arguing to alter the Liturgy or Prayers and therefore most of the Fathers were against his pretended Liberty And from this matter of Fact Vossius observes First That mentioning the three Persons is now and hath been of old the usage of the whole World by which it is very probable that it came at first from the Apostles (m) Vossius ibid. p. 371. Again he notes Though Baptism should be valid though the words of this Form were altered Yet the old Form ought not to be innovated or changed at every Mans pleasure And if Christ had not tied us to a certain Form of Words Yet it is much better to retain the
old Form which all Agree to be certainly right but it is disputable and uncertain whether any other Form be so or no And surely certain things are much to be preferred before uncertain (n) idem ibid. pag 379. Thus this learned Man represents the Matter and if my Adversary who transcribed his Instances had imitated his Ingenuity He could not have framed any Argument from hence for his Liberty of varying Prayers because he reckons his Liberty a Priviledge a Duty and an advantage to the Worship But this variation in Baptism was an irregular Fact generally disliked and censured so as to make the very Office Null or at least very liable to be counted so it was an Illegal thing seldom done never commanded nor directed to be done only when it was done it was condemned by many and excused by very few And suppose now varying the Prayers be such a Fact as this is it Advisable or Eligible No the Comparison shews the taking such Liberty would be an ill thing for which scarce any would undertake to make an Apology And so I have done with his Comparison between Forms of Prayer and the Form of Baptizing § 10. His next Excursion is about the Creeds and being deckt in the Plumes he hath borrowed from Grotius Vossius and Bishop Vsher he fills Four Pages with Pompous Margens to dress up this Argument viz. That in the Primitive Times there was an Agreement in sense not in Words as to the Creed it self and he thinks that they who left themselves and others at so much Liberty in Forms of Creeds would not limit themselves nor others by Forms of Prayer If the Apostles Creed be objected he looks on Ruffinus his Relation to be a Fable and saith that no Writer for 300 years took notice of it And since the Ancients would not be confined to this Creed it argues they would never be confined to Forms of Prayer composed by others and he notes that the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions hath set down a Form of Creed different from that of the Apostles (o) Disc of Lit. pag. 99 100 101 102 103. This is the sum of his Reasoning Which when it is strictly examined will all appear to be either mistaken or fallacious He first directs us to Grotius upon Math. xxviii 19. where that Author brings in Justin Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Tertullian Novatian c. using various Expressions when they give an account of its several Articles But Grotius his Inferences which he cites in his Margen pag. 100. are two First That when they say the Rule of Faith was immutable they do not respect one certain Form of words received in all places but they respect the Force and meaning of the Interrogations And Secondly That Cyprians words seem to him to shew that the Creed or Rule of Faith in his time was not yet tied to those words in which it was afterwards found written and yet it cannot be doubted but the Sense of it was always the same (p) Grot. Com. in Math. XXVIII 19. p. 288 289. Now though Grotius here be not so just perhaps as he ought to be to the Antiquity of Creeds and being a Modern Author his Affirmation in this weighs no more than his Instances prove Yet I will wave that Dispute and for the present admit what he saith were true and then make Parallel between Creeds and Liturgies And in his First Inference he only saith That when the Ancients use various ways of expressing their Faith they do not refer to one certain Form of Words received in all places but only to the force and meaning of the Interrogations Which shews Grotius did not think as my Adversary grosly doth That every one of the Ancients in the places cited pretended to repeat the very Form of the Creed but only to shew the main Doctrins of it which in these occasional Discourses is all that we can expect And therefore the variety of expressions doth not prove there was not one Form of Creed but that these Fathers in these places do not refer to that Form Yet Secondly These Fathers all lived within 250 years after Christ and if we grant to Grotius that then there was not one Form of Creed every where received we may allow the Parallel with Liturgies and suppose that in Cyprian and Novatian's Time and so upwards to Tertullian Irenaeus and Justin Martyr there was not one Form of Liturgy every where received yet for all this Liturgies might be used and received before the year 300 that is before the quiet settlement of the Christian Church 1400 years ago and above 200 years before my Adversary allows them to have come in And this also is all that can be inferred from his words in the second Passage viz. That in S. Cyprians time the Creed was not tied to that Form of words wherein it is found written down afterwards Though he speak this modestly and only say it sâ—ems so to him Yet let it be supposed true and certain and then make the Parallel and no more will follow from thence but this That the Liturgies of the Church were not written down in so many words in the year 250 as we find them written in afterwards Now this being in the Ages of Persecution and while the Miraculous Gifts lasted it will not prove that because the Church then had no such Form of written Liturgy therefore now when the Church is setled and Inspiration ceased we neither need nor ought to have such a Form In the next Page in the Margen he grants the Creeds had more stated Forms in the Fourth Century though even then the Creeds of several Cities in the same Country were not Vniform and he instances in Rome Aquileia and Ravenna in Italy referring us to Vossius and Bishop Vsher (q) Disc of Lit. Marg. p. 101. And a little after he saith it was not put into set Form till the Fourth Age or neer it but the Forms varied in several places in the same Country Now because the Antiquity of Creeds is not our business here we will also for the present suppose this to be true And then if I may Argue from the History of Creeds to that of Liturgies as he evidently doth the Consequence will be That Liturgies were put into set Forms somwhat before the beginning of the Fourth Age though those great Churches which were at that time independent of one another though in the same Country as Aquileia and Ravenna in Italy which then were not subject to Rome had some difference in the Words and Phrases as also in the Order and Method of their Liturgies But as the Roman Creed was imposed upon all those Churches which were under the Popes Jurisdiction properly so called and the Aquileian Creed and that of Ravenna were respectively imposed upon all the Churches subject to these two great Metropolitans So it must follow if Liturgies and Creeds kept pace as he supposes that the Roman
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 â—orm 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 bâ—fâ—re the time of that same Council and the Creed of Aquileia differed from this but very little (r) Vosâ— de trib â—ymb diss 1. §. â—0 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) 〈◊〉 Apoâ—â—â— or â— Dâ—scourse aâ—â—â—ting the Antâ—â—s and Autâ—◠〈…〉 Creed P inted at Oâ—â—a 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 Lâ—t 〈…〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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
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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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
while there was any thing of such Eminency in the Church (n) Disc of Lit. pag. 155. And again a little after Diligent and frequent Preaching was the happiness of the Fourth and part of the Fifth Age and its security was the excellency of those Bishops who were the lights and ornaments of those Times (o) Disc of Lit. p. 190. So that for ought I know this Age was a good one for all this long Character of its degeneracy and if I had a mind I could fill as many Pages in its commendation as he hath done in its disgrace and therefore if Liturgies had come in then it had been no hurt no nor any disreputation to them However this Argument thus managed could not injure them Secondly As to his formidable number of invidious Quotations I have taken the pains to examine them all and besides that jumbling of Authors and Times and repeating the same Instances twice or thrice which is his usual way of proceeding I dare assure the Reader there are some of them falsly cited more of them misapplied and most of them impertinent and though I doubt it will be a little tedious yet I will make some short Remarks upon them by which it will appear that these Instances thus cited and applied give a worse Character of him that produces them than they do of the Age intended to be blackned by them Pag. 181 c. If the Church were in so bad a state in and long before S. Chrysostom's Time as that Father piously complains I would fain know when it was in a good state Wherefore this must be taken for Rhetoric and the effect of his Zeal against divers evil Men not for a strict and universal Character of the Age As we may learn from Isidore of Peleusium who Wrote within 20 years after S. Chrysostom's Time and was his Scholar in an Epistle cited by my Adversary very often though he omits this Passage who admires this Age which S. Chrysostom condemns and saith There were Bishops then who were lovers of Vertue averse to Honour delighting in Poverty and Fearing God (p) Isidor Pel. lib. 5. epist 21. pag. 559. So that these holy Men blamed their own Times and commended the former and no Argument can be drawn from these pieces of popular Oratory Pag. 182. Isidore of Peleusium who is so often cited was a pious but discontented Monk living under the Jurisdiction of Theophilus his dear Master S. Chrysostom's mortal Enemy and he was further provoked by one Eusebius a very ill Man who was Bishop of that Diocess where his Monastery stood and by the profligate Lives of Zosimus and two other wicked Priests ordained by the said Eusebius and therefore he doth not speak of the Church in general which a retired Monk could not be supposed to know but in most of the Quotations he refers only to Theophilus and Eusebius and some ill Clergy-men in that Province yet my fraudulent Adversary still applies these Passages as if he spake of all the Bishops and Priests in the World As for the place here cited first Isidore blames a Schism which had then hapned for all the Evils which were broken in upon the Church and he adds that they had now lost all the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gifts of former Ages (q) Isid Pel. lib. 3. ep 480. pag. 410. so that it seems the Gift of Prayer was then gon The next Quotation out of Isidore (r) Id. lib. 2. ep 5. pag 128. only shews that the Apostles Times were far better than those he lived in nor doth he there blame any body but himself and so it is nothing to the purpose Pag. 183. The next Page contains nothing but his affirmation That the Service of God was more corrupt than when it was first instituted Origen indeed shews how the Pagans had corrupted it by their Idolatry c. which he applies to the Christian Church above 200 years after Origen's Death and S. Chrysostom is not at all speaking of Religious Worship In Matth. hom 50. pag. 323. Pag. 184. S. Augustin is twice cited as if he blamed the Church of his Time for prescribing numerous Rites and imposing them yet he lived 100 years before my Adversary allows there was any thing prescribed or imposed But if we consult his Words it will appear that S. Augustin is only speaking of Corrupt Practices observed with great exactness by the Superstitious Vulgar not enjoyned by the Church Aug. ad Jan. Ep. 119. cap. 19. idem de morib Eccles lib. 1. cap. 34. It was these ignorant and superstitious People who began to venerate Pictures and Sepulchres for which the Church reproved them And if Petrus Gnapheus did as he pretends put in the name of the Virgin into the Prayers An. 483. He was a declared Heretick and his Fact ought not to be charged upon the Orthodox who did not imitate him therein But Forms had found Entertainment long before this Pag. 185 186. He fills his Margen with Isidore's Complaints of Theophilus and Eusebius and some others in those parts as if Prelacy had degenerated and the Bishops grown Tyrannical all the World over And he generally breaks off his fraudulent Quotations just at those Words which Isidore puts in to declare he doth not speak of all the Bishops and Clergy no not in that Province So he leaves out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (s) Isid Pel. lib. 5. ep 21. which place is again so cited pag. 187. These things I do not speak of all Thus he writes horrid Corruption of the Clergy (t) Ibid. lib. 5. ep 131. but will not quote those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For all are not fallen into this Gulf. Again he cites another Epistle for a general Accusation where he might have found a large Encomium of one Clergy-man and this limitation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I do not accuse all (u) Idem lib. 3. ep 223. And he might if he pleased have seen a very high Character of Hermogenes a Bishop of that Age and that Country (w) Idem lib. 5. ep 448. p. 466. But his omitting all these shews he designedly perverted this Author to represent the Bishops and Clergy of this time as being generally depraved which argues my Adversary to be as destitute of Integrity as he was of Charity I need not observe that his Quotation out of S. Chrysostom is no more but a just description of the Episcopal Office without any complaint (x) Chrysost hom 37. Tom. 6. Nor that Isidore in the next place cited is only speaking of the fore-mentioned evil Bishops and Clergy-men (y) Isid Peleus lib. 5. ep 272. And it is not he as the blundering Editor thought but Nazianzen who adds the next words And as for that Good Man 't is well known he was angry and highly disobliged when he made the Oration here Quoted And yet he doth not as my Adversary saith wish there were no Prelacy that is No
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 selâ—cta cum Hymnâ— Collectâ—s purâ—â—ribus c. per â—â—r Cornâ—rum 〈◊〉 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. Râ—vii 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 Adminâ—strat Sacram. c. in ditione Duc. Megapolensium â—rancfera 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 suâ—â— in appâ—nd 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. Sâ—â— 1. Num. 3. 37 â—8 39 c. p. â— p. 34â—â—5 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) Câ—nfâ—ss 〈◊〉 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— â—esp ad â—ranc 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.
