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
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
or you remember the Words of my Prayer this day Twelve-month or indeed this day Seven-night Under this Head we may place all his needless Quotations to prove that Catechumens and Penitents were excluded from these Mysteries (c) Discourse of Lit. p. 35. c. For we grant the Matter of Fact but the natural Inference from thence is not that they durst not write Forms as he weakly pretends but that they used constant Forms and these being Mysteries above the Capacity of the Unbaptized they feared by often hearing they might learn them which they fancied was a profanation of their Mysteries But had their Prayers been in new Phrases every day there had been no need to exclude any Body they might have challenged them all that were present to remember any thing if they could This silence and secrecy therefore was to secure their Forms from the knowledge of the Unbaptized Though as the Heathens writ their Mysterious Prayers and yet concealed them by charging the Priests to keep both Books and Forms from the knowledge of the Un-iniated so might the Christians also well enough keep their Written Forms secret by charging the Priests and Faithful not to discover them and excluding the Catechumens whensoever these Forms were used Secondly He would prove that he who Officiated was left to his liberty by some general Expressions in S. Chrysostom â—â—scourse of 〈◊〉 pag. 66. viz. The Priest in the Mysteries offered up Prayers for them (e) Chrysost Hom. 41. in 1 Câ—r p. 524. and The Priest of God stands to offer the Prayers of all he trembles when he offers up Prayers for thee (f) Id. hom 15. in Hebr. p. 515. I Answer That S. Chrysostom in the former place cites the Words of those Prayers and in the second evidently supposeth a Set Form And when he hath made it clear there can be no Prayers offered up to God but Extempore then this will be an Argument till then it is extremely frivolous Thirdly He thinks the Prayers at the Eucharist were not written and could not be gotten by heart being ordinarily very long which he proves by Chrysostom's saying The Priest stands not bringing Fire but the holy Spirit and makes a long Supplication that the Grace of God might fall upon the Sacrifice (g) Chrysost de Sacerd. Orat. 3. p 16. To which I Reply that it is nothing to the purpose how long this Prayer was because it is certain it was a Form and was written in so many Words in the Apostolical Constitutions where we find this very Petition to which S. Chrysostom alludes placed in the middle of the Prayer of Consecration That God would send his Holy Spirit upon this Sacrifice (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Constit Apost lib. 8. cap. 17. Lit. Chrysost in Eucholog p. 77 Lit. Basil ibid. pag. 169. which is also in S. Cyril and both in the Liturgy of S. Chrysostom and S. Basil So that this Long Prayer being written before Chrysostom's Time need not to be got by Heart and therefore all his Inferences from that false Supposition do fall to the ground Nor can he pretend that the Priests bringing the Holy Spirit here mentioned is meant of his praying by the Spirit that is as he thinks Extempoâ—è because the Spirit here is the thing prayed for and that which the Priests Prayers brought down upon the Christian Sacrifice as Elijah's Prayer of old brought down Fire upon the Legal Sacrifice Fourthly He tells us that S Chrysostom saith It required greater confidence than Moses and Elias had to pray over this Sacrifice from whence he gathers that there was no need of such Confidence if their Prayer were written in a Book before them (i) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 75. But if the Reader consult the place in the Father (k) Chryâ—â—st de Sacerd. lib. 6. Tâ—m 6. pag. 46 He will easily discern how this Passage is perverted to serve an ill Cause S. Chrysostom is setting out the dignity of the Gospel Priesthood who are to intercede with God to have Mercy not upon one City but upon the whole World even upon all Men. Now he thinks that the confidence of Moses and Elias who prayed but for one Nation would not suffice to fit a Man for this Intercession alluding to the Litany where as he notes they pray That Wars may cease in all places and all Troubles be removed and that Peace and Prosperity and a deliverance from all Evils public and private may be obtained (l) Chrysost ibid. Who afterwards treats of the Priests praying over the Sacrament These are plainly Litanick Supplications which were written down long before this Age as we have shewed and therefore the Confidence was not needful to invent Words Extempore but to enable a Mortal sinful Man to ask so many and so great things from so glorious a God for so many persons As for the Confidence of his Party it is indeed greater than that of Moses and Elias for they were really inspired miraculously and so might intercede for the Jews for ought I know Extempore on some extraordinary occasions but these Men who are not inspired dare upon ordinary occasions daily vent their Extempore Conceits before God and their Congregation but whether there be not more Boldness than Prudence in this let him judge who considers that Solomon saith Be not rash with thy Mouth and let not thine Heart be hasty to utter any thing before God for God is in Heaven and thou upon Earth (m) Eccles V. 2. Fifthly He cites a place of S. Chrysostom where he shews what is meant by the Cup of Blessing and reckoning up some of the Heads of those things for which they gave Thanks He adds with these and other such like Thanksgivings we approach whence he infers That the Priests enlarged themselves in such like particulars according to discretion (n) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 76. But first he was forced to translate the place falsly or else it would not have been for his purpose S. Chrysostom saith after he had reckoned up divers general Heads of Mercies For these and all such things as these giving Thanks so we approach (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 24. in 1 Cor pag. 396. He doth not say With these and other such like Thanksgivings that is his perverting the Father Secondly S. Chrysostom being making a popular Discourse doth not repeat any part of the Thanksgivings but describes some of those Mercies for which they gave Thanks at the Sacrament One principal Head of which was For delivering Mankind from Error and for bringing them to be Heirs of his Kingdom Which is one of those Heads for which God is praised in that large Form of Thanksgiving in the Constitutions (p) Non permisit genus humanum perire Constit Apost lib. 8. cap. 17. as it is also in the Liturgy of S. Chrysostom (q) Liturg. Chrysost Euchol p. 75 Therefore they were Forms of
several Minister but it is plain that Fancy of Ministers exercising such Gifts in public Prayers was not so much as thought of in that Age it is a Novel invention of Modern Enthusiasts and utterly unknown to these ancient Times Thirdly He cites Socrates about the Prayers used at the time of Candles lighting (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 21. which he saith were accomodated to the Season (h) Disc of Lit. pag. 161. But I must ask who it was that suited these Prayers to the Season Was it private Ministers by their Gifts who daily varied them If not it is nothing to his purpose For if they were fixed written Forms fitted by the Bishops of several Countries and prescribed to those under their charge for constant use then they justisie prescribed Forms which will be plain enough when we consider what Socrates saith of these Evening Prayers in this very place cited viz. That in Greece Jerusalem and Thessaly the Prayers at Candle-lighting were made after the same manner which was used by the Novatians at Constantinople So that this passage if my Adversary durst have produced it a large shews First that the three several Provinces did all Pray alike at this hour of Prayer and all of them followed the way of the Nâ—vatians at Constantinople Now if the Novatians there had daily varied these Prayers Extempore No Provinces nor places could have exactly used the same Prayers as they did and every one of these places must have differed from another So that when so many distant Churches agreed in the same way and made the same Prayers no doubt they all Prayed by prescribed Forms And this is all that is needful to say as to these Historians Concil Vinet Ann Dom. 453. § 11. Though there passed neer an hundred years between the Council of Laodicea and this of Vanues yet my Adversary was so unfortunate that he could find nothing for Liturgies in all this space of Time for he tells us the next Authority he meets with after the Council of Laodicea is the Synod at Vannes (i) Disc of Lit. pag 173. which he labours both to disparage and pervert because it hath a Canon for uniformity in the Liturgy But we will first cite the Words of it at large and explain the sense of it And then Answer all his Allegations The Words are these We also think it fit that at least within our Province there should be one usage for holy Offices and for the