of Charity that the Lapsed may obtain the Remedy of Repentance and lastly that the Catechumens being brought to the Sacrament of Regeneration may have the Gate of the Divine Mercy opened unto them (l) Obsecrationum quoque Sacerdotalium sacramenta respiciamus quae ab Apostolis tradita in toto mundo atque in omni Ecclesiâ Catholicâ uniformitèr celebrantur c. Celest Ep. pro Presp Hilar. inter opera Prosper p. 894. This is that famous Passage which our Adversary labours to misinterpret but in vain since nothing can more clearly prove the use of a prescribed Form than these Words For Celestine is here arguing against Hereticks and he confutes them by the Forms then used in the Church producing the very Words and affirming that the Apostles had delivered these Prayers to them at first and that there was an Uniformity in these Petitions between all the National Churches in the World that is all their Litanies had these Requests differing only in the Order and some few Phrases but the Roman Form was this which he here sets down bids the Hereticks look upon it and tells them this was the Rule for Prayer and therefore they ought to believe suitably to these Prayers which might be a Rule for their Faith as well as for their Devotion Now if these Prayers only agreed in the persons and things to be prayed for but were daily varied as every Minister pleased might not the Hereticks have asked him Where they could see Extempore and invisible Prayers or how he could make those Prayers fix a Rule for their Faith which were as various and uncertain as their Ministers Fancies They might except justly against any Argument taken from Prayers which were varied every day and differed so exceedingly in every â—everal Church But since they could be looked on transcribed and urged as an Argument and were so ancient in this Age that even Hereticks durst not â—xcept against the Authority of them we are sure they must be prescribed â—orms made long before this time I will not deny but that both Innocent and Celestine might stretch their Tradiâ—ion something too far when they â—scribed the Original of these Forms to â—he Apostles themselves but even that Assertion especially here in a dispute with Hereticks shews they were so ancient then that there was no Memorial of the first Composer left and â—t is usual among the Fathers to call that Apostolical which was generally observed and had so early a beginning that its first Author was not known As for my Adversaries pretence That this Testimony only affirms an Uniformity as to the order the persons and things to be prayed for I must observe that S. Augustine useth this very Argument against the same Hereticks and when he comes to cite the Words of the Prayer he repeats these very Words without altering any thing either in the Phrase or Order We have cited the place in the First part and if there be any verbal difference in the Translation from what is here set down out of Celestine I assure the Reader there is none in the Latin as will appear by comparing both places together (m) Celestin Ep. apud Prosp Et Aug. de Eccles dogmat cap. 30. See this History Part. l. Cent. 4. §. 21. pag. 231. Now when Celestine at Rome some years after quotes the same Form of Prayer verbatim which S. Augustine in Africa had cited before this shews that the Words as well as the Matter and Order were agreed on and it follows that both the Roman and African Church had a certain prescribed Form of Litany at this time and that the same Form was used in both Churches and was so Ancient and of so good Authority then as to be quoted for Evidence in a dispute with Hereticks And who can imagine there was no more but such an Uniformity as he speaks of that is that every Priest in every several Church in Rome used several Phrases every day which is more properly a Multiformity since we see the same Form of Words quoted for Evidence by two great Bishops the one in Italy the other in Africa and this also at two different times Or how can such a liberty and variety in Praying as he dreams of be called legem supplicandi a Rule of Praying How can such an uncertain thing which daily appears in a new and different shape fix the legem credendi the Rule of Believing We conclude therefore that the Words as well as the Method of this Litany was fixed at Rome long before the Time of this Pope § 6. Which will appear more plainly Prosper Aquitan An. D. 430 if we consult Prosper in whose behalf the Pope writ this Epistle For he being to Expound that place of S. Paul 1 Tim. II. 1. I exhort therefore that Prayers Supplications c. refers to the same Litany only supposing that the Form was well known he doth not quote the Words in their order but describes them so plainly that any one may discern it is the same Form which he S. Augustine and Pope