224. And not he alone but all the Calvinists do generally allow and use prescribed Forms of Prayer as Mons Durell hath very largely made out to whose Observations I will add two very Learned Men of the French Church who freely own that Liturgies and stated Forms are of very ancient use in the Christian Church and these are the Lord Du-plessis and Mons Daillè both which my Adversary often cites as if they were of his Opinion concerning the late Original of Prescribed Forms But first Mornay Lord Du-Plessis in his Book of the Mass having shewed That the Jews had Forms of public Service adds the First Christians then framed themselves after this manner of Service (d) Mornay of the Mass Book 1. pag. 19. and so runs the parallel between the Jewish and the Primitive Liturgy And a little after he tells us That those Authors who lived about the Year 800 declare That some Forms were used from the beginning and that they had industriously searched out the ancient Service of the Church and they might also in their days possibly find the Books of Rites or Prescribed Forms used in the Church before the Pope assisted by the Power of Great Princes had abolished the use and memory thereof (e) Id. ib. pag 22. Again he owns a very ancient Form of Prayer used at the Offertory (f) Ib chap 5. pag. 36. and saith there was a General Prayer for the whole World and the Estate of the Church which the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Form whereof continued as we have seen it since the time of the Primitive Church and is to be found and read in the Writers of that time (g) Ib. pag 37. He also confesseth in the same place that there was anciently One Form of Salutation and Prefaces Yea in this whole Book he every where owns there were Primitive Forms long before the Roman Church had corrupted their Service and speaking of the Liturgies of the Greek and Latin Churches he doth not so much as pretend they had no prescribed Forms only he notes That though in substance the Service of these Churches do agree together yet we must not imagine there was one and the same prescript Form observed and kept in them all (h) Mornay ut supr chap. 6. pag. 43. We see he grants Forms in all Churches but so as there was some Variety between the Forms of several Churches And now how is it possible that this Great and Learned Man had he not been misinterpreted should be Evidence for my Adversaries Opinion of Liturgies coming in after the Year 500 The like may be said of M. Dailé who understood Antiquity as well as any Writer that ever was of the French Reformed Church Now he frequently cites the Book which goes under the Title of the Apostolical Constitutions ascribed to S. Clement wherein there is a very ancient Form of Liturgy used as we have shewed in the Church of Antioch wherein there are prescribed Forms for all the Parts of Divine Service at large Now this Learned Man thus speaks of that Writer He seems to have compiled his Work a little before the Nicene Council (i) Dailé de Confirm lib. 2. cap. 11. p. 120. And in another place he saith In this Book of the Apostolical Constitutions I think no man who understands any thing of Antiquity can deny but that the Author hath painted out the Form of Ecclesiastical Worship such as it really was in those Times when he Writ (k) Idem de Relig. cultus objecto lib. 3. cap. 12. By which we see that he believed The Ecclesiastical Worship was performed by a prescribed Liturgy even before the First Council of Nice Which appears also to have been his Opinion by his citing this Liturgy of the Constitutions with divers other ancient Liturgies and then concluding thus We our selves truly do not deny but that very many of these Liturgies which we have produced are ancient and written about the very beginning of the Fourth Century though we think that they were corrupted by Additions and Alterations at several times after their first Original (l) Dailé de cult Latin relig lib. 3. cap. 13. p. 359. Wherefore this studious Searcher into Antiquity can be no Witness for my Adversary since he very expresly affirms That these Liturgies were written out for Public use in the very beginning of the Fourth Century that is as soon as the Church became setled by the Conversion of Constantine the Great To these we may add the Testimony of the Helvetian Divines and others who did not Reform after Luther's Pattern Bullenger saith The Church hath Supplications she also hath Holy days and Fasts the Church celebrates the Sacraments according to certain Laws at certain times in a certain place and by a prescribed Form which is according to the received Rules and Vsage of the Church (m) Bulleng Decad. 2. Serm. 1. pag. 38. In which Words he evidently justifies a prescribed Form and owns That the Church hath power to make such a Form and that all her Members are obliged to use it The eminent Lud. Lavater himself published the Common-Prayer-Book of the Tigurine Church which I have seen and read The Title of which is this A Little Book of the Rites and Institutions of the Trigurine Church Wherein is contained The whole Order of their Divine Service with the several Forms by which they Administer the Sacraments and all other Offices which belong to the Ministerial Function (n) De ritib. institutis Eccles Tigurinae Opusculum Edit à Ludovic Lavatero An. 1559. so that they also have stated and prescribed Forms And Zanchius one of the most Learned of the Divines of that Age tells us That Concord and Decency or Order cannot be observed in the Church nor can all things be done decently and in order as S. Paul commands without Rules and Traditions by which as by certain Bonds Order and Decorum is preserved because there is such diversity in Mens Manners such variety in their Minds and such opposition in their Judgments that no Polity is firm unless it be constituted by certain Laws and without a Stated Form no Rites can be preserved (o) Hieron Lanch Tom 7. In Com. praecip cap. Doctrin Christ Loc. 16. So that he pleads for the necessity of such a Form and accordingly all setled Protestant Churches have composed a Liturgy and made Forms of Divine Service for their Clergy to Officiate by So have the Churches of Holland whose Common-Prayer-Book I have seen Translated into the Greek Tongue with this Title (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Impres Ludg. Bat. An. 1648. The Christian and Orthodox Doctrin and Order of the Belgick Churches viz. Their Confession of Faith their Catechism their Liturgy and their Ecclesiastical Canons And in that Part which is their Liturgy there are the Forms of Prayer prescribed for Baptism for the Lords Supper
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. Aâ—es inter Buceri script Anglicaâ— pag. 373 3â—5 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. Sâ—croâ— 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 praeâ—ix 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)
soon see the Danger and Emptiness of that way of Praying which you have admired Which will tend to your own Happiness as well as to the Peace and Establishment both of our Church and State Consider what I say and the Lord give you understanding in all things 2 Tim. II. 7. To the only wise God our Saviour be Glory and Majesty Dominion and Power both now and ever Amen Jude ver 25. THE TABLE PART I.  An. D. Cent. Pag. Introduction Of the Grounds for Liturgies in Scripture   1 Ancient Auhors and Councils Philo Judaeus 60 I. 20 S. Clemens Roman 90  21 Plinius Junior 93  22 S. Ignatius Antioc 99  25 Lucianus Philos 112 II. 29 Justinus Martyr 140  31 S. Irenaeus 179  39 Clemens Alexand. 192  40 Tertullianus 192  43 Hippolitus Martyr 220 III. 54 Origenes 230  55 S. Cyprianus 248  65 Gregorius Thaum 253  72 Paulus Samosat 269  4 Arnobius 303 IV. 78 Constantinus Mag. 312  80 S. Athanasius 326  82 Flavianus Antioc 348  86 S. Cyrillus Hierosol 350  90 S. Jacobi Liturgia   95 Clementis Constit 360 IV. 103 S. Hilarius Pictav eo An.  114 Julianus Apostat 361  115 Concil Laodicen 365  117 Optatus Milevit 368  132 Epiphanius Cypr. 369  136 Gregorius Nazian 370  141 S. Basilius Mag. eo An.  148 ejus Liturgia   167 Pseudo-Dionys Ar 371  174 S. Ambrosius 374  178 S. Hieronymus 378  189 S. Chrysostomus 397  196 ejus Liturgia   208 S. Augustinus 398  225 Concil 3. Carthag eo An.  249 Concil African   257 PART II.  An. D. Cent. Pag. Innocentius I. Papa 402 V. 4 Aurel. Prudent 405  15 Isidorus Peleusiota 412  17 Synesius Episc eo An.  19 Celestinus I. Papa 423  22 Prosper Aquitan 430  27 Johan Cassianus eod A.  30 Concil Ephes Oec 431  34 Petr. Chrysologus 433  37 Socrates Hist Eccles  V.  Sozomenus Hist Eccles 440  41 Theodoretus Hist Eccles    Concil Vineticun 453  52 Vocomus Musaeus 458  62 Sidonius Apollinaris 472  ibid. Petr. Cnapheus Haer. 483  66 Gelasius Papa 492  68 Caesarius Arelatens 503 VI. 76 Concilia Agathens 506  77 Concilia Aurelian I. 507  81 Concilia Epaunens 509  82 Concilia Gerundens 517  ibid. Fulgentius African 518  84 Concil Valentinum 524  86 Concil Vasense 529  87 Benedictus Monach. eo An  90 Justinianus August 530  93 Vigilius Papa 540  97 Concil Nopsvestenum 550  103 Concil Bracarense I. 563  105 Concil Turonicum II. 570  109 Pelagius Papa 577  112 Leander Hispelens 588  114 Gregorius Mag. Pap. 590  119 Leontius Byzantin 594  136 Isidorus Hispalens 603 VII 139 Concil Toletanum IV. 633 VII 143 Concil Toletan V. 636 c.  Concil Tolet. VI 638  158 Concil Tolet. VIII 653   Concil Emeritanum 665  159 Concil Tolet. X. 675  ibid. Concil Constantin in Trullo 680  ibid. Eccles Brit. Sax.  VIII 162 Ecclesia Gallicana   175 Eccles Germanica   182 Agobardus Lugd. 831 IX 188 Adrianus II Papa 868  193 Leuthericus Senon 1004 XI 195 Gregorius VII Papa 1077  197 Paschalis II. Papa   198 Appendix  Chap.  Of the Arguments urged against the Antiquity of Liturgies Chap. IV. 201 Of the Agreement of the Reformed Churches in the Approbation and Use of Liturgies Chap. V. 30â— FINIS 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 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. To Their MAJESTIES WILLIAM AND MARY KING and QUEEN of England c. May it please Your MAJESTIES WHen Heaven had made Your Majesties the happy Instruments of our late Wondrous Deliverance we did with great satisfaction behold Your Royal Cares were first employed upon the securing our Established Religion and the uniting all Your Subjects in the Bonds of Peace And since all Protestant Churches agree in the use of Holy Forms nothing can be more necessary to produce this Vnion among us than the removing all the Exceptions that have been taken against our excellent Liturgy which the pious Members of our Church admire and by which the Moderate Dissenters themselves do frequently worship God But I was surpriz'd to find some in this Juncture when Your Majesties had recommended this to the Care of Your Clergy not only decrying our Liturgy but all prescribed Forms of Divine Service and thereby at once affronting all Reformed Churches as well as ours and rendring Your Majesties gracious Designs of uniting us impracticable Wherefore the Justice and Necessity which obliged me to confute so false and so unseasonable a Charge upon our Primitive and Establish'd way of Worship must be my Apology for presuming to beg your Royal Patronage to these Papers which modestly defend one of the Essentials of our Constitution And your Majesties have given so many Eminent Demonstrations of your steddy Resolutions to preserve this Church that there is no room to doubt of your Gracious Acceptance of these Endeavours nor of our happiness under your most Auspicious Reign the Continuance whereof for the glory of God and the happiness of these Nations is unfeignedly desired and daily prayed for in the significant Words of our incomparable Liturgy by Your Majesties most Humble and most Obedient Subject and Servant THO COMBER THE INTRODUCTION I Doubt not but many who pass under the general Name of Dissenters are so sensible of the out Opposition of the Conforming â—lergy to the late Encroachments â— Popery and the great Secuâ—ity which the Protestant Religion â—n general receives from this Estaâ—â—lished Church that they would â—ake some steps towards a happy â—eace and Vnion for our Common â—ood But we cannot imagin that â—arty who lately Published Mr. â—larkson's two Books the one against â—â—r Episcopal Government the other against our Liturgy to have any inclination to a Reconciliation These are like those among whom Holy David Sojourned who were such Enemies to Peace that when he spake unto them thereof they made themselves ready to battel (a) Psal cxx ver ult For we had long since left off to Write against them and were actually treating of Accommodation with them and while the Truce lasted they not only make hostile Preparations but contrary to the Law of Nature anâ— Nations they boldly commit Actâ— of Violence both against the Persons and Things which of all others are most dear to us (b) Per inducias