Order of Singing That as we hold one Faith in the confession of the Trinity so we may hold also one Rule in our Offices lest by various usages our Administrations be thought to differ in some things (k) Rectum quoquâ— dâ—ciâ—â—◠〈◊〉 vâ—l in◠〈…〉 Sac◠〈…〉 â—rdo 〈…〉 Ut sicut 〈◊〉 câ—m Trinitatis câ—nfâ—ssion◠〈◊〉 teneâ—at◠〈◊〉 Ospâ—◠〈◊〉 reâ—ulâ—m tâ—neamâ—â— variatâ observâ—tione in alâ— no observatio nostra discrepare creaaâ—ur Concil Viâ—tet Can. 15. Bin. Tom 1. par 2. p. 422. This Canon is as plain an Injunction of one Liturgy as can be expressed one Custom in Administring the Sacraments and one Order of Singing Hymns Which is afterward called one Rule for the Offices which was to be observed by all the Clergy in this Province Again they compare this to one Creed Now the Creed was one known Written Form of Words in which they all confessed their Faith and they think it reasonable that their Prayers and Hymns should be so also that is performed by one prescribed Rule and in the same Forms Lastly The reason they give why they would have but one Form or Liturgy in all their Province is to prevent the Scandal and Offence which might be given by variety in these Offices as if there were no good agreement among these Bishops which might easily be believed if every Diocess varied in the manner of Worshiping God but if every private Minister at that time had daily varied his Prayers and Praises it had been very ridiculous in these Bishops to be affraid of seeming to differ in any thing And in vain had they setled an agreement in the Rubries if the substance and Words of the Prayers had been changed every day However my Adversary tries all his Art to undervalew and pervert this plain Decree For first he falsly thrusts this Council down to the latter end of the Fifth Century whereas it was held but three years after the midst of it Ann. Dom. 453 Then he saith this Canon was made only by Six Bishops in one Province where there were Fifteen or Seventeen and this not till the latter end of the Fifth Age when all things were grown very bad (l) Disc of Lit. pag. 176. To which I reply That this Council supposes there was an Order in every Diocess of this Province only whereas there was as Socrates observed in the East some difference between them they now reduce all to one Form those under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan of Tours of which Perpetuus was now the Bishop and came to Vannes with five of his Suffragans to ordain a Bishop there and being assembled they made this and oâ—her Canons and Writ to Victurius Biâ—hop of Mans and Thalassius Bishop of Anjou two absent Bishops of this Province to see this and the rest of these Canons observed in their Diocesses And in all probability these Eight were all the Bishops of that Province in those early Times for Miraeus reckons now in this Age but Eleven Bishops who are under the Metropolitan of Tours (m) Miraei notitia Episc lib. 4. p. 194. so that my Adversary is mistaken to say there were Fifteen or Seventeen And he is as grosly out in his calling this a late Decree For it must be considered that France was overrun by Barbarous and Pagan Nations within less than an hundred Years before so that it needed a new Conversion a little before this Century began and therefore Lidorius was the first setled Bishop of Tours who had a Church Builded there for Christian Worship and he died as Gregory Turonensis relates Ann. Dom. 370. that is only 80 Years before this Council S. Martin also the great Apostle of this part of France and Bishop of Tours died only 50 Years before this Câ—non was made and Perpetuus the President of this Council was the Fifth Bishop after â— Mâ—rtin (n) 〈…〉 §. 14. p. â—â— and hold this Synod at least 30 Years before the Conversion of Clâ—vis the first Christian King of France So that it is very frivolous to say no worse for my Adversary to call this a late Decree with respect to the whole Church Since as to this Province and with respect to France it is a very early Decree made soon after their Conversion to the Faith and considering each great City after the Barbarous inundation was Converted by a several Bishop it is no wonder if there were some variety in their Liturgies But we see
of it sent to this Bishop is called An Order of Prayer Which therefore doth not signifie a bare Rubric for Method but a Book containing the Prefaces Hymns and Prayers themselves And thus it is used in the Life of S. Laetus a Monk who about this Time was ordained Deacon and He in a short time learned the Psalter and all that the Ecclesiast cal Order required so as to be more perfect in them than many were who had been longer used to them (s) Cointè Annal Eâ—â—les â—raâ—â— An 533. pag 413. This Ecclesiastical Order was a Book as well as the Psalter and this ingemous Monk got to say the very Words of them both by Heart But to return to Pope Vigilius He was so tenacious of Forms that he warns Etherius not to permit one Syllable to be altered in the Gloria Patri Which the Catholics by ancient Custom use to say after the Ps â—ms thus Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost but some Heretics a little before presumed to leave out the last and saying it thus and to the Son the Holy Ghost which he coâ—demus as an Heretical Variation (t) Vâ—â— Ep. 2. ibid. pag 4. But it had been impossible to secure the Orthodox Forms if my Adversaries pretended liberty of varying the Words of their Prayers and Praises had then been allowed in the Church Nay if that had been permitted in former Ages there would have been no certain Primitive Forms left by which they could have corrected these Heretical Innovations § 8. In the East we have further Evidence of the continuance of Liturgick Forms Concil Mopsevest An. D. 550 for in the Council of Mopsvestia the Fathers there assembled pray for the Emperour in that ancient and generally received Form O Lord save the Emperour And hear him whensoever he calls upon thee (u) Salvum fac Domine Imperatorem exaudi eum quacunque die te invocaverit Vid. Synod Quint. collat 5. apud Bin. Tom. II. par 2. pag. 83. Anastasius Sinaita Patriar Antioch An. Dom. 560. But soon after this we have sufficient Proof that the whole Liturgy transcribed in the Apostolical Constitutions and shewed to have been the Antiochian Office some Ages before was still in use there For Anastasius who had been a Monk of Mount Sinai being now Patriarch of Antioch hath some Homilies owned to be genuine still extant wherein he refers to and expounds the Words and Actions prescribed by that ancient Liturgy As first He bids them mind the Deacons Voice when he crieth Stand with reverence stand with fear bow down your Heads And again The Priest saith he engages you to attend when he bids you Lift up your Hearts And what do you Answer Do you not Reply We lift them up unto the Lord Adding That the Peoples joyning their part to the Priests made the Prayers to be more effectual He goes on to tell them The Angels minister at the holy Liturgy The Cherubins stand round about and with sweet Voices sing the Trisagion Holy Holy Holy and the Seraphins bow and adore He mentions also the Lords Prayer as being daily repeated by all in the Communion-Office and Comments upon that ancient Form Give holy things to those that are holy (w) Arastas Sin Orat de sacr Synaxt in Auctario Bib. Pati Tom. 2. col 9 10. Now these Passages and in this Order may be seen in divers ancient Liturgies particularly in that which is set down in the Constitutions which shews that the same Forms were used at Antioch in this Age which had been used there in divers of the fore-going Centuries And though in these Homilies he doth transcribe no more of them but only such parts of the Liturgy as were proper to move the People to come to the Communion with Devotion and Reverence Charity and holy Resolutions yet by those which he occasionally mentions and by the Order of them we may discern the ancient Forms were still in use there with little or no Variation § 9. By this Time divers Parts of Spain had embraced the Catholic Faith Concil Bracar I. An. Dom. 563. and therefore now the Orthodox Bishops met in a Council at Braga and after they had caused the Book of ancient Canons to be publicly read before them they gather out of them some that were of present use and revive them by a fresh imposing them The first thing they labour to regulate is that variety of Forms and different ways of Divine Service which the mixture of divers Nations and Opinions had produced among them therefore the first Canon is That one and the same Order of Singing shall be kept in Morning and Evening Prayer and that no different Customs either of private Men or of Monasteries shall be mixed with the Ecclesiastical Rule (x) Ut unus atque idem Psallendi ordo in Matutinis vel Vespertinis officiis teneatur non diversae ac privatae neque Monasteriorum consuetudines cum Ecclesiasticâ regulà sint permixtae Concil Brac. Can 1. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 211. The Morning and Evening Offices consisted chiefly of Psalms and Hymns with some proper Collects and were all or the most part of them chanted and sung which cannot be in a public Congregation unless the Form and Words be known before Wherefore for these Mattens and Vespers they had established One Order Besides these there was the Communion-Office before Noon and for that they had also a Prescribed Form which they call here The Ecclesiastical Rule and since some private Persons presumed to alter this and others followed some of the Forms prescribed by the Rules of certain Monasteries they utterly reject these Variations and bind them all to the public Liturgy This is the plain sense of the Canon and therefore Ordo Psallendi and Ecclesiastica Regula must be more than a Rubric for these confined them to Sing the Mattens and Vespers in the same words and to celebrate the Communion-Service by such a certain Rule as admitted of no Variation And the following Canons make this still more plain The Second is That on the Vigils of Feasts and at the Communion all shall read the same and not different Lessons in the Church The Third orders That Bishops and Priests shall use the same Form of Saluting the People viz. The Lord be with you To which they shall Answer And with thy Spirit even as the whole East hath retained it from the Apostles and not as the Priscillianists have altered it The Fourth Canon is That the Communion-Office shall by all be celebrated by that same Order which Profuturus formerly Bishop of this Church received in Writing from the Apostolical See The Fifth enjoyns That none pass by that Order of Baptizing which the Church of Braga anciently used and which to avoid all doubts concerning the same Profuturus had received in Writing from the See of S. Peter (y) Concil Bracar l. Can. 2
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)
Antiq Brit. Eccles pag. 370. An. Dom. 560. Moreover Baleus further tells us That S. Asaph the Scholar and Successor of Kentigern writ a Book Of the Ordinations of his Church (g) Balaeus de script Brit. fol. 34. An. Dom. 590. which seems to be the Forms used there in Ordaining Presbyters and Deacons and perhaps in Admitting of Monks This may suffice to shew us the Britons had written and prescribed Forms before my Adversary will allow them to have been used any where and if any require further satisfaction he may consult the Learned B. Vsher's Antiquity of the British Churches where there are divers Evidences of this Truth We proceed therefore to the Saxons who were Converted by Augustin the Monk about the end of the Sixth Century And He no doubt according to S. Gregory's direction made a Liturgy for them taken out of the Roman the Gallican and other Forms which continued in use for some time But after Gregory's Roman way of Singing began to be so generally admired in all these Parts of the World That was also laboured by Augustin's Successors to be brought in here For Bede mentions one James a Deacon who was skilled both in the Roman and the Canterbury way of Song saying of him That Paulinus leaving York and returning to Rochester left this James behind him in the North who when that Province had Peace and the Number of the Faithful encreased being very skilful in Singing in the Church became a Master of Ecclesiastical Song to many after the way either of Rome or of Canterbury (h) Bedae histor lib. 2. cap. 20. circ A. D. 640. Which must signifie his teaching Clerks how to recite Gregory's or Augustin's Forms of Service because in that Age they chanted their Prayers and Praises both About Thirty years after this in Theodorus his Time They learned to Sing the Office all England over and one Eddi after the aforesaid James was their Master in the Churches on the North of Humber (i) Beda ibid. lib. 4. cap. 2. circ An. 670. And a little after those who Instructed Men in Ecclesiastical Offices are called Masters of Singing (k) Idem lib. 5. cap. 20. because the Offices were set to some certain Notes and that alone is enough to prove they then Prayed by certain prescribed Forms it being impossible to set Arbitrary or Extempore Prayers to Notes which though some have affirmed liable to be Canted yet none ever thought them capable to be Chanted But we proceed I doubt not but the Gregorian Forms as well as his way of Singing came into use here before the Year 700 For in the late elaborare Collection of Old Saxon Books and Manuscripts put out by my Worthy Friend Dr. Hicks there is a Sacramentary of S. Gregory which is at least a Thousand years old (l) Grammatica Maeso-Gothic D. Hick p. 148. and then it must be Written about the Year 690. But this is more plain in the Famous Council of Clovesho which sat 24 year after wherein there is not only clear Testimony for the use of Forms but a full Evidence of the prevailing Interest of the Roman Offices For there it is appointed That All Priests shall learn to repeat the whole Office by Law appointed for their Order and shall be able to interpret the Creed the Lords Prayer and the holy Words pronounced in the Mass into the Vulgar Tongue Can 10th As also That all Priests shall perform all their Offices after the same way and manner Can. 11th And further it is Decreed That the Festivals in memory of our Lord be celebrated in one and the same manner in all Offices belonging to them as to Baptism Administring the Communion and the manner of Singing according to the Written Form which we have received from the Roman Church and that the Festivals of the Martyrs shall be observed on the same day according to the Roman Martyrology with the Psalms and Hymns proper to each of them Can. 13th And finally That the Seven Canonical Hours of Prayer be observed with the proper Psalms and Hymns and that the Monasteries shall all Sing alike and shall neither Sing or Read any thing but what is generally used and is derived from Scripture or permitted by the Custom of the Roman Church that so all may with one Mind and one Mouth glorifie God Can. 15th (m) Concil Clovesho Can. 10 11 13 15. apud Spelm. Concil Tom. l. p. 249. circ An. D. 714. From which Canons it is very plain that the Saxons within one Century after their Conversion had Written Forms of Prayer for all Offices and that the Roman Liturgy was now beginning to be generally received in this Land I shall make but one Remark more in so clear a case which is That Venerable Bede dying on Ascension-day is by ancient Historians said to have repeated the Collect for the Day in these Words O King of Glory and Lord of Hosts who as on this day didst ascend triumphantly into the Heaven of Heavens leave us not comfortless but send us the Promise of the Father even the Spirit of Truth (n) Gul. Malms de gest reg lib. 1. cap. 3. pag. 12. Sim. Dunelm lib. 1. cap. 15. and soon after he gave up the Ghost Now this is the Collect in the Old Roman Forms and is yet continued in our Liturgy almost Verbatim which gives that Collect the honour of having been received in this Nation for near a Thousand years But since my Adversary dares not attempt the Saxons and Spelman's Councils afford so many undeniable Proofs of prescribed and imposed Forms used here from the Time of their Conversion I shall not heap up needless Instances but proceed to the Kingdoms and Churches in France and Germany where the same Order and Method of Praying was observed § 5. I have so fully proved Ecclesia Gallicana ab An. Dom. 450. that there was a Form of Service peculiar to the Gallican Church that I need not have added any thing on that Subject but that my Adversary hath the confidence to say In France they had Books for public Service in the 8th Century yet they were used at the discretion of those that officiated who added and left out as they thought fit till Charlemain in the beginning of the Ninth Age would have them Reformed after the Roman guise And this he proves by a Passage cited out of the Chronicle of Engolism related in Mornay of the Mass (o) Disc of Lit. p. 134. but the whole Story is nothing else but Falshood and Fallacy For First He speaks of Books for public Service in France in the 8th Century as if they had none before Whereas we have made it appear That S. Hilary made a Book of Hymns for the Gallican Church in the Fourth Age An. 354. That Museaus of Marseils composed a Book of Prayers for Consecrating the Sacrament in the Fifth Century An. 458. We have shewed That the Gallican Office which is