Celestine do all appeal to His Words are these Which Law or Rule of Prayer the Devotion of all Priests and Faithful People so unanimously observe that there is no part of the World wherein the Christians do not celebrate such Prayers For the Church every where prays to God not only for the Saints and those already Regenerated in Christ but for all the Infidels and Enemies of his Cross For all Idolaters and all that persecute Christ in his Members for the Jews to whose blindness the Gospel gives no light for Hereticks and Schismaticks who are estranged from the Vnity of Faith and Charity And what doth it ask for these but that leaving their Errors they may be converted to God and receive the Faith embrace Charity and that being freed from the darkness of Ignorance they may come to the acknowledgment of the Truth (n) Prosper de Vocat Gent. lib. 1. cap. 12. pag. 798. We see he is discoursing gnerally of this Litany and breaks the Sentences first running over the persons prayed for and then the things asked for them yet even in this lax way of discourse it is easie to discern that he refers to Celestine's Form and with him affirms That this Prayer was a Rule unanimously observed by all Priests and People whereas if every Priest had daily varied the Words in every Assembly of the People there could be neither Certainty in the Rule nor Uniformity in the observing it I may add that Prosper did so highly reverence S. Augustine that we cannot doubt but he imitated him in the Approbation and use of public Forms and he explains one of those public Forms viz. the Preface of Sursum Corda in his Sentences taken out of S. Augustine's Works (o) Prosp sent ex Augustin sent 153. pag. 434. And in another place he mentions and commends that ancient Custom prescribed in the old Liturgies for the People
Hereticks And so much was he in love with Forms that he made such for private and extraordinary occasions For when any came to him under outward afflictions and desired his Prayers he used this Form Lord thou knowest what is best for our Souls and therefore when we ask for such things as our necessity compels us to desire do thou only grant that which conduces to our Spiritual welfare therefore if our humble Prayer be expedient then let it be heard so that thy Will may happily be Accomplished (p) Vita Fulgent cap. 25. pag. 30. Another Form frequently repeated by this holy Bishop in his last Sickness was this O Lord give me patience here and thy Pardon at my End (q) Ibid. cap. 30. pag. 93. And the Writer of his Life remarks that these Prayers of his were graciously heard and answered by Almighty God who it seems is well pleased with Forms that are said with true Devotion and if he accept them we may justly despise the Censures of ignorant and prejudiced Men. I must not conclude this Period till I observe that there is in the Works of this Fulgentius a Book dedicated to him by Peter the Deacon which this holy Bishop highly commends wherein as we shewed before it is affirmed That the Liturgy of S. Basil was generally used in the Eastern Church and of so great Authority was it accounted that he cites a passage out of it against the Hereticks (r) In libel Petr Diac. de incarn grat Jesu Chr. inter op Fulg. Moreover in that same Book is quoted also that same Prayer for all Estates of Men as an Argument to confirm the Catholic Faith which we produced at Large before out of S. Augustin and Pope Celestine (s) Ibid. cap 8. pag 281. See Cent. 5. §. and since so many Fathers produce it in dispute it is Evident it was a part of the Churches Liturgy and had been so for many Ages otherwise it had been to no purpose to bring it for Evidence against the Enemies of the Catholic Faith And this may suffice to shew the continuance of Liturgy in the African Church in the time of Fulgentius Concil Valentin Ann. Dom. 524. § 4. To return into the West there is a Canon made at the Council of Valentia in Spain Which saith Before the Catechumens go out and the Office of the Faithful begin let the Epistle and Gospel be Read and the Sermon be Preached because by hearing of these many had been converted to the Faith (t) Concil Valent Can. 1. Bin. Tom. II. par 1. pag. 629. By which wee see the Offices of the Catechumens and the Faithful yet remained in two distinct Forms as they had been in the Primitive Ages but this Canon made way for joyning those Offices and admitting all sorts of People to the whole Service excepting only the holy Cummunion so that after this we rarely hear of dismissing the Catechumens or of keeping Mysteries secret because these parts of the World were now generally become professed Christians In France a little before this Sigismund one of their Kings had instituted a Society of Monks to sing the Daily Office (u) Gregor Turon lib 3. cap. 5. pag. 