illiciti sunt omnes sunt actus bellici sive in personas sive in res Grot. de jur Bell. Pac. lib. 3. cap. 21. §. 6. I shalâ— not question the Character oâ— Learned and Judicious which the Title Page bestows upon the Deceased Author because he whâ—â— was so Learned to make these Collections was so Judicious to suppress them so long as he lived But though I know not the Publisher I am sure he can make claim to neither of those Characters His want of Learning appears in leaving divers Quotations in a wrong place where they have no reference to the Text and several References in the Text to Passages in the Fathers which because the Author did not the Editor could not cite as also in such gross Mistakes both of the Names and Tracts of the Ancients as made it very difficult to guess at the intended Quotations And his want of Judgment appears in his being so hasty to publish these indigested Collections at this unseasonable Juncture that he took no Time nor Care to fill up the imperfect Periods nor cut off the nauseous Repetitions nor to clear the blundered Sentences of this Discourse which ought rather to be styled a Discourse against than concerning Liturgies Had this been a time when their Way of Worship was not Tolerated or when Ours was imposed on them by Penalties there had been some Excuse for this Attempt to prove Forms of Prayer Novel and Vnlawful Had we begun to provoke them by exposing their Extempore Prayers as we could easily do that had been a fair Apology for this daring Vndertaking but when all our Pens for some years past have been employed against the late bold and dangerous Emissaries of the Roman Church who were rather encouraged than opposed by some of these Gentlemen at This Season to become the Aggressors is ungrateful and inexcusable Though their Way be not established but barely permitted as Divorce was to the Jews and for the same Reason too (c) Matt. xix 8. Possum dicere quod permittitur bonum non est Tert. ad uxor lib. 1. pag. 163. yet we have not been willing to bend our Force against it while there seemed any hopes of a successful Treaty But they without any sense of Honour in requital to our Civility have not been content to vindicate their barely permitted Novelties but have attacked our Legal Way of Worship while it is guarded by Laws and is the Public Religion of our National Church 'T is true if this great Searcher of Antiquity had made any New Discoveries to clear the practice of Extempore Praying to have been the constant Vsage of the Primitive Church the Editor had been pardonable for obliging this Age with so rare and as yet so unheard of a Notion But since this Author who to use his own Words seems to have been the best acquainted with the Fathers of any of his Stamp makes no discovery by that Diligence which hath ransacked all the Corners of Antiquity for it (d) Disc concerning Liturgies pag. 180 181. but a few forced Phrases and Irregular as well as Extraordinary Facts to justifie their Prayers but uses the meanest of Artifices to disparage Ours jealous yea judicious Men will be apt to conclude That Conscience is not the only motive to this party for Dissenting nor Indulgence theiâ— only Expectation because they cannot take satisfaction in the Enjoyment of their own Worship unless they may disturb and expose Ours In this Case the sober Dissenters will certainly excuse us for thiâ— necessary Self-defence And ouâ— Friends would justly censure us as the Betrayers of our Establishment if the vain hopes of gaining Men of such a Temper should make us silent under so heavy a Charge For this Discourse pretends to shew That Liturgies are a late and Corrupt Way of Worship and that Prescribed Forms were invented in the Ages of Ignorance and Superstition and have been supported â—y the Laziness of the Clergy and â—he Decay of true Devotion but both Liturgies and all Forms hinder the Pastors from exercising their Gifts and the People from being edified by the Divine Service But all this is not proved by Arguments a pompous shew of Antiquity and a Margen filled with Quotations is the Medium to make out this severe Indictment And possibly those of the Authors Principles who are generally Strangers in the Fathers may think he hath mighty Evidence of his side while those who are skilled in the Primitive Writers may easily discern at first Reading that his Instances are generally false or impertinent and his Inferences forced and fallacious This I have shewed in the following Papers particularly and shall only now make a few general Observations to take off the Advantages which he seems to have by these numerous Allegations First His Testimonies are not so many as they may appear to an hasty and careless Reader because He often repeats the same thing twice yea thrice over in several parts of his Book Thus the same places of S. Augustin are transcribed often as about correcting Prayers (e) Disc of Lit. pag. 48 113. about Barbarisms and Solecisms (f) Ibid. p. 5. pag. 142. about Praying in an House infested with Evil Spirits (g) Ib. p. 66. pag. 121. And He quotes one Passage in Celestine's Epistles thrice (h) Ibid. p. 6. p. 29 138 in like manner he hath dealt with the same places of Justin Martyr S. Basil Innocentius and almost all other Fathers who he thinks have any thing which sounds to the discredit of Liturgy Secondly His Testimonies are not so weighty as might be imagined at first sight because wherever his Margen is very full it is always to prove something which no Body will deny and which is nothing to the purpose As about the Ancients delight to conceal their Mysteries (i) Disc of Lit. pag. 28 29 34 35 36 42. about the Laying on of Hands in divers Offices (k) Ib. p. 51 52. about the Variety of Expressions in the Fathers who only occasionally speak of Baptism (l) Ib. p. 95 c. or of the Renunciation of the Devil (m) Ib. p. 106 107. Now this arguaes a great scarcity of Testimonies concerning the Public and Solemn manner of making Prayers in Christian Assemblies which is the only Point in question Thirdly His Evidence is by no means clear and intelligible and He seems to design it should not serve to inform but amuse because he hath jumbled all Antiquity together and thrown it into confused Heaps placing the later Fathers often before the former and mixing the first last and middle Ages together without any order or coherence yea and citing the same Father in little parcels in sundry and distant places of his Book So that it is almost impossible from him to learn the true Sense either of any Age or any Ancient Writer because those Matters which should help us to judge of this are so designedly
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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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) Aâ—g 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
(q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore that Phrase must not be restrained to Extempore Prayer No nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 speâ—â—ac 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 â—e brings them in with these Prefaces We â—nd in the Prayers or We say often in the Prayer (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. in Cels lib. 4. p. 178 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. pag. 197. And thus it is said in the Prayer or The prudent when he prayeth â—aith (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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. in Cels l. 8. pag. 402. and Praying to him with all the might we have (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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-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 admoâ—eatur 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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
in the Eucharist they could not be confined to any Set Form (o) Disc of Liturg. p. 66. and that it had been a vain thing to tell him of this if it had been the common Form which he knew before (p) Ibid. p. 68. To the first I answer he must learn to distinguish between reciting the Words of a Form which are addressed to God and relating in a Letter the sum and substance of the things desired when the speech is directed to a Man Now these Words are no Prayer nor addressed to God S. Cyprian is only telling Pope Lucius what things in general they asked for him Yet if these had been the Words of this Prayer and made by S. Cyprian the Primate of Africa on this great occasion of the chief Bishop of the Wests being banished it would not follow that because a Primate of Africa on an extraordinary occasion put in one new Petition into the usual Office therefore in ordinary times private Ministers may vary their Prayers every day To his second inference viz. that supposing this were the common Form he need not have told Lucius of it I reply if this were then the African Form to supplicate for Confessors yet Cyprian might rationally give Lucius an account of it First because it is not certain that they at Rome knew the Form of Praying for a Confessor at Carthage or if they did Lucius could not know till he was thus informed that it was used for him So that whether it was the common Form or no it will not serve out Adversaries purpose for let it be noted if S. Cyprian had Prayed to God for Lucius every day Extempore in various and other Words he had told him a manifest Untruth when he said he Prayed for him in these words That he who is perfect c. So that if these had been the words which S. Cyprian used for Lucius as he supposes they must have been a Form and were prescribed for that occasion by S. Cyprian to his subordinate Clergy His second allegation out of S. Cyprian for such occasional Prayers is that there are also mention of such occasional Prayers in the Epistle to Moses and Maximus (q) Disc of Liturg. p. 68. but he durst not cite the place at large which only speaks of private Prayers made by these Confessors in Prison in which S. Cyprian desires to be remembred believing God would grant them whatever they prayed for But there are no petitions mentioned nor any account whether they prayed with or without a Form so that this Quotation is as impertinent as his third instance is fraudulent For he cites S. Cyprian to prove that the Form of Words used in Baptizing was varied by some but he leaves out those Words which utterly spoil his Argument Quomodo ergo quidam dicunt there he draws a line modo in Nomine Jesu Christi c. (r) Disc of Liturg p. 98. But S. Cyprians Words are these How then do some say who are out of the Church yea against the Church that if a Pagan be any where or any ways Baptized in the name of Christ Jesus he may obtain Remission of Sins (s) Cypr. ad Jubai Epist 73. Therefore it was manifest Schismaticks and Hereticks varied from the Form and S. Cyprian disputes against the practice and proves that it makes the Baptism null and void So that our Adversary is at a low Ebb when he would prove an usage of the Church by the practice of its Enemies and founds their Extempore variations upon the Opinions and the use of Schismaticks and Hereticks Gregorius Thaumaturgus An. Dom. 253. § 5. Gregory Thaumaturgus Bishop of Naeocaesarea was Contemporary with S. Cyprian and though he had so extraordinary a measure of the Spirit that he did many Miracles yet he was so much for a Liturgy that we have the Testimony of S. Basil an Unquestionable Witness concerning him that he appointed a Form of Prayer for that Church of Naeocaesarea from which they would not vary in one Ceremony or in a Word Nor would they add any one Mystical Form in the Church to those which he had left them yea when their Offices grew to be deficient by reason of their Antiquity the Bishops who succeeded this Gregory would allow no addition to be made unto that which he had established (t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil de Spir. Sâ—â—cto cap. 29. pag. 221. and it seems he had appointed also a way of singing the