of Rome (m) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap. 9. pag. 74. For then it follows That the ancient German Offices were still used in some Parts that were subject to the Archbishop of Colen So that still this is exchanging one Form for another and no proof at all of liberty in Praying a thing unknown in this Age. Agobardus Episc Lugdun An. 831. § 7. We have little more in this Discourse against Liturgies out of Antiquity excepting only some few pretended proofs from late Ages to shew that they used various words in the distribution of the Eucharist As First he tells us that Agobardus the Famous Arch-Bishop of Lions could not well like that Common Roman Form The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ c. since he was only for Scripture Expressions in the public Offices And then he intimates that Agobardus was censured for this by Baronius and his Epitomator (n) Disc of Lit. pag. 90. 91. To which I reply First That Baronius never censures this great Bishop at all for this passage is not in Baronius but only in Spondanus the Epitomator and from him alone my Adversary cites it (o) Vid. Baron Tom. 9. An. 831. p. 797. 798. Secondly Spondanus speaks not one word of Agobardus his correcting the Communion-Office but only that he took great pains in restoring the ancient Antiphonary or Book of Hymns (p) Spondan Epitom An. 831. Num. 2. And Baluzius hath now put out the very Tract which Spondanus refers to and there is not one Syllable in all that Book expressing any dislike at the Words used in the distribution (q) Agobardi lib. de divin Psalmod lib. de correct Antiph oper Tom. 2. edit Paris 1666. Yea there is a peculiar discourse of this Bishop against Amalarius his Comment on the Mass wherein he speaks of the Roman Canon Te igitur c. yet never makes the least exception against the Roman Order or any thing contained in it (r) Ibid. lib. contr Amal. pag. 101. So that this pretended dislike of the Roman Form of distribution is a meer Fiction of his own Brain And if it were true that Agobardus did not like any thing in Sacred Offices but what was Scripture Yet there is no cause he should for that cause dislike this which he calls the Roman but was the Primitive and is now our Protestant Form since the words are taken out of and grounded on express places of Holy Scripture The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ is a Scripture Expresion (s) Math. xxvi 26. Luk. xxii 19. 1 Cor. xi 24. and the next words Preserve thy Body and Soul to Eternal Life are grounded on Scripture Promises (t) John vi ver 50.51.53.54 58. so that if Agobardus were never so scrupulous he might very well like and use this Form But because my Adversary deals only in Epitomes I will now give a full Account of this matter We must observe therefore that Leidradus the Predecessor of Agobardus in the year 799. according to the desire of Charles the Great had brought in the Roman Order of Singing into the Church of Lyons and had put out an Antiphonary with an Epistle before it the Hymns whereof were generally taken out of the Holy Scripture (u) Leidradi Ep. ad Carol. Mag. inter oper Agob Tom. 2. p. 127. But about 30 years after Amalarius a busy Monk pretends to bring a new Antiphonary from Rome Corrected after the Roman Office in the time of Gregory the Fourth which he presented to Lewis the Godly and hoped by his Authority to impose it on all the Gallican Church But Agobardus the Primate of France rejects this new Antiphonary and writ a Book to prove there were Heresies Blasphemies and Nonsense in these Hymns of Amalarius and keeps to the old Roman Antiphonary established by his Predecessor the Hymns of which were for the most part taken out of the Psalms and other parts of Holy Scripture commending this to his Clergy and giving them his Reasons why he would not admit of the other And this Book of Agobardus concludes with these words As the Church hath a Book of Mysteries for Celebrating the Solemnity of the Mass digested Orthodoxly and with convenient Brevity and hath a Book of Lessons collected Judiciously out of the Divine Books so they ought to have this Third Book the Antiphonary purged from all Human Figments and Lies sufficiently ordered out of the pure words of Scripture through the whole Circle of the year That so in performing sacred Offices according to the most approved Rule of Faith and the Authority of ancient discipline there may be kept among us one and the same Form of Prayer of Lessons and of Ecclesiastical Songs (w) Agobard de correct Antiphon §. 19. Tom. ii p. 100. This is the whole Story and the passage which Spondanus ignorantly or at least rashly Censures and my Adversary Ridiculously brings in to shew Agobardus his dislike of the words of distribution Whereas these words refer only to the Hymns which yet probably were not all the very words of Scripture but were either Transcribed thence or agreeable thereto much more than the new Hymns of Amalarius And since Agobardus received and used the Roman Canon and the whole Roman Missal wherein were many things which are not the words of Scripture we must not expound these words cited but now so strictly as Spondanus doth as if he would not use any words in Divine Offices but those of Scripture For Agobardus means no more than that the Hymns ought to be either taken out of Scripture or agreeable to the Doctrine thereof for he proves that the Hymns of Amalarius were Heretical and Blasphemous contrary in many things to the Holy Scripture and therefore he rejected them But as to any Liberty in varying the Prayers Lessons or Hymns that were established or altering the Roman Forms This great Bishop was so far from it that he enjoyns the old Gregorian Office and imposes that prescribed Form together with the Lessons and the Hymns and opposes those Innovations and Alterations which some attempted to make because the Forms and Order then established were agreeable both to the Rule of Faith and to the acient Ecclesiastical Laws upon which occasion he produceth that African Canon before cited (x) Part. i. Cent. 4. §. 24. pag. 257. in these Words viz. That no Supplications and Prayers be said unless they have been approved in a Council nor shall any of these at all be Sung in the Church till they have been considered by the Prudent and approved of in a Synod lest any thing against the Faith be composed either my mistake or by design (y) Canon Afric ap Agob de correct Antiph §. ii p. 92. And now the Reader shall judge whether this Author be for my Adversaries purpose or no since he imposes Books of prescribed Prayers Lessons and Hymns and thinks the keeping strictly to them is
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
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)
scattered and dispersed Fourthly His Quotations are not faithful for he frequently disguises the Evidence which he produces both by false Translating divers Passages and Citing them wrong So in the Council of Carthage he reads Quascunque for Quicunque (n) Disc of Lit. pag. 44. And in that of Milevis Cum prudentioribus collatae for à prudentioribus collectae (o) Ib. p. 49. So he Translates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cum his caeteris hujusmodi gratiarum actionibus (p) Ib. p. 76. pretending they used a diversity in their Praises whereas S. Chrysostom's Words only import That they did give Thanks for Variety of Blessings for these and all such like And it is very remarkable that he cites many Authors imperfectly drawing a Line thus and leaving out the most material Words if they seem to make against him So when he perverts Nazianzen as if he spake of Words in Extempore Prayer he draws a Line before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and applies it falsly to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in Nazianzen there are three Substantives The Throne the Altar and the Holy Things in that Sentence which he twice leaves out (q) Disc of Lit. pag. 60 pag. 77. to which Substantives 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 plainly belongs for it was not the Words but the Throne the Altar c. which were present to him by the Holy Ghost By the same Trick he draws a Line in S. Cyprian after Quidam dicunt (r) Ib. p. 98. to conceal the next Words which shew it was Hereticks only which said this My Answer hath variety of Instances of such like dealing which a Man might expect rather from the Disciples of Loyola than from Persons that pretend to Tenderness of Conscience Lastly Whereas he often saith He hath Answered all the Places of the Ancients which either others had alledged or He in his diligent search of Antiquity had met with which seem to make for Liturgies (s) Disc of Lit. p. 179 alibi I doubt not but to make it appear that he hath not only omitted but industriously concealed some Hundreds of Proofs for Liturgies which I shall produce in my Answer and by comparing that clear Evidence with the slight Testimonies which he produces to confute it will appear to every Intelligent Reader that he resolved to keep all Testimonies of this kind out of sight except only those which he hoped he could either blunder or pervert to some other Sense Having given this short but just Character of his Book I will say something of my own wherein I have taken Care that this Ill-dealing should not transport me into any Personal reflexions and am plainly content to shew my Adversary is either ignorantly or wilfully mistaken without giving the Epithets that properly belong to both kinds of Mistakes Nor will I make it my chief business to confute his Book but to render my Discourse more useful than it could possibly have been if I had only followed him through his various Windings and Turnings I have Collected in every Century as many Testimonies concerning Liturgies and their Antiquity Original and Use as my Time would permit or the Argument needs though not all which might have been found and I have placed these in the exact Order of time under the several Names of the Fathers and then reduced the scattered Pieces which he objects under every one of these Fathers as I go along giving a distinct answer to