95. vid. Cointe Annal An. 522. Now that Office which is Sung by each side of a Choir can be no other than a prescribed Form And we shall shew presently that the Monks of France had a peculiar Office made up of ancient Forms of Praise and Prayer In the mean time we shall look upon the Canons of the Council of Vaison Concil Vasent 3. Ann. 529. by which we shall see that Liturgick Forms were used at this time also in all the Churches of the World and believed to have descended down to them from the most ancient Times For the Bishops in this Council say That since it was the custom in the East at Rome and in all Italy to repeat the Kyrie Eleeson Lord have Mercy upon us Therefore in all our Churches this holy Custom shall be introduced to say it in the Morning Prayer at the Communion and at Evening Prayer (w) ut in omnibus Ecclesiis nostris ista consuetudo sanct ad Matutinum Missas ad Vesperam Deo propitiante intromittatur Concil Vas Can. Bin. Tom. II. par 1. pag. 641. The Form was ancient and used in all the Primitive Litanies but in these Churches they had not begun to repeat these Words in the Daily Offices at the three great Hours of Prayer But since it was become a Custom in all other Countries so to use this holy Form they now prescribe it shall be so used in their Churches as it is still in our Liturgy immediately before the Lords Prayer Again the same Council ordains That the Communion Service shall never be said without the Hymn of Holy Holy Holy that is the Trisagion which though it was prescribed by their Liturgy before yet some in the time of Lent and in private Communions had thought fit to omit it (x) Ibid. Can. 4. so that the variations which Bishops had made from the old way were regulated by the Councils of this Age. The next Canon affirms That at Rome in the East in Africa and Italy they had for preventing Heresie added to the Gloria Patri these Words As it was in the beginning c. Wherefore they ordain that this Hymn shall be repeated with that addition in their Churches (y) Ibid. Can. 5. p. 642. The Form with this enlargment also had been long in use in other Churches but this Addition was first Established in France after its second Conversion by this Canon And we gather from hence that in this Age there is not only an assurance that every Nation had a Liturgy but that the lesser Churches laboured to imitate the greater and more famous Churches in order to the making as great an Uniformity as was possible in all the Liturgies then in the World And we shall finally note from this Councils Orders about these ancient Forms that private Bishops themselves in this Age were not allowed to correct or alter any thing relating to the Liturgy Nothing less than a Council might presume to make Orders in those Cases Wherefore we cannot imagin that Liturgies were lately set up in the end of the last Age or the beginning of this as my Adversary affirms much less can we think that private Ministers had leave to vary the Offices as they pleased Benedictus Monach. An. Dom. 529. § 5. About this time Flourished Benedict the Father of that numerous Order of Monks who within an Age or two had filled all the Western World and he writ his Rule not as my Adversary pretends in the middle (z) Disc of Lit. p. 178. but towards the beginning of the Sixth Age viz. Ann. Dom. 530. (a) Vid. Dr. Cave Cartoph Eccles p. 109. Which Rule is still extant (b) Vid. Cointe Annal. Eccles An. 536. And as to
Antioch especially when it was conveyed for the most part of that time only by Oral Tradition To conclude The Apostles shewed the way of making Forms of the things to be believed and if the Parallel hold between Creeds and Liturgies then we have reason to believe they first Composed Forms also for the things to be asked of God in Prayer and to be spoken to his Honour in Praises Which first and Apostolical Forms are the foundation and ground of all the several Liturgies in great and eminent Churches which like their Creeds agree in the main Essential parts and have so much likeness as to persuade us they all came from one Original Form at first but tract of Time and distacne of Place caused some differences in the Order and Phrases in distant Churches But so that all the Members of every great Church were obliged to learn the Creed of that Church where they received their Baptism and also to use the Forms of that same Church in whose Communion they lived And this may suffice for his Consequences drawn from the Primitive Creeds because it is nothing to our purpose when they came to be used first in the Communion Office forasmuch as he grants they were used in the Office of Baptism from the beginning § 11. He concludes this Set of Arguments by a large and tedious digression about the Variety used in the Form of Renouncing the Devil in Baptism and here