Psalms of which the Naeocaesarean Clergy were so extremely tenacious that when S. Basil would have brought in a better Way they opposed him in it and objected that it was not so in the Days of Gregory the Great (u) Basil Epist 63. ad Cler. Naeocaes pag. 843 844. Now how is it possible to have a clearer proof in the World for prescribed Forms than this That in an Age while Miraculous Gifts lasted a Bishop full of the Spirit Appoints a Form of praising God by Psalms and prescribes a Liturgy containing the Ceremonies the words of Prayers and the Form of Consecrating the Holy Sacrament and this Liturgy used for above an Hundred Year without any variation or addition by the Bishops of that Province and all their Clergy This is not like his Arguments squeezed out of misconstrued Phrases or built upon vain Suppositions and remote Conjectures It is plain and undeniable Matter of Fact of which I shall say no more but this That S. Basil doth not relate this as any thing extraordinary in Gregory nor remark it as a thng strange and done no where else so that it is probable most of the Eminent Bishops of each Diocess did compose or collect a Form of Prayer for their several Churches before the ceasing of Miraculous Gifts but our Adversary alas could find nothing of this kind in all his search for Antiquity or at least he was so wise to conceal what he could not pretend to Answer § 6. Not long after this Paulus Samosatenus Paulus Samosatenus Episc Antioch An. Dom. 269. an Heretical Bishop of Antioch was offended at those Hymns which were sung there in honour of our Saviour Christ and composed others pretending that those Hymns which he rejected were written but lately and composed by Persons that lived but a little before his time (w) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 7. cap. 24. From whence it appears that there were prescribed Forms of glorifying and praising our Lord Jesus used at Antioch and written at least as early as the beginning of this Century and some of them perhaps long before (x) See Chap. I. §. 3. of this History Now Psalms and Hymns as we have proved were a very great part of the Primitive Worship and S. Paul had commanded all to Sing as well as to Pray with the Spirit therefore if they Sung by Forms it is probable they prayed by Forms also there being no reason why the one should be performed
Secondly That it was reckoned a pious thing to compose and learn a Form of Prayer which Eusebius would not have commended if Forms had not been esteemed lawful and commonly used in public And Thirdly That those who use Forms of Prayer either by committing them to memory or by frequent use might often lift up their Eyes to Heaven in the repeating of them So that we may grant his Instance of Constantine's Effigies on his Coin represented as in a praying posture with Hands and Eyes lifted up to Heaven (l) Disc of Liturg pag. 10. For since we are sure he used Forms this only shews the folly of his arguing from that posture that such as did use it could not pray by a Form I shall therefore conclude this Evidence with this further Observation That we cannot doubt that Christians had accustomed themselves to pray by Forms in Public before the time of this Religious Prince who was guided by those Bishops who had been Confessors for the Faith and yet composed and used Forms of Prayer and was highly commended for it nor did any of that Age object this as any Innovation in the Christian Worship but Eusebius particularly reckons it as an Instance of his Piety that He ordered all his Army at a certain Signal given by one Man to send up one and the same premeditated Prayer to God (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vita Constant lib 4. cap. 19. Which shews That the Christians did then worship God by premeditated and prescribed Forms and not in the Extempore way which our Adversaries pretend to be the ancient Mode S. Athanasius An. Dom. 326. § 3. Soon after flourished the Great Athanasius in whom there are evident marks of a public Liturgy for we have noted before That the People can never make certain and vocal Responses but only where the public Prayers are made in a known Form but nothing can be plainer than that they made such Responses in the Diocess of Alexandria For he alluding to the ancient Litanick way of Praying declares when he said Let us pray for the safety of the most Religious Emperour Constantius that all the People immediately answered with one Voice Christ help Constantius (n) Athanas Apol ad Constant pag. 156 157. In another Tract he tells us The People mourned and groaned to God in the Church all of them crying to the Lord and saying Spare thy People good Lord spare them give not thine Heritage for a reproach to their Enemies (o) Idem Epist ad Solitar pag. 239. which is an original piece of Litany and a known Form prescribed in Scripture retained in the Primitive Church and continued still in use among us Athanasius also speaks of the Prayers at the Communion as a distinct Office affirming That the People offered up these Prayers with one Voice and without any manner of disagreement adding That in that great multitude there was but one Voice when they unanimously answered Amen (p) Idem Apol. ad Constant pag. 159. From these and other Testimonies the Centuriators confess there were Forms of Prayer used at Alexandria in his time (q) Magdeb. Cent. 4. cap. 6. pag. 412. and the Learned Bishop Bilson observes That the Church in that Age thought it not enough for the Simple to say Amen they knew not to what but requiring and appointing their devout distinct and intelligent Answers Confessions Blessings and Thanksgivings as well in the ministration of the Lords Supper as in other parts of their public Service (r) Bilson's Christ Subjeâ—t part 4. p. 435. So that it is plain he believed there was a Form wherein the Peoples part of all Offices was appointed by the Church which could not be done in the Extempore way I shall only further note That Athanasius orders the People to sing the Psalms in the very Words wherein they are written Affirming That he who thus repeats them may be confident God will hear these Supplications (s) Athâ—n de inter Psalm pag. 303. Which confirms that which was observed before out of Origen That the Church of Alexandria had many Forms of Prayer out of the Psalms As for my Adversary He omits all these passages and as is usual with him he mentions nothing of this Father but two places out of which he hopes to raise some Objections against Forms of Prayer First He saith The Arians who charged Athanasius with burning the Bible do not mention any Indignity done to the Liturgy whence he gathers there was no Liturgy used there ourse of pag. 13. But let it be noted that he falsifies the Historian who saith they charged him with burning The Holy Books (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat. hist lib. 1. cap. 2. pag. 539. in the plural Number which may very well take in the Liturgy as well as the Bible being reckon'd also an Holy or Sacred Book And we have shewed That in the Emperour Constantine's Court there were Books of Prayers as well as of Holy Scripture and therefore it is likely there was so also at Alexandria For even in the relation of the Arians Cruelty there He writes of a Virgin who was very ill treated by them who had her Psalter wherein were many of their Forms of Prayer in her hand (w) Athan. ad Orthod de perfec Arian pag. 171. Secondly He alledges a place out of Theodoret which affirms as he saith That the Devils were more afraid of Athanasius his Prayers than of others and thence concludes that he prayed Extempore (x) Discourse of Liturg. p. 129. I Reply That Theodoret makes no comparison between his praying and others and if he had it would utterly have spoiled his Cause because if the Devils feared Athanasius Prayers more than any others as being Extempore then it would follow that all others had prayed by Forms so that upon that supposition Athanasius had prayed Extempore contrary to the general use of the Church But indeed Theodoret is only saying That the Devil hated him for his fervent Praying and rational Preaching by which he converted many (y) Theoderet hist lib. 3. cap. 8. he makes no comparison between him and others nor doth he say one word to prove that Athanasius did not pray by a Form we therefore will freely grant our Adversary That not Phrases but Devotion of Mind is the Fountain of Prayer And we argue from thence That it was Athanasius his Devotion not his Phrases that was so terrible to the Devil That crafty Spirit is not afraid of new Words or Extempore Phrases it is the inward Devotion of Mind which he dreads and that Athanasius did doubtless exercise to a very high degree even in the use of those Forms which were then allowed and prescribed by the Church Wherefore our Adversary gains nothing by this Father â—â—vianus Antioch An. Dom. 348. § 4. In the time of Athanasius Leontius an Arian was Bishop of Antioch who having altered some few Words in the
Discourse of Liturg p. 138. and challenge any Judicious Eye to discover any thing of a Form therein For if the Reader have not S. Cyril's Works to consult let him look upon Mr. Clarkson's own Book (l) Discourse of Liturg. Marg. of pag. 14◠and of pag. 175 176. where he himself cites out of this very place of S. Cyril very many Ancient Forms which then were almost generally used in all Churches and particularly in the Church of Jerusalem in their public Office And all of those Forms and Responses which he cites being put together make up as clear and full a Liturgy as to the Peoples part especially as can be set down in Writing But since he is so confident we will first observe one thing and then set down the particulars The Observation is this That S. Cyril was here expounding the Liturgy not to Priests who are presumed to understand their part of the Office but to the Faithful who knew the Words of these public Forms which required their distinct Answer but perhaps might not fully understand the Sense and therefore S. Cyril here briefly passeth over the Priests part and only enlarges upon the Peoples share of the Office This being premised Let it be noted that S. Cyril saith to his Auditors That in the Eucharistical Office The Priest cries Lift up your hearts and saith he You answer We lift them up unto the Lord Then the Priest saith Let us give thanks unto the Lord and you reply It is meet and just (m) Cyril Cateches Mystag 5. which are the very Forms that we meet with in S. Cyprian c. above 100 years before But S. Cyril goes on to the Priests part and there indeed only mentions the general Heads for which he gave God Thanks in an Eucharistical Collect. Next he mentions The Seraphic Hymn viz. Holy Holy Holy and speaks of their singing together with Angels and Archangels Then he briefly describes The Prayer of Consecration and The Prayer for all Estates of Men which were said by the Priest alone And after this saith he you say the Lords Prayer which being the Peoples part is there largely expounded And then the Priest said Give Holy things to those that are holy And the People Answered There is one Holy even one Lord Jesus Christ Then one begins to sing that Psalm O tast and see how gracious the Lord is c. And when they receive the Bread and the Cup they are to say at each of them Amen Finally after they have Communicated they must stay for that Prayer Wherein God is praised for making us partakers of these Mysteries (n) Cyril Catech Mystag 5. à pag. 240. ad pag. 245. Vide locum Now if we compare this with those Accounts already produced out of the FATHERS or those that follow or if we examine it by the Ancient Liturgies or by our own Communion Office This is so full a proof of a prescribed Form being then used at the Eucharist in the Church of Jerusalem at that Time that he must have a Forehead of Brass who can deny it Indeed being a popular Discourse made by a Catechist he doth not presume to set down and explain the Priests part but that is made up by the Ancient Liturgy which goes under S. James his Name the Ancient part of which I will now prove was the public Service of the Church at Jerusalem long before S. Cyril's time § 6. The Liturgy of S. JAMES I have often wondred to see many Learned Protestants dispute earnestly against those Ancient Liturgies which now appear to the World under the Name of S. JAMES or others of the Apostles and level all their Arguments against the Titles and the Modern Corruptions of these