them all that are material which I judge to be the fairest way to find out the true Sense of Antiquity in this Question And by this distinct and regular proceeding I hope not only to discover the Weakness of my Adversaries pretended Evidence but to give a clearer and fuller account of the early beginning and general use of Liturgick Forms than hath yet been done by any who have Writ upon this Subject And the use hereof may be First to confirm the Devout Members of our own Church who are the greatest and most considerable part of the Nation in their just Veneration for those Holy Forms by which they daily serve God when they find them so very agreeable to pure and genuin Antiquity which the Romanists have deserted by new Additions to their Forms consonant to their Superstitious Innovations and Corruptions and so have our High-flown Separatists also by new pretences to a Gift of Prayer long since ceased and by Praying Extempore upon ordinary occasions in Public Assemblies a Method unknown to the Ancients ever since there was a setled Christian Church And Secondly I will not despair but those moderate Dissenters who honestly desire to serve God in the best manner and have been abused by False-Teachers into an ill Opinion of Forms may by perusing these Papers lay aside their Ill-grounded prejudices against Liturgies when they clearly discern that the most Pious and Learned of the Primitive Martyrs and Fathers in the best and purest Ages of the Church did always approve of and use prescribed Forms in their public Worship So that they cannot reject Liturgies as a corrupt carnal cold and formal way of Praying without condemming the Devotions of the best and dearest Servants of God in all Ages both of the Jewish and Christian Church Which is a censure as void of Truth and Modesty as it is of Charity and Humility It is certain Millions of Holy and Admirable Men have Prayed thus with wondrous Fervency and God hath heard such Prayers and if they be lawful in themselves aceptable to Heaven and sufficient to procure what we Pray for there can be no reason why this Church should not enjoyn them now as all other Modern regular Churches do and the Primitive Church also did I grant such as have had a false Notion of them cannot be expected to use them so devoutly as others do but if their Judgment were rectisied those prejudices would soon wear off and a little Time and Experience of the great benefit of Holy Forms would convince them That a Pure and Prudent Pious and proper Liturgie such as ours is the most rational and Advantageous way of Paying our public Service to Almighty God and the greatest help to true Devotion in the World I confess my first design was to have gon through every Century that can be called Ancient but my time not permitting me as yet to transcrible all my Observations in Vindication of the Antiquity of Liturgies from the unjust Cavils of my Adversary I have now published only the first Four Centuries till the rest be made ready because if we find them within that compass all Men must own they are Truly Primitive And it is not fit to delay a just Censure of this Fallacious Treatise Since that Party so extremely dote upon it as to think it unanswerable For one of them in his Book called The healing Attempt that is a project to heal the Dissenters by the Wounds of the established Church lately talks at this vain
Extempore 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
the several Duties there performed Prayers and Hymns Baptism and the Holy Eucharist but gives no account in what Words they celebrated these Offices for when he mentions Baptism he only saith They are taught to Fast and Pray and ask of God the forgiveness of their former Sins And being brought where Water is they are Regenerated in the same manner as we were Regenerated (d) Just M. Apol. 2. p. 93. which shews that even in his time they began to conceal the particular manner of Celebrating these Mysteries So that we cannot expect much light from him as to the Christian Forms Yet we must remember he lived in Palestina and conversed much with the Jews who then used Forms of Prayer and Praise for which he never reproves them nor doth he speak of any difference between the Jewish and Christian Worship in this particular But he hath some general expressions which incline me to believe they had Forms in his time I shall not insist upon his saying they prayed for the Conversion of the Jews and the deliverance of the Gentiles from their Errors and for all Men (c) Just M. dialog cum Tryph. p. 363. p. 335. Though these are pieces of ancient Litany But I will observe that when he speaks of the bringing the Newly-baptized Person to the place where the Faithful worshiped God he saith They there made Common-Prayers for themselves for the Person Baptized and for all other Men every where with great fervency (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoli 2. p. 97. Now Common-Prayers do signify Forms that are known to all and in which all may joyn and therefore S. Cyprian speaking of the Lords Prayer which was that Form which all the Christians used and repeated together calls it a public and Common-Prayer (g) Publica est nobis Communis Oratio Cypr. de Or. Dom. and to such Forms which all locally joyned in Ignatius before cited refers when he speaks of One Prayer and one Supplication But our Adversary who will not allow this plain and natural exposition of Justin's Common-Prayer stretches another ambiguous Phrase of his most extremely to make it signifie Extempore Prayer viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first place he cites for this is in the next Page The President offers up Prayers and in like manner Thanksgivings as well as he is able (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apol. 2. p. 98. this he gives us twice over (i) Disc of Liturg p. 68. p. 115. and most extremely glories in it spending ten Pages in Quotations most of which are nothing to the purpose to strain it to his Sense of inventing Words as the Spirit enabled them or Praying Extempore To all which I answer First That if this were the Sense it will not follow that because the â—ishops in Justin Martyrs time were inspired to make Extempore Prayers therefore every private Minister in this Age when Inspiration and that Gift of Prayer is ceased hath the same ability now Secondly It seems he is hard put to it for proofs when he is forced to lay so great stress on a single ambiguous Phrase which may be otherwise interpreted since this Phrase can be no solid proof unless his were the only Sense of it But Thirdly I shall make it out that it doth signify otherwise in this place For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here answers to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place before cited That declares the Prayers at Baptism were made Fervently or with all their might (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Hesych 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this shews that the Prayers at the Eucharist were made as Du-plessis Translates it by the President with all the power and might that was in him And thus in Scripture the same Phrase is used by the LXX which version Justin both uses and imitates for doing a thing with all our might (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eccles 9.10 For Solomon advises us to do what we are about with all Application of Mind and when the Phrase is applied to Prayer it must signify to Pray as Fervently and devoutly as we are able And doubtless when we desire the several things Prayed for in a Form with all the Earnestness and Vigour we can we may properly be said to pray 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as we are able or to the utmost of our power As in Plautus Orare opere maximo signifies to intreat or beg a thing with extraordinary importunity (m) Nunc te hoc orare jussit opere maximo Plaut Mostel iii. 2. Maximo te orabat opere Eunuch iii. 3. So that the power here spoken of refers to the affections and not to the Phrases or expressions of him that prays And therefore it hath no relation to Extempore Praying Yea if we review the place of Justin Martyr again we shall see that this Phrase doth not follow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prayers but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thanksgivings So that it doth chiefly if not only relate to the Hymns used in the Eucharist which the Bishop offered up with all his might that is with all Fervency Now these Hymns as we have proved before were known Forms and yet Justin Martyr saith they were offered up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wherefore this Phrase cannot be expounded here that they made the Hymns Extempore And our Adversary is forced to false point and miserably wrest a parallel place in this Author to make it seem to belong only to Extempore Prayer (n) Disc of Liturg. p. 114. 115. he leaves out the stop between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vid. loc whereas there this Phrase is very evidently joyned to the Word Praising with the Words of Prayer and Thanksgiving in all our oblations praising him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as we are able (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Just M. Apol. 2. p. 60. And withal it must be noted that in this latter place the Phrase is not as he pretends applied to the Minister but to all the Christian People who no doubt joyned in the Hymns in public with all possible Fervency and Devotion and that was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet did not make those Hymns Extempore I suppose when the Son of Syrach said to the Jews when you glorify the Lord exalt him as much as you can and when you exalt him put forth all your strength (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the Greek Phrase is almost the same no man will be so absurd to imagin * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclus. Cap. xliii Ver. 30. he bid them every one make Extempore Hymns For he plainly means They should recite the Forms used in their Nation with all imaginable Vigour and Devotion And thus Origen cited by him applies the like Phrases For he saith all Christians in their own Tongues prayed to God and praised him as well as they were able