again he fills his Margen with the Names of near twenty Ancients who speak of this Form of Renunciation in different Words by which he hopes to prove That this Form was arbitrary since not only divers Churches differed therein but the Authors who lived in the same Church yea the same Author in several places of his Works expresses it variously And then comes his Inference That if they were not limited to a Set Form of Words in this Sentence none can believe they were or would have suffered themselves to be confined to an invariable Form of Words in Praying at Baptism (b) Disc of Lit. pag. 105 106 107 108 109. Now if we should grant his Consequence did follow from these Premisses then we must expect at least that the Premisses shall be fully proved but we shall shew that he hath not made them out sufficiently For first the greater part of his Authors do not pretend to recite the Form but are only applying the Duty in occasional Discourses for which I need no other Evidence but to desire the Reader to consult the Places he produceth out of Origen Ephrem Syrus S. Basil Cyril of Alexandria Pseudo Dionysius Justinian Optatus S. Cyprian S. Augustin in the two later places and S. Hierom These Fathers in Homilies and practical Discourses speak of the thing and press the Obligation but do not pretend to repeat the words they express them in their own Phrases and therefore no wonder if they differ Secondly Many of these Witnesses do not speak of the whole Renunciation but some of the Renouncing the Devil only others only of Renouncing the World as the Subject upon which they were treating required and it is strange that he should cite these Authors to make out a difference in the whole Form when one speaks of one part of it and another Author treats of another part Thirdly Most of these Authors not only lived in several Ages but belonged to several distant Countries and were Members of Churches which had some difference in the Phrases and Order of their whole Liturgy and therefore their differing in the Words or Syllables of this Renunciation doth not prove they had no Set Forms of Prayer in any Church but only that several great Churches had some Variety in their Forms which we freely grant and it cannot hurt our Cause since all were limited to use the Forms of their own Church Thus Origen belonged to Alexandria Constantine's Edict was forged at Rome Cyril was of Palaestina Basil of Cappadocia Salvian of France Pseudo-Dionysius of Laodicea Clemens of Antioch Justinian of Constantinople Tertullian of Africa and S. Ambrose of Milan Now we have proved that there was a Variety between the Liturgies of these distant Churches in many particulars and therefore it is not strange they should differ in expressing the Syllables of the Renunciation supposing every one of them had been repeating the Form of his own Church Yet Fourthly Those of the same Country and espcially those of the same Church do either agree or come as near one another as can be expected from Men who are rather describing than repeating the Form Thus Ephrem-Syrus and Cyril of Jerusalem do agree exactly both of them no doubt referring to the Form used in Palaestina Salvian twice mentions this Form in the same words referring to the Liturgy of the Gallican Church and S. Chrysostom differs very little from Justinian because both had respect to the Constantinopolitan Form and that of Antioch related in the Constitutions is very near it So Tertullian and S. Augustin where they speak closely do exactly agree in the African Form And it is very probable that Constantine's Edict refers to the Roman Form Basil to that of Naeocoesarea and S. Ambrose to that of Milan Now if each of these great Churches had a certain Form to the use of which all that belonged to it were obliged then probably they had also such a Form for other Prayers And Fifthly it is very plain that every great Church had such a Form because the Fathers do very often charge those who were Baptized to remember the very words in which they made this Renunciation so doth S. Ambrose (c) Quid interrogatus es recognosce Quid responderis Ambros de iis quae initiant cap 2. and S. Chrysostom (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys in 2 Cor. hom 2. p. 555. Now this Charge had been ridiculous and had required an Impossibility if the Words were arbitrary and every one of them had made the Renunciation in a different Form of Words I conclude therefore That every Great Church had one certain Form and all of them were so like that they must come from one Original at first and it was only length of Time and distance of Place that had made the small Variations between the Forms of several eminent Churches Which also was the Case of Liturgies in general and of the whole Baptismal Office as well as of this peculiar