Liturgies Since neither those of the Roman nor Reformed Church who in this Age defend them are so vain to pretend either that the Titles imposed on them are true with respect to all that is contained in these Liturgies or that all passages in the Modern Copies are Apostolical So that to go about to prove That S. James did not compose that whole Office which is now extant under his Name is highly impertinent since no Body in this Age of any Note hath affirmed it Bellarmin and Card. Bonaventure with others of the Romanists Dr. Hammond and divers Learned Reformed Divines do confess That the Title doth not belong to all that which is now found in this Liturgy and own that divers things have been added to it in later Times But that which we maintain is this That the Liturgy now extant under S. James his Name doth contain many Primitive Prayers and Responses which were the public Forms used at Jerusalem long before S. Cyril's Time And though S. James be not the undoubted Author of this Office yet if it were made and used at Jerusalem before the beginning of this Century that is sufficient to confute him who ascribes the Original of all Liturgies to the Fifth and Sixth Centuries and will fully prove Liturgies to be as Ancient as the setling of Christianity it self which is all that I am obliged to make out Now that the main of this Office was used long before at Jerusalem I think is very clear from the harmony and agreement which we find between S. James his Liturgy and that described by S. Cyril and expounded to the Catechumens of that Church The accounts differ only in some Words and Phrases but agree in many places in the very Syllables and in all places in Method and in the Sense the difference being not so great but it may be well imputed to variety of Copies and to the divers Ages in which the Liturgy was Transcribed every Age delighting to alter somthing in its Ancient Forms as we see in our own incomparable Liturgy which hath been more than once revised and altered in some places But let it be considered First that there were public Forms at Jerusalem in S. Cyrils time and that he who expounded part of them while he was a Catechist could not be supposed to make these Forms therefore they were in use long before him and to prove this let us note that S. Cyril pretends not to be Author of these Offices but when he hath delivered them and expounded them he calls them Traditions that is somthing conveyed down to them from their Fore Fathers and charges them to keep them (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyr. Cat. Mystag 5. pag. 245. So that at least they were made by some Bishop of Jerusalem before that Age T is true Cyril doth not mention S. James his name but he having been the first Bishop of that See and probably laying the Foundation of this Liturgy there soon after Cyrils time viz. within 80 years Proclus Bishop of Constantinople An. 434. calls this Liturgy by S. James his name saying it was so large that Men who were engaged in secular business could not attend it and so desired S. Basil to compose a
shorter Form (p) Proclus Constant Epist de traditione divin Missae ap Bonav de rebus Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 9. And though that and S. Chrysostoms had made this Liturgy to be laid aside at Constantinople yet the famous Council of Trullo (q) Concil Constan â—in Trullo can 32 An. Dom â—80 there cites it under S. James his name as Authentic evidence in a dispute It is therefore most notoriously false in our Adversary to say Balsamon declares in his notes upon this Canon of Trullo that the Greeks under the Patriach of Constantinople and those of the Diocess of the Orient utterly disclaimed this Liturgy 1200 years after Christ (r) Disc of Liturg p. 149. For Balsamon there affirms that S. James the Brother of our Lord being the first Bishop of Jerusalem first delivered an holy Liturgy but the Church of Constantinople having another Form in his time did not receive it nor would he permit the Patriarch of Alexandria to use it in his great Church as he desired though Balsamon confess it was used by those of Jerusalem and Palestine on great Festivals even in his time (s) Balsam not in 32. can Concil in Trull Bever Tom. 1. pag. 193. So that the Greek Church did not utterly disclaim this Liturgy they owned S. James to have been the first Author of it and held Communion with those Churches which used it only having for some Ages used other Forms they thought not fit to permit this Liturgy to be read in their great Church and this confirms my Position viz. That there was anciently such a Form of Prayers used in the Church of Jerusalem But our Adversary objects (t) Disc of Liturg pag. 149. c. ad p. 154. First That this Liturgy is not mentioned by any Fathers or Councils I reply The matter of it and the very Words are mentioned by many Fathers and the very name and Title as we have shewed are found in Proclus and in the Council of Trullo Secondly If S. James made it he saith it ought to be accounted Apostolical and ought never to be added to diminished or altered Answer If S. James had made it for his Church of Jerusalem other Apostles might make other Forms for other Apostolical Churches so that S. James his Liturgy would not have ben necessary for all places But he knows we hold that S. James and the other Apostles Celebrated the Sacrament at first by very short Forms probably using only the Lords Prayer the Words of Consecration and an Hymn of praise and while there were inspired Bishops they added divers Collects Responses and Prefaces which being writ down and remembred brought forth the Primitive Liturgies in the next Age after those Miraculous Gifts of Prayer ceased Now since all Liturgies retain those things which are essential and were certainly Apostolical in other parts of the Office every Church may vary as they find expedient Thirdly He objects that there are many Corruptions and gross Superstitions in this Liturgy Answer We freely confess it and as freely own that none of these are either Apostolical or so much as Ancient But let it be noted these Corruptions crept in by the itch of altering which hath infected every Age and all Churches and by this means brought in all the Corrupt Opinions of every Age into the service of God thus the names of Saints and Ora pro nobis got into the Roman Litanies about the ninth Age or somwhat later but he would be an odd Logician who should argue that the Roman Church had no Litany before the ninth Age because the invocation of Saints came in about that time Since in their Litany there are other Petitions very Pious and agreeable to the Doctrin of the pure and Primitive Church yea the very Phrases are found in the most ancient and Orthodox Fathers and there are yet extant some Manuscript Litanies without any names of Saints So as to this Liturgy there are many Corruptions in it which are modern Additions but there are also many Pious and excellent Prayers agreeable to Scripture and to the best Antiquity yea the very Words of which are found in the Orthodox and elect Fathers Fourthly Therefore whereas he objects that we had better wholly reject this Liturgy because we know not how to separate the Corruptions from what is pure and Orthodox I reply We can easily distinguish between them for we desire to justify no more of this Liturgy than what is agreeable to the Scriptures and to the Doctrin and Practice of the first four Centuries And there is enow of those Primitive passages in this Liturgy to convince any reasonable Man that there was a Form of public Prayers and Praises prescribed and used in the Church of Jerusalem long before S. Cyrils time and therefore I place this Liturgy here as being an Authentic Evidence there were Forms of Prayer allowed in this Age which is all that I am concerned to prove I conclude with Causabon's observation that the Liturgy under the Title of S. James which is now extant is partly true and partly false (u) Causab Exerc. in Baron xvi §. 41. pag. 384. And truly all Du-Plessis his Arguments which our Adversary hath Transcribed do only shew that S. James was not Author of all that Liturgy which now goes under his name (w) Du-Plâ—ssis 〈◊〉 he Mass 〈◊〉 1. chap. 2. but that learned Man never inferred from thence as this Author doth that there were no public Forms used in the Fourth Century for Du-Plessis acknowledges there was an Order and Form for the Celebration of the Sacrament in this Age and shews wherein it differed from the Modern corrupted Roman Mass (x) Idem ibid. Book 1. chap. 4. p. 30. c. and this may suffice to say concerning this Liturgy of S. James § 7. There is another Liturgy in the Apostolical Constitutions ascribed to Clement Clement's Constitutions circ An. Dom. 360. and though the Author to make the Forms and Rites of his own Age look more Venerable falsly claps the Apostles Names upon them yet he is owned by all Judicious Men to have been a Person Learned and well Skilled in Ecclesiastical Offices and is allowed to be worthy of Credit even by our Adversary (y) Disc of Liturg. p. 39. marg p. 110. in that which he relates concerning that time wherein he lived which as we will presently shew must be at least as early as the middle of this Century Wherefore so early we have a clear and undeniable Evidence that there was a prescribed Liturgy and Forms of Prayer used upon all public occasions The particulars are too long to insert but the several Heads are these These Constitutions have the Form of the Deacons warning those who were to Communicate noâ— to come with Malice or Hypocrisy (z) Constit Apostol lib. 2. cap. 58. They mention the alternate Singing of Davids Psalms (a) Ibid. cap. 61. begun at Antioch not long before A
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 â—â—is 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazian in Jul. Orat. 3 p. 102. And Sozomen relating the same thing saith That Julian designed to adorn his Gentile Temples with the Order of Christian-Worship and therefore among other things He appointed prescribed Prayers upon Set-days and Hours (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zoz hist lib. 5. cap. 15. From whence it is as clear as the Sun That in Julian's Time the Christians generally used a Form of Prayer in parts so that the People could make their Responses and that they had proper Forms appointed for certain Days yea for the several Hours of Prayer in every Day and this was so grateful to the People of that Age that this ingenious Apostate in one of his Epistles yet extant advises his Pagan Priests to Pray thrice a day if possible or however Morning and Evening both in private and public and to learn the Hymns of the Gods which were made in older and in later Times adding that there was a Liturgy for these Priests and a Law directing them what to do in their Temples from which they might not vary (k) Julian Fragment Epistol in oper pag 552. So that he had actually brought the Christian Orders into the Service of the Heathen Gods and because Christians had Responses in their Prayers and sung their Hymns alternately so did he appoint the Pagans to pray and sing by such like Forms § 9. The next place must be assigned to the Council of Laodicea The Council of Laodicea An. Dom. 365. which is one of the earliest Synods after the setling of Christianity and its Canons have always been received by the Catholic Church And here we have many convincing proofs that the Christians then had written and prescribed Forms of Prayer and Praise and used a Liturgy in the Service of God First we find an order that the Hereticks who returned to the Church should learn the Creeds (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Laod. Can. 7. Bever Tom. 1. pag. 455. probably the Apostles and the Nicene Creed However they must be Set Forms or otherwise how could Men learn them Secondly In this Council we meet with Canonical Singers who sang out of written Books and none but they are allowed to Sing in the Church (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Can. 15. p. 459. that is as Balsamon well Notes to begin the Hymns for the People were always allowed to follow them and Sing with and after them Now if they had Forms of Praise written in a Book why might they not have their Prayers written also in a Book T is certain they had no great esteem for Extempore composures nor for variety of Forms neither because they forbid the Reading of Psalms composed by private Men in the Church (n) Ibid. Can. â—â— p 