is to be kept in our own Breast for our Lord saith we must not declare it to Swine and expose it to Dogs (c) Sanctum quotidie jubeamur intra Conscientiam nostram tenere Cypr. ad Demetr §. 1. p. 324. And from that same Text of Matth. VII 6. the same Author proves That the Mysteries of our Faith are not to be profaned by publishing them to those without (d) Idem lib. 3. test ad Quirin §. 50. p. 429. Wherefore since it is so clear even in these early Ages that they were scrupulous of publishing their ways of Worship we may conclude that no full and clear account of their Forms at large can be expected among these Writers And it is sufficient that they mention some and darkly hint at others of those Mysterious Forms sometimes and that they do plainly attest they had a prescribed Liturgy though they had but seldom an occasion or an inclination to tell us what it was Hippolytus Mar. An. Dom. 220. § 2. Among the Writers of this Age the first is Hippolytus a Bishop and Martyr who in his discourse of the End of the World and the Coming of Antichrist puts it among the Signs of those evil Times That Liturgy shall be extinguished singing of Psalms shall cease and reading of Scripture shall not be heard (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hippol. de Consum Mund. Bib. Patr. T. 2. p. 357. Which shews that the public Service of which he there speaks consisted then of three parts The ministration of Prayers Singing of Psalms and Reading the Scripture And the first of these is called Liturgy which though it signifie any public Service in general and be sometimes applied to the whole Public Worship yet where it is limited only to Prayers as it is here it implies a Common Form used generally which will be more probable to be this Fathers Sense if we consider that he saith Liturgy shall be extinguished that is the public Forms shall not be permitted to be used which cannot be properly said of Extempore Prayers they being an inward Gift as our Adversaries pretend And Antichrist himself hath no power to extinguish or put out Mens Gifts He may suppress the use of Forms of Prayer but the Extempore Mens faculty was not liable to any such interdict as could extinguish it And why may we not believe the Prayers in this Age were suitable to the rest of the Offices They sang by a Form out of a Book and read the Lessons out of a Book so that they scrupled not the use of Forms wherefore there is no ground to believe they disliked Forms of Prayer and consequently nothing to hinder us from expounding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the usual sense viz. of the Public Liturgy which Antichrist would not allow the Christians to use § 3. Our next Author is the Famous Origen Origen Adam An. Dom. 230. who hath so clear and convincing a Testimony for the use of a Liturgy in his Homilies on Jeremy that the Learned Centuriators were convinced by it that Set Forms of Prayer were used in his time for they thus cite the place It is say they without question that they had some Set Forms of Prayer in this Age for Origen in his XIth Homily on Jeremy seems to allude to those we now call Collects where he tells us We frequently say in our Prayers Grant O Almighty God grant us a part with thy Prophets and with the Apostles of thy Son Christ grant that we may be found at the Feet of thy only begotten (f) Formulas domque quasdam precationum absque dubio habuerunt Cent. Magdeb. cent 3. cap. 6. pag. 135. And if we consider that our Saviour promised to such as were effectually Converted that they should sit down with Abraham Isaac and Jacob in the Kingdom of God (g) Matth. viii 11 and that the Holy Apostles and Prophets are describ'd in Scripture as rejoycing together in Heaven (h) Revel xviii 20. we shall be convinced this Form of Prayer is grounded upon Christ's Promise and upon the Word of God and consequently must own the Prayer to be pure and primitive Indeed our Adversary uses many Artisices to wrest this Testimony from us (i) Discourse of Liturg p. 141. but all in vain First he saith Ruffinus made many additions to Origens Homilies so that possibly this may be one of his Additions I Answer If he were sure Ruffinus added this yet since he lived in the next Century that would serve to confute him who maintains there were no prescribed Forms till the Fifth or Sixth Age But we can make it very probable Ruffinus did not add this passage First because there is nothing in it but what agrees well enough to Origen's time and to his Doctrin Secondly In Ruffinus his time they had made some steps towards Invocation of Saints and therefore had it been a Prayer composed by him there would have been some footsteps of that Superstition some Address to or expectation from the Apostles and Prophets whereas this Prayer only supposes them to be in Heaven and desires God to grant us a part with them Again Our Adversary saith These Words if they be Origens will no more prove this was a prescribed Form than S. Paul 's was Ephes I. 16 17. where he saith He ceased not to make mention of the Ephesians in his Prayers that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ might give them tht Spirit of Wisdom c. I Reply His Parallel will by no means hold since the Apostle only relates and reckons up the things he asked for them and speaking to the Ephesians gives them an account of the Subject of his Petitions for them But Origen is repeating the Words of a Prayer and speaks directly to God therefore this must be a Form of common use as the Magdeburg Divines believed it to be Having thus detected his Sophistry and answered his Cavils and so cleared this Evidence for a Set Form we shall more easily understand that Origen refers to an usual Liturgy in another place where he saith They who serve God through Jesus in the Christian way and live according to the Gospel use frequently as becomes them night and day the enjoyned Prayers (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. in Cels lib. 6. pag. 302. Whence we infer that the Christian way was to serve God night and day with prescribed Prayers for the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not only a thing enjoyned or commanded in general as Isocrates and Aeschines use the word (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isocr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aeschin ita Math. i. 24. but so enjoyned that the very order and manner of doing it is set down and particularly appointed So those directions concerning the Leper's offering his Gift which Moses prescribed in the Old Law Levit. xiv 4. is called doing that which Moses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commanded them that is which he prescribed
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
plenty for deliverance from Sedition and for the prosperity of the Public He mentions also the Prayers for those in divers Necessities and the Thanksgivings for all the Mercies we daily receive from God (g) Ambros Com. in 1 Tim. cap. 2. Tom. 3. pag. 574. Which are the Heads of general Intercession used in all ancient Liturgies and come as near the Words of some of them as can be expected in a Commentary where he doth not cite the very Words but shew the agreement of these Forms to the Apostolical Rule In another place he refers to this Prayer briefly and notes that immediately before the Prayer of Consecration there is premised a Prayer for Kings and all others (h) Oratio praemittitur pro râ—gibus pro caeteris Id. de Sacram. l. b. 4. c. 4. p. 366. But as to the Prayer of Consecration it self He gives us the very Form of it Would you know saith he with what Heavenly Words it is consecrated Hear the very Words The Priest saith Make this Oblation ratified rational and acceptable that it may be for a Figure of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ who the day before he Suffered taking Bread into his holy Hands c. Then reciting the Words and Actions of the Institution He goes on to tell us that the Priest adds Wherefore we being mindful of his most glorious Passion of his Resurrection from the Dead and of his Ascension into Heaven do offer unto thee this immaculate rational and unbloody Sacrifice this holy Bread and Cup of Eternal Life desiring and praying thou wilt accept this Oblation upon thy Heavenly Altar by the hands of thy Angels as thou didst accept the gifts of thy Servant the Righteous Abel and the Sacrifice of our Father Abraham which was offered to thee by thy High-Priest Melchisedec (i) Ambros de Sacr. lib. 4. c. 5 6. pag. 367 c. Which is an express Form and the same with the primitive Roman Canon till the New Doctrins of a Propitiatory Sacrifice and Transubstantiation compelled them to alter their old Forms to suit it with their later Opinion He also declares the Form of Administration The Priest saith The Body of Christ and Thou saist Amen (k) Id. ib. p. 368. vide Const Apostol lib. 8. cap. 20. Ubi habemus eandem Formulam He also tells us That the Lord's Prayer concluded the Office (l) Ibid. lib. 5. cap. 4. pag. 370. And concerning that Ancient Hymn the Trisagion He saith That in most of the Eastern and divers Western Churches in the Oblation of that Sacrifice which is presented to God the Father the People and the Priest with one Voice say Holy Holy Holy Lord God of Hosts all the Earth is full of thy Majesty * Lib. de Spir. Sanct. Tom. 5. pag. 525. Moreover He mentions the old Form of the Bishops Saluting the People by Praying Peace might be with them (m) Ambr. de dign Sacerd. cap. 5. We have also in him The Form of renouncing the Devil (n) Id. de Sacr. lib. 1. c. 2 p. 354. and of Consecrating the Water in Baptism (o) Ib. lib. 2. cap. 5. pag. 359. and a Form of asking those who were to be Baptized concerning their Faith in the Holy Trinity (p) Ibid. cap. 7. pag. 360. He informs us also That the Church had ordered a Prayer for the Bishop (q) Id. Com. in Rom xv Tom. 3. pag. 331. And he prescribes the LI Psalm as a very proper Form of Prayer for a sincere Penitent to use in private (r) Tract ad Viâ—g laps T. 4. pag. 455. and recommends some Verses of the XLI Psalm as fit to be said when we go to Visit those that are Sick (s) Com. in Psal xli Tom. 2. pag 755. So that it is not only past all contradiction that S. Ambrose used and approved Forms but we might collect almost an intire Liturgy out of his Works And we have the Testimony of Walafridus Strabo who lived almost 900 year ago That S. Ambrose made not only a Communion Office but Composed all other Offices for his own Church and others which the Church of Milan retains to this very day (t) Walafrid Strab. de â—eb Ecclâ—s cap. 22. An 840. There is also other ancient Evidence that he made such a Liturgy in Card. Bona de reb Liturg lib. 1. cap. 10. but this like all other ancieâ—t Liturgies hath also been mixed with â—ome of the Modern Corruptions however his genuine Works give us Evidence enough that there were prescribed Forms of Prayer and Praise in his time Let us now examine what our Adversary hath gathered out of S. Ambrose to oppose this plain Proof First He is one of those Authors who calls the Prayer of Consecration A Mystery and this he tells us twice over (a) Discourse of Liturgy p. 28 29. But yet we have shewed that he hath actually writ it down so that it could not be his meaning That it was such a Mystery as might not be committed to Writing and that shews that our Author gets no advantage to his Cause by citing this place (b) Ambros de Fide ad Grat. lib. 4. cap. 5. Secondly He would prove that S. Ambrose counted Praying Extemporè to be praying by the Spirit and for this he quotes his Epistle to Horontianus (c) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 60. I Answer S. Ambrose is not speaking of the Public Service but of private Prayer in that place and therefore the Allegation is impertinent Besides He doth not say the Spirit furnishes us with Words and Phrases but helps us to apply our Minds to pray and keeps out Carnal thoughts making us content with such things as we naturally wish to be quit of because they are for our good And both here and elsewhere he explains that Phrase of the Spirits helping our infirmities Rom. viii 26. to be meant of the Spirits giving us such patience that we shall not desire to be presently freed from our Afflictions (d) Ambros ad Horont lib. 5. ep 4. pag. 290. Com. in Rom. viii Tom. 3. p. 293. which is nothing at all to his Notion of Extempore Prayer In another place He expounds those Words Praying always in the Spirit to signifie Praying with a pure Conscience and a sincere Faith which he who prays by a Form may do (e) Com. in Ephes vi p. 516. And certainly he who knew it was always his Duty to pray by or with the Spirit and yet used and approved a Form must believe it possible to pray in or by a Form and yet to pray by or with the Spirit Thirdly My Adversary objects a Passage out of S. Ambrose his Epistle to his Sister Marcellina viz. That while he was Celebrating he heard that the Arians had seized upon one Castulus just as he was performing the general Collect whereupon he ordered the Prayer suitable to that Occasion which one that had
stand up and with great Decency (o) Id. hom 4. de natura Dei And that Holy things must be given to Holy persons (p) Idem hom 17. in Hebraeos Both which passages are in the Liturgy in the Constitutions in so many Words (q) Constit lib. 8. cap. 15. cap. 20. And also in every one of the ancient Liturgies which go under the names of S. James S. Basil and S. Chrysostom in all which also there is a Form of Prayer after the Holy Communion (r) Constit lib. 8. cap. 22. and S. Chrysostom hath a Homily to reprove those Who left the holy Liturgy unfinished and went out before the last Prayer which is the Title of that Homily (s) Chrys Tom. 5. edit Front Dac et p. 522. All which abundantly proves that there was a set and prescribed Liturgy at that time by which the Eucharist was Administred I might be much larger in my proof of this had I time to make a narrower search in the learned Volumes of this elegant Father but I take this to be sufficient especially if we consider the Evidence we have that S. Chrysostom did compose that Liturgy as to the main which now goeth under his name The Authorities and Arguments for which being much the same with those produced for the Liturgy of S. Basil (t) See before in this Chap. §. 15. we refer the Reader thither And shall here only observe First That Proclus who was S. Chrysostoms successor at Constanstinople and came into that See within 27 years after Chrysostoms Death affirms That this Holy Father like a good Pastor who was careful of his Flock resolved to root up all the pretences which human sloth was wont to make and therefore drew up a shorter Form of Prayers for the celebrating of the Eucharist lest Men who hate to be confined too long being deceived by the craft of the Devil should omit this Divine Ordinance (u) Proclus de traditione divinae Missae And the Greek Church hath ever since used this Liturgy as the genuin composure of S. Chrysostom Secondly The main part of this Liturgy is found either explicitly or by plain intimations in the genuin Works of S. Chrysostom who reckons up the same Ceremonies Hymns and Prayers and generally in the same order And also upon occasion comments upon and explains both the Rites and ancient Forms and covertly refers to many more passages in this Liturgy only he would not speak out because his Homilies were Preached to a promiscuous Auditory Thirdly There is a great part of this Liturgy very pure Primitive and worthy of this great Author even so much of it as is Recorded in his own Writings and in the Works of S. Cyprian S. Cyril S. Basil S. Augustin and others or so much of it as is taken out of Holy Scripture And in all this there is nothing of Praying to Saints to Angels or the blessed Virgin nothing of any Prayers for delivering the deceased from pain nothing of venerating the Cross or any other Image The passages which look this way are later Patches tacked to this holy Liturgy in corrupter times easily distinguishable from the Original composure both by the Stile and Matter wherefore these Parts we reject but must not throw away the Wheat with the Chaff there being no Father to which some corrupt Additions have not been made but we must not for the sake of these spurious Tracts reject that which is true and genuine Fourthly Since it is so clear that Forms had been long used in the Church and that the Gift of Prayer was ceased before this Century began it cannot but be very probable that so great a Bishop of so eminent a Diocess and with so large a Jurisdiction should model and correct the ancient Forms and adapt them to the use of the Churches under his care as S. Basil had done for those under his charge especially since no ancient Author did ever contradict this Universally received Notion That this Liturgy was made by S. Chrysostom Nor doth any Historian assign any other Person as the maker thereof or mention this Liturgy as coming into use in any other Age. § 20. And now we will consider those things which are objected both against the use of Forms in this Age and against the Authority of this Liturgy my Adversary produces divers places out of S. Chrysostom to prove that