480. And enjoyn the use of the same Office for the Evening Prayer at whatever hour of the Afternoon it was said which is the true meaning of that famous Canon about which our Adversary raiseth so much dust The Words of it are these That the very same Liturgy of Prayers ought to be used always both at three in the Afternoon and in the Evening (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 18. Bev. Tom. 1. p. 461. that is saith Balsamon they forbid Men to reject the Prayers which the Fathers had appointed for three in the Afternoon and to make new Prayers of their own on pretence they used them at the time of the Evening Hymns And Zonaras saith The Council rejects new Prayers and allows none but such as had been approved in a Synod nor would they permit Men to use Prayers of their own making in public but the same Prayers which had been delivered down to them were to be said in every Assembly (p) Balsam Zonar apud Beveâ—eg ibid. To which I will only add this That the whole day being divided by the hours of Prayer as it had formerly been among the Jews the Morning hour took in the time from Six till Nine The Noon-hour of Prayer was said any time between Nine and Three and The Evening-hour Prayer might be said between Three in the Afternoon and Six at Night soon after which was the time for Singing those Hymns at the first lighting of Candles and it seems some put these two last Offices together and having said the usual Forms for Evening Prayer at Three of the Clock when they were to Sing the Evening Hymns at Candles lighting Composed new Forms of Evening Prayer and used them in the Church which the Synod forbids and enjoyns the same Liturgy or Forms of Prayer which had been used in the Afternoon to be repeated over again with the Hymns in the Evening Now this Canon made in the Eastern Church where Liturgies were then commonly used must be expounded of a Set and prescribed Form and therefore divers of the Presbyterian persuasion have confessed that Liturgies have been used for at least 1300 years (q) See Falkner's Vindic. of Liturg. pag. 140. And Smectymnuus derives the use of them from this Canon and believes the sense of it to be that none should vary but always use the same Form (r) Smectym Answer to remonstr p. 7. But our Adversary resolves right or wrong that Liturgies shall not be grounded upon this Canon Wherefore first he Assigns a date to the Council later than he ought for he saith it was in the latter end of the fourth Century (s) Disc of Lituâ—g p. 61. whereas it was held soon after the middle of it Secondly He reserves this Canon to the latter end of his Book not daring to produce it till he had prepossessed his Reader with a false Notion That there were no Liturgies in this Age (t) Ibid. p. 155. Then he recites the Words of it wrong putting the Evening before the Ninth hour (u) Ibid p. 156. And in another place he brings in Caranzas false Translation of this Canon who leaves
the Sacrament or in saying his public Office of Prayers Wherefore we conclude that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Deacons who as Balsamon notes were to observe the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or loud pronunciation of the last Words in the Collects by the Priest and with this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signifie the prescribed Office But this will be more clear if we consider the word joyned with it viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 â—psorum pâ—â—nitentiam 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eâ—â—phan in Anâ—orat 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naz. Orat. 3. pag. 101. which Forms most certainly were Forms of Prayer and of Administration of the Sacraments derived as Nazianzen believed from Ancient Tradition and retained to his very time and to imitate the Doctrins we see Julian set up Schools and Lectures to imitate these Forms he appointed a Form of Prayers in parts Secondly Nazianzen did believe this way of Praying by Forms to be very agreeable to the Gospel because he there saith That these Forms of Prayer and other things before mentioned were clearly belonging to the good Order of the Christians (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. ibid. So that we may be sure both of the use of Forms of Prayer in this time and of Nazianzens approving them This Evidence for the Antiquity of Liturgies my Adversary suppresseth but cites two other places out of Nazianzen which he would perswade us will make out the use of Extempore Prayers First he tells us that Nazianzen being to discourse of the holy Ghost prayeth that he may be enabled thereby for the expressions (t) Disc of Liturg. p. 59. The words are these That being to speak of the Spirit he may have the presence of the Spirit and that it may give him such a faculty of discoursing as he desires at least such as is suteable to the occasion (u) Nazianz. Orat 44. p. 409. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he translates in the plural number Give me such expressions But let it be noted that this is not properly a Prayer but a Rhetorical Apostrophe in the middle of an Homily by the polite style whereof we may conclude it was composed in his Study before he he came to the Church and therefore both the Prayer and Homily were made in his Closet however being part of a Sermon this is nothing at all to the Churches public Prayers about which we dispute For many Conformists do use such Apostrophes to God or Christ or to the holy Ghost in their Sermons yet none will argue from thence that we have no Liturgy in England Secondly He pretends that Nazianzens Father prayed at the Eucharist by the Spirit and shortned the usual Prayers there when he was sick And of this he his so proud that he quotes it twice (o) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 60 pag. 76 77. But he gives us only the Epitome of this story out of the Centuriators which he imagined sounded more to his purpose Therefore we will give the Fathers own Words who saith His sick Father awaking the Night before Easter first moved himself a little and then more strongly soon after he called on his Servant by Name with very low Voice to give him his Garments and lend him his Hand the Man came with amazement and did readily obey him and leaning on him as on a Staff he imitated Moses upon the Mount and staying up his Hands in the posture of Prayer he readily performed the former and latter part of the Mysteries of the People in few words indeed because he was weak in Body but with a Mind it seems very perfect O admirable Without a Pulpit on the Pulpit a Sacrificer without an Altar a Priest at a distance from the things to be consecrated but these things were made present to him by the Holy Spirit as he knew though those who were present did not see them After this repeating the accustomed Words of the Eucharist and Blessing the People he went to Bed again (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Nazâ—â—at 19. pag. 305. After which he relates how he Recovered and went to Church and solemnly celebrated the Sacrament with the whole Church on the first Sunday after Easter Where I think the Centuriators and our Adversary both mistake the point in supposing the old Bishop to do all this in the Church for there is nothing in the Relation to shew that he went out of his Chamber and his being without a Pulpit an Altar and the things to be consecrated viz. the Oblations of the People brought to the Church do make it plain this was a private Communion celebrated in his Chamber to some few that were about him yet he performed that as nigh the public Forms as he was able And though he abbreviated the long Prayers before the Consecration out of meer necessity yet he kept strictly to the Words of Consecration as he was wont to do he did not alter that Form in the least So that a Man may as well argue We have no larger Office for the Communion in our Liturgy because we have a shorter Office for the Sick as our Adversary can infer from this short way of private Communicating in a case of necessity and in a Chamber That there was no Form of Prayers for public Communions in that Age yea we see by the weak old Bishop 's coming as near the Public Form as he was able and in the most Essential part keeping close to it that there was a Public Liturgy then And Secondly Our Adversary both in his Greek * Note that in citing the Greek after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he draws a Line to conceal his being without a Pulpit c. and goes on thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. See the Marg. of Discourse of Liturg. pag. 77. and Latin omits all those Words viz. of his being without a Pulpit an Altar and things to be consecrated on purpose first to abuse this Reader into the mistake of the Bishops being in the Church to which we see he did not come till a Week after And then secondly he would make us believe that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These things refers to his abbreviation of the Office to his Short Words that so he may pretend Those Words were given to him by the Inspiration of the Spirit which is a manifest falsifying of the Father who saith The Pulpit Altar and Consecrated things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These things were made present to him by the Holy Ghost as Nazianzen believed though no Body there saw them which is a flight of Rhetorick usual in him but upon the gross perverting this Expression all our Adversaries Argument of Expressions and Words in Prayer being given by the Holy Ghost doth depend I beg the Readers Pardon for this Excursion which clearly demonstrates that this Adversary of mine did wilfully misinterpret the Greek after he had read it and cited it with a designed omission to hook in an Argument for his false Notion of praying Extempore by the Spirit but when genuine Antiquity affords no better Testimonies than this They have more use of their Wit than of their Integrity But I doubt not all impartial Men will gather from this very
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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naz. Orat. 19. pag. 313. And this may suffice for Gregory Nazianzen S â—ASIâ— 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. Naeocâ—sar 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 〈◊〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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. 〈◊〉 lio â—atr pâ—g 4 5. Liturg. 〈◊〉 â—â—d pag 70. Câ—â—râ—â—t Apostol â—iâ— 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 fâ—rth the Spiritual fruit of good Works (y) 〈…〉 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. Jaâ—â—â— ut suâ—r â—â—g 89. item Condit Apoâ—â— â— 8. cap. 13. cap. 18. Lit. 〈◊〉 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
when we consider the exact agreement betwixt this and the ancient Litanies this eminent Instance out of the genuine Works of so great a Bishop in these early Times wherein we see he refers his Friend to known and public Offices both proves those parts of the ancient Litanies to have been Primitive and shews that there was a Litany in S. Basil's time Thirdly There are many Evidences that he approved of Forms of Prayer for he commends the way of praying by conjoyned Voices in Responses where he saith That a Prayer wherein there are not conjoyned Voices is not half so strong as otherwise it would be (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil Ep. 68. pag. 856. So that he thought Forms of Prayer in which the People joyned their Responses to the Priests Words were the most effectual way of praying and he saith Their bearing a part or share in any Prayer made it far more profitable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas Ep. 392. pag. 1174. Therefore he esteemed this way of praying which can only be performed in prescribed Forms would be soonest heard by Almighty God And for this Reason he made a Canon or Form of Prayer for his Monks charging them whensoever they prayed to use their Voices and also to continue until the last Prayer of the Canon (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas asciet Tom. 2. p. 243 244. and he orders them to reject those thoughts whith took off their Minds from the Canon of Prayer that is the prescribed Form which was to be the Canon or Rule by which he appointed they should always pray And so great a lover he was of Forms that he ordered those Monks should be rejected who would not learn the Psalms by Heart (e) Basil regul brev pag. 549. which no question were to be some of their Forms of Prayer and Praises We will conclude with one Observation viz. That our Adversary grants there was an Hymn for Candle-lighting in S. Basil's time (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Disc of Liturg p. 361. but he omits that the Father there saith It was a certain Form of Words used by the People so long before his time that he knew not which of the Ancients composed it but yet none blamed the People for using this old Form which was Let us praise the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit of God (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil de Sp. Sancto cap. 29. pag. 220. All which Passages do abundantly prove the Use of Forms in S. Basil's Time but this Author concealing most of these and misrepresenting the rest hath sought out some other places of S. Basil by which he would confute this our Assertion § 14. Which Objections we will first fairly produce and then plainly answer Objection first S. Basil saith he was against writing down Mysteries and so could not be for written Forms and this he proves by his Epistle to Meletius wherein S. Basil saith he will not fully write his Message having a trusty Messenger who might relate it (h) Disc of Liturg. p. 37. I reply This was only private business to a friend and no way concerns Divine Offices wherefore the Allegation is impertinent Secondly He cites his Book de Spiritu Sancto where he saith The words of Consecration upon the taking up of the Eucharistical Bread and the Cup of Blessing which of the Saints hath left in writing We are not content with that which is Recorded in the Apostle and Gospels but we say other things before and after as having great efficacy in the Mystery taking these things from unwritten Tradition (i) Basil de Sp. Sancto cap. 27. Tom. 2. p. 210. 211. And hence he infers that there were no written Forms in S. Basil's time yea he calls this direct Evidence that there could be no such Forms in writing and repeats this fraudulent Argument four several times according to his custom when he thinks he hath gotten a considerable testimony (k) Dâ—sâ— of Lituâ—g p. 38. pag. 73. pag. 7â— pag. 109. wherefore I shall answer it fully And First it doth not well become our Adversary who gives such Odious names to those who cite any spurious Writings to lay such mighty stress upon a Tract which he himself suspects to be none of S. Basils works (l) Ibid p. 110. and which all those Authors whom he cites to prove his Liturgy to be Forged do generally reject as a Forged piece (m) Eraâ—m praes ad suam veâ—s istius libri loci censura p. 121. Riveâ—i censur p. 305. Scultet medul pag. 1054. Ush e Dailè in isto Authore pag. 110. it is no great proof of his own sincerity to fetch his topping Argument and urge it over and over till the repetition become Nauseous out of a Tract that he believed to be suspicious at least But Secondly I will take no advantage from hence for after all I see no Reason to deny the piece to be Genuin but let it be as he pleases it maks nothing for his purpose For S. Basil doth not affirm that these Eucharistical Prayers were not written in his time but that they were derived from an unwritten Tradition Now this sufficiently proves that anciently they were Forms because it is impossible for an Extempore Prayer that is to be daily or often varied to be conveied down from our Fore-Fathers by Tradition whatever is so delivered must be a Form of words either written or learned by heart and so taught by the Elder to the younger Priests Wherefore even in this Sense these additional Prayers in the Sacramental Administrations were Forms made by the most Primitive Fathers and taught to their Successors and so conveyed down by oral Tradition But Thirdly this is his Fallacious perverting of S. Basils Words and not the true Sense of them For the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwritten Traditions here spoken of by S. Basil are not things which never were written down by the Fathers as he falsly pretends Because both he and divers of the Ancients had written about many of the Rites and Usages which he there calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwrirten Traditions an Hundred times As for instance about the hours of Prayer turning to the East when they prayed and about the Prefaces before the Eucharist c. But S. Basil only saith these things were not written in Scripture they were not enjoyned there those Saints or holy Men viz. the Apostles and Evangelists had not left Orders in Scripture for these Rites and Forms which must be his meaning because he goes on and saith We are not content with that which is Recorded in the Apostles and the Gospels That is besides the words of institution there were Forms of Prayer and Praise before and after in the Sacraments delivered down from the Primitive Fathers which he doth not say were never writ down by them but were not writ in Scripture For S. Basil calls the Scripture by
way of Eminence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all Rites and Forms not set down there though they were writ down by the Fathers he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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.
but if it be S. Basil's it will not help his Cause because these are Directions for the Monks private Prayers in their Cells and therefore do not belong to the Public Offices about which we dispute yet even in that Book he makes Forms both of Praise and Prayer for their private use and though he allow his Monk to collect Sentences of Scripture also for this purpose yet he would have those Sentences put into a Form and he was to offer that Form up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as devoutly as he was able by which we not only learn that S. Basil much approved of these Forms but we see that the Phrase of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about which he made such a stir in Justin Martyr doth properly signify The using a Form of Prayer with all possible devotion I shall only add That when these Monks prayed all together they had a Form also which S. Basil calls their Canon or Rule as we shewed before Lastly Out of the same Tract he observes that S. Basil would have his Monk in Prayer to have his Mind upon God alone and nothing else (t) Basil Constitut Mon. cap. 1. pag. 671. and he fancies this was very hard to do if the Monk had his Book to mind and thence he infers they had no Prayer Books (u) Discourse of Liturg. p. 121. But we may remember that S. Basil ordered his Monks to get the Psalms by Heart and if they got their other Prayers also by Heart that would utterly spoil his Inference Yet suppose they did read their Forms by frequent use they would soon be so perfect in them that a few glances sometimes on their Books would serve to help them to repeat them right and not divert their Mind from God at all And we who use our Common Prayer know by Experience that the Liturgy being early become familiar to us we have nothing to mind but only God when we pray whereas those who pray Extempore have their Fancy so busie in inventing new Phrases and Matter and their Thoughts so taken up with what they have said are saying and are to say next that they cannot steddily keep their Mind upon God And the Congregation also are so busie in observing the new Phrases that they cannot have such fixed Thoughts as they who being accustomed to their well known Forms have no other thing to do than to watch their own Hearts and keep them close to the Duty they are about And this may suffice to confute all his far fetch'd Objections out of S. Basil and to shew they are all of them very insignificant § 15. But we must carry this Matter further and will prove that S. Basil The Liturgy of S. BASIL not only approved Forms but made a Liturgy himself which we shall make out by sufficient Evidence in every Age since it was Composed First His dear Friend Nazianzen who knew him best of any Man saith in his Encomium That the Prayers which he composed were the Ornament of his Throne (w) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Naâ— Orat. 20 p. 34â— Secondly The Life of S. Basil said to be writ by Amphilocius tells us He prayed to God for such Grace Wisdom and Vnderstanding as might enable him to offer up the unbloody Sacrifice in Words of his own by the direction of the Holy Ghost And the Author saith our Saviour appeared to him telling him His Request was granted whereupon he first pronounced and then writ down the Liturgy which bears his Name (x) Vita Basil per Amphilâ—c inter Opera D. Basilii I shall not undertake to justifie the Miracle that may have been added by some Admirers of this Liturgy but the Matter of Fact on which it was grounded was always taken for a certain Truth in very ancient Ages and as I need not this Testimony so I had not cited it at large but to check our Adversaries Confidence who cites Bishop Jewel saying That Basil besought God he might celebrate with Prayers of his own making (y) Disc of Lit. Marg. pag. 73. by which he hopes to abuse his Reader into thinking that Basil desired to make daily new Extempore Prayers Whereas Bishop Jewel refers to this Passage in S. Basil's Life and it was a Liturgy of his own Composing that he begged abilities for We proceed to Proclus who was Bishop of Constantinople within fifty years after S. Basil's Death and who personally knew S Chrysostom and he saith That S. Basil seeing Mens sloth and degeneracy made them weary of a long Liturgy though he thought there was nothing unnecessary or tedious in that of S. James which was used before yet to prevent the weariness of Priests and People He delivered a shorter Form (z) Proclus de tradit divin Lâ—â—urg The reason is fair and the Authority of this Writer being so near S. Basil's Time is very weighty Again Petrus Diaconus Contemporary with Fulgentius who lived in Africa not very much above an 100 years after S. Basil's Death cites this Liturgy as an undoubted piece of his genuine Works in his Dispute against the Pelagians in these Words S. Basil Bishop of Caesarea in his Prayer made at the holy Altar which all the Eastern Church useth among other things saith Grant O Lord of Hosts our defence we beseech thee that the evil may be made good and those that are good keep them in their goodness (a) Petrus Diac. de Incarnat c. 8. From whence we note first That these Words are still in that very Liturgy which bears S. Basil's Name Secondly That within little more than one Hundred years after S. Basil's Death it was used as S. Basil's Liturgy by all the Eastern Church and known even in Africa by that Name Thirdly That it was of so great Reputation and Authority then and there as to be quoted for unquestionable Evidence even against Hereticks Wherefore we conclude it was certainly of his Composing it being morally impossible that any Forgery in his Name should be so early and generally received in the Eastern Church where he was so well known and should get such Credit among the Africans that even Hereticks durst not except against it To this we may add Leontius a Monk of Constantinople who lived in the same Century with Fulgentius and cites this Liturgy for Evidence against Nestorius (b) Lâ—ont adv Nestor lib. 3. An. â—90 In the very next Age it was quoted as good Authority against the Error of the Armenians by this August Title The Mystical Service delivered to us in Writing c. and then they cite a Passage of S. Basil's Liturgy as that which was daily used in their Church (c) Concil 6. Constant in Trull Can. 32. An. â—â—0 Beveâ— Tom. I. pag 192. We need proceed no lower because the whole Greek Church gives constant and universal Testimony to it ever since as a genuine Composure of S. Basils However we will hear our Adversaries Objections
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 â—ational 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 Prayâ—r for the Faithful (s) 〈…〉 Apolâ—◠〈◊〉 câ—p 5. â—â—â—p â— câ—p 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) 〈…〉 Dâ—acâ—â—â— pepulâ—â— ut pradâ—x 〈…〉 Câ—n lit Aâ—ostâ—â— 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 â—â—â—â—stom 〈…〉 pâ—g â—â— 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) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 Peaâ—e (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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.