Words spoken in the Celebration of the Sacraments were Mysteries which S. Chrysostom thinks ought to be concealed and therefore he supposes there were no Written Forms in his time however none of his Wrting (w) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 29. pag. 35 36 37. I have often answered this Argument before But I shall now observe That this Notion of the great Sin of divulging Mysteries to the Unbaptized hinders S. Chrysostom in his Discourses which are generally Sermons Homilies and Orations made to a promiscuous Auditory from giving as many Passages of the Ecclesiastical Forms which he generally there wraps up in dark Expressions yet his appealing to the Faithful and telling them they knew and remembred such and such things is a certain sign that there were known and prescribed Forms For how could he appeal to the Initiated or tell them they knew or remembred such or such a Passage which he darkly hinted if Sacraments had been celebrated or Prayers made in the Extempore way by Phrases daily varied Thus in those Instances which my Adversary brings Speaking of the Litany used by the Faithful S. Chrysostom saith It is a Mystery but the Initiated know how it abounds with Mercy (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chry◠in Matth. hom 71. p. 451. Disc of Liturg. pag. 29. This must be some Form which they knew otherwise he could not have made this Appeal So when this Father speaks of the mystical Words in Baptism he doubts not but those who were baptized could remember what they Answered (y) Id. Hom. 40. in 1 Cor. p 514. Disc of Liturg. Marg. pag. 29. which shews they Answered in a certain Form of Words And it appears they also had a set and certain Form of renouncing the Devil because S. Chrysostom appeals to the Initiated and bids them Remember those Words by which they renounced the Devils Tyranny (z) Hom. 2. in 2 Epist ad Cor. pag. 555. yet our Adversary by a dexterity of arguing peculiar to himself cites this to prove there was no Form of Renunciation (a) Discourse of Liturg. p. 37. By which rare Art also he quotes S. Chrysostom's Exposition of Gal IV. 28. where he saith The Faithful knew the Divine Words pronounced by the Priest at their Baptism (b) Chrys hom in 4 Galat. p. 748. Disc of Liturg. p. 37. to prove there were no Forms and yet if there had not been known Forms this Appeal could not have been made For no Dissenting Pastor who Officiates Extempore can appeal to his Congregation and say You know
was the very Case of Liturgies then they were writ down but kept secret from the Unbelievers though at the same time they were known to all the Faithful And for his alledging pag 42. That Writing them out for many Châ—â—â—â—â—es must needs divulge them The Formed Epistles also were written out for every Bishop and a Copy transcribed as often as any of his Diocess was to Travel into a strange Country by shewing which to the Bishop of that remote City who had a like Form written down beside him this Stranger was admitted to Catholic Communion So that these were Written often out and yet kept secret from Hereticks as the Liturgies were also written out frequently yet still kept from the sight and hearing of the Catechumens or if any of them by chance came to the sight or knowledge of the Liturgick Forms he confesseth pag. 43 that Man was immediately Baptized and so obliged to keep all secret from those without And as to what he saith there of the Pagans torturing Christians to get out the Secrets of their Worship that proceeding was over long before the Age wherein he saith this Secrecy was so strictly practised And therefore he should not urge those Methods But if we grant this Concealing Mysterios began sooner there is no doubt but the Faithful were taught to be as resolute not to publish their Mysteries as they were not to deny their Faith so that there was no danger of their being published by Tortures Finally If the People had all their Responses and their part of the Liturgy by Heart as they might easily have there was no need of Writing out the Forms for them as he insinuates pag. 44. and so that could be no occasion of publishing the Forms to Unbelievers To conclude There is nothing in this tedious Ramble of my Adversaries for 16 Pages together which doth in the least prove That the Christian Mysteries were not celebrated by Written Forms and therefore there is nothing in it to his purpose but on the contrary much of it tends to prove That the Divine-Service was then performed by Prescribed Forms § 8. The next thing which looks like an Argument is his deducing the Fathers Extempore Praying from their Extempore Preaching For when he hath spent many Pages in proving That Origen Cyril Nazianzen Chrysostom Atticus Hierom and Augustin Preached 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Extempore He concludes at last in these Words Thus they did Preach and thus they might Pray (a) Disc of Lit. pag 50 to pag. 60. I Answer He seems very dubious he dare say no more than It is possible they might Pray so But still it is possible also they might pray by Forms and it is more than probable they did so because this Author hath ransacked every Corner of Antiquity and cannot produce one plain Evidence wherein any of these or other Fathers who are commended for Preaching thus are either affirmed to have Prayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Extempore or commended for that Gift which our Adversaries think was then and is now one of the main Qualifications for the Ministry We need not doubt but if he had found any such thing he would have brought it out with all imaginable Triumph and Ostentation He that is forced to spend so much Paper to force two obscure Phrases into a Sense for his purpose viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and de Pectore which do but remotely hint That in the Ages of Inspiration when Justin Martyr and Tertullian lived they prayed without Book How would he have triumphed if he could have met with any plain Evidence of their Praying Extempore This would have done his business at once and gon far toward ending the Controversie But when this Author cannot find one word of this but is forced here to falsifie Nazianzen most grosly and pervert the Meaning of S. Ambrose as was shewed before to make out a remote Conjecture but he hath not one Positive Proof no not here where his Cause needed it so extreamly We may conclude there is no Evidence that any of these Fathers did pray Extempore in Public and thence it will follow that after the Fourth Century began the Gift of Prayer was ceased and the Usage of the Church was to pray by Forms yea these very Fathers who preached Extempore and so could have invented their Public Prayers as well as their Public Sermons having acquired that Faculty yet did not see fit to use it in their Addresses to God because they considered the Greatness of His Majesty and the Care and Caution to be used in speaking to Him before whom Angels voil their Faces their Sermons were only spoken to mortal Men but their Prayers addressed to a Glorious Immortal God therefore they took freedom in the one but durst not in the other There they used holy and known Forms not out of necessity but choice which shews their Judgment was That Forms were the best way of Serving God in public especially and though they were better Qualified than our Dissenting Brethren for Extempore Praying they rejected that Method All this we have reason to believe from the Universal Silence concerning Extempore Prayer in all these Ages wherein we see they do observe there was an use of Extempore Preaching and if this Gift of Praying on the sudden had been so admirable a thing and so necessary to qualifie a Man for the Ministry 't is impossible but there would have been some memorial of the use of it and some of the Fathers must have been commended for excelling in it but no such matter appearing while yet there are plain and express Proofs of Liturgies we conclude that none then did use to pray Extempore in a Public Congregation § 9. After this he Argues from the Liberty the Ancients took to use several Forms in Baptism with great variety That they also used as much Liberty in their Prayers (b) Disc of Lit. pag. 93. yet he tells us at first That Tertullian saith The Law of Baptism is imposed and the Form prescribed by Christ (c) Lex namque tingendi impositâ— est Fâ—rma praescripta Tertul de Bapt. cap. 13. viz. in those words Matth. xxviii 19. Go teach all Nations and baptize them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Now it will not easily be believed that the Holy Fathers who took this prescribed Form to be a Law bound upon them by the Authority of Christ himself should think themselves at liberty to alter this Form as they pleased especially since we know the Ancients generally declared those Hereticks Baptism to be null and void who did not Baptize in this very Form of Words (d) Can. Apost Can. 49. Cyâ—r ad Jubai Epist 73. Concil Niâ—end Can. ult item Sozom. lib. 6. cap. 26. Which is a strong Proof that these Holy Fathers believed this Form to be invariable Let us therefore see how he makes out the contrary Why First his Text and Margen