their Time were to be prayed for but the New Editions of these Liturgies have no Emperours or Bishops Name at all only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 necessarâ—a sunt Verba quibus commoveanâ—ur inspiciamus quid pâ—tamuâ— 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) Oâ—secratiâ—â—rum quoque sacerdâ—talium Sacramenta respiciamus quae ab Apostolis tradita in tâ—to modo atque in omni Catholicâ Ecclesiâ Uniformiter Celebrantur â—â— legem credendi lex statuat supplicanâ— Aug. de Eccles dog cap. â—â— 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 hâ—ed 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 Antâ—stâ—tes 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) Aâ—g de 〈…〉 7. â—â—g â—â—â— 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 〈◊〉 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
Diocesses which indeed shewed their want of Judgment but did not make the Baptism Null This is the true case From whence I observe First That no Argument can be drawn from hence for the inferior Clergies choosing their own Forms or being at liberty to Pray Extempore for if they Baptized any they were obliged to use the Forms which their own Bishop had chosen Secondly Let it be noted These Additional Prayers were Forms composed by others as S. Augustin plainly declares nor doth he censure these well-meaning Brethren of his for using Forms but for using silly or Heretical Forms which shews that the Churches way of Praying then even in occasional Offices such as Baptism was by Forms and had it been otherwise the putting these Forms to an Extempore Office had been like setting a piece of New Cloth into an Old Garment wherefore we may reasonably suppose the old Office which contained the Essentials of Baptism that is the Lords Prayer the Renunciation the asking them the Creed the Prayer of Consecration and the Hymns were all certain Forms but some Weak and Ignorant Bishops thought this not enough and would needs add new Composures to their ancient Office but they had so ill success in this attempt that I make no doubt this gave occasion to the African Church at this very time to Ordain that no more Prayers should be added to any part of the Liturgy which is the Sense of that Canon of Carthage as I will presently shew Thirdly I must remark also that the Gift of Prayer must have been ceased in Africa before this time because had there been such a Gift the Bishops must have had it and then neither would the Unskilful or Heretical have composed needless Forms nor these weak Bishops have wanted any sort of Forms their very chusing such composures shews they could not make Prayers Extempore Though they were Ignorant yet miraculous Gifts would have enabled these as well as those of greatest learning to make Orthodox Prayers on the sudden And if the Gift of Prayer was ceased as it was then and is much more so now it will follow they needed Forms as we also now generally do Lastly Let it be considered the Fact was irregular S. Augustin censures it and the Church saw the ill Consequences of it yea and made a Canon to restrain this mischievous liberty for the Future therefore this must not be urged for a precedent to us to leave Ministers at liberty either to Pray Extempore or choose their own Forms that were to make Faults and things of ill Consequence a pattern for our imitation Thirdly He objects that S. Augustin saith some Bishops and Ministers called upon God with Solecisms and Barbarisms and he Tauntingly asks if these Barbarisms were prescribed (s) Disc of Liturg. p. 51. again p. 132. But he forgets that the holy Father saith there None ought to deride them for this when he twice makes himself Merry with this Rare Argument The notorious Fallacy whereof will be exposed if we consider that he wilfully mistakes these Solecisms and Barbarisms for false Grammer and downright Non-sense that so he might fairly pretend that no Church could prescribe such Forms But S. Augustin explains his own meaning and discovers our Authors craft when he defines Solecism to be when we do not duly joyn Words that are rightly put together and a Barbarism to be the pronouncing a Word with other letters or another sound than the Latins used (t) Aug. de doctrin Christ lib. 2. cap. 1â— Tom. 3. pag. 7. and he instances in the Peoples singing Floriet for Florebit in the Latin Psalms Yea in the place cited by my Adversary he describes the Persons Guilty of these Solecisms and Barbarisms to be such as did not understand the Words they pronounced or could not rightly distinguish them (u) Aug. de Catec rudibus cap. 9. Tom. 4. pag. 218. Now this must refer to reading Prayers out of a Book which some of the Ignorant Africans could not do so acurately after the Roman mode but that as S. Augustin here observes Those who came from the Schools of Grammarians and Orators derided them for this false and harsh pronunciation of their Latin calling these mistakes Solecisms and Barbarisms But the devout Father excuses these Rustical Pastors and blames those who censured them because God minds the inward devotion more than the pronunciation So that upon the whole case we may determin That this instance is so far from proving Extempore Prayers were then used or that there was no written Liturgy that it first shews these could not be Extempore Prayers because such as could not pronounce Latin truly could certainly not Pray on the sudden in that Language Secondly It proves there was a Liturgy written in Latin so elegant that though the African Pastors and People too understood it yet by reason of their rough and harsh Dialect they could not Read and pronounce it so exactly as to please the learned Criticks However God did accept of these Forms thus Rustically pronounced when they were said with true Devotion So that when our Adversaries designed Sophistry is laid open this proves an Argument against himself Fourthly We are told out of S. Augustin that one of his Presbyters being desired in his absence to Pray in a House infested with evil Spirits Went and Celebrating the Sacrament there Prayed with all his Might that this Vexation might cease and by Gods mercy it ceased presently (w) Orans quantum potuit ut Cessaret illa Vexatio Deo protenus miserante Cessavit Aug. de Civ Dei lib. 22. cap. 8. Now from hence he draws two Inferences in two distant parts of his Book First That the Prayer for all Estates of Men at the Eucharist was not a Form (x) Disc of Liturg. p. 66. Secondly That there was no Form of Prayer for this occasion (y) Ibid. p. 121. And he twice Transcribes the passage at large supposing no doubt it is unanswerable But if the Reader look into his Quotation he will easily observe First That the Sacrament was over before this Prayer began and that this was not the Prayer for all Estates of Men beeause neither the House nor the Devil can be ranked under that head but it was a Prayer upon that particular occasion for he Prayed that God would cause that Vexation to cease I confess he puts a stop after Quantum potuit which makes it seem as if this Prayer was a part of the Eucharist but this pointing is false and his own invention For S. Augustin's Words shew that the Sacrament was first Celebrated and then came this Prayer wherein he desired as earnestly as he could that this Vexation might cease So that this passage is impertinently cited to prove that the Prayer for all Estates of Men in the Eucharist was not a Form Secondly If we grant that Quantum potuit signifies according to his Ability and intimates that he Prayed Extempore upon
this Extraordinary occason All which can be gathered from hence is that they had no Form of Prayer in Africa then for casting the Devil out of an House But that is no Argument to shew they had no Forms for public Worship on ordinary occasions since we have no Form for this extraordinary contigency but none must Argue from thence That we have no Common Prayer Yet Thirdly I see no Reason to grant that Quantum potuit signifies any more than that this Presbyter Prayed with as Vigorous a Devotion as he was able or with all the powers of his Soul because it is not a long-winded Prayer nor variety of new invented Phrases that the Devil fears but an earnest and fervent Prayer And we could give many Instances where this Phrase is used only to denote doing a thing earnestly and devoutly one Example shall suffice at present where the Jews who always in that Age praised God by Forms are commanded when they praise God to exalt him as much as they can (z) Benedicentes Dominum exaltate illum quantum potestis Ecclesiastic 43. in sine by which the Son of Syrach did not intend to oblige every ordinary Man to make an Extempore Form of Praise in the highest strains of Rhetoric but only enjoyned them when they used the Forms of Blessing to say them with all the joy gratitude and devotion imaginable And if we explain the Phrase thus then this Passage will not suffice to prove so much as that they had not a Form for dispossessing Houses or Persons infested with Evil Spirits Lastly He saith Augustin did not take any offence at the Varieties used in the Sacrament though they were more than could be known (a) Discourse of Liturg. pag 82. and for this he cites the Retractations which mention his Epistles to Januarius and a Passage out of his Epistle to Jubaianus intimating that every Bishop in these Cases might do as he pleased But all this is manifest Sophistry For whereas he applies this to the Eucharistical Prayers S. Augustin is not treating of any Variety in them Yea he himself cites S. Augustin in one of these Epistles affirming That there were many things in the Sacrament universally observed without any variation and these were Instituted by the Apostles (b) Disâ—ourse of â—â—turg p. 173 Marg ex Aug. ad â—anuar Ep. 118. that is the Prefaces Prayer of Consecration c. as we noted before these were Forms and not to be varied from But the Variety which S. Augustin speaks of is a Variety in Rites and Ceremonies in the Churches of divers Provinces and Countries these he Instances in and affirms there was great Variety in these and that every Bishop in these Matters had power to appoint such Rites as he thought to edification S. Augustin being only a Bishop no Primate or Metropolitan would not impose the Rites used in his own Church upon any But as to the main parts of this Service he often observes all Churches did and ought to agree in them Wherefore it shews a want of better Arguments when he is forced to urge the Variety of Rites in divers Provinces to prove that they varied the Prayers themselves every day which false Notion neither he nor any of his Friends have or can make out And this may suffice for S. Augustin's Judgment and Practice both which are clearly on our side § 23. The Third Council of Carthage An. Dom. 398. We should here have concluded this Century but only our Adversary produces some African Canons and pretends they shew there was no prescribed Form at this Time in that Church First He cites the 23d Canon of the Third Council at Carthage (c) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 44. in these Words That no Man in Prayers shall name either the Father for the Son or the Son for the Father And when they are at the Altar the Prayer shall always be directed to the Father And what Prayers-soever any shall Copy out for himself he shall not use them unless he first debate them with his Discreeter Brethren (d) Concil Carthag 3. Can 23. Bin. Tom. 1. par 1 pag. 575. This Canon evidently consists of Three parts The first to correct the irregularity of naming the Father for the Son or the Son for the Father and hence my Adversary infers That those who were guilty of this Fault did not use prescribed Forms and supposes the Church left them at liberty for the future to use what they thought sit only imposing this on them Not to name the Father for the Son (e) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 45. I Answer This first Clause for any thing appears in the Canon is meant of private Prayers and so is nothing to our Question it was a Fault committed by private Christians who had the misfortune to Copy out Heretical Forms But suppose the Council refers to those Ignorant Bishops lately mentioned in S. Augustin who for the use of their own Diocesses writ out Heretical Forms not knowing them to be such wherein those who held Heterodox Opinions about the Trinity had altered these Names in favour of Sabellianism or Arianism These were Forms and no doubt prescribed by these Bishops to their own Clergy but the Council rejects all these new Forms and reduceth them to the old Liturgy which they were sure was Orthodox and wherein we see the Prayers began with an Address to the Father and concluded through the Son so that they order None shall begin with the Sons Name or end with the Fathers However it cannot well be understood how this Council could prevent such Ignorant persons from making this Mistake but by obliging them to use the Churches Forms where they take it for granted these Names were always right placed So that in effect this prohibits all new Forms of Prayer and binds them to the Old ones wherein such Instances could not be made And our Adversary supposes this Council to be extreme Silly in saying they left such Men as he grants (f) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 46. were fit to be confined to prescribed Forms because they could neither make nor judge of Prayers to their liberty to do as they thought fit this makes the Canon Non-sense for how should these Men know when they ought to name the Father and when the Son and exposes the whole Council who could no way prevent this Mistake but by casting away all such new Forms and confining all Men to the Old ones and without supposing such we cannot make Sense of the Canon which Supposition is not made at random because we have abundantly proved out of Tertullian S. Cyprian Optatus and S. Augustin who was one of this Council that there were Forms used of Ancient time in the African Church The second Clause of the Canon refers to the public Prayers all which and not only those peculiar to the Eucharist were then made at the Altar And these Prayers were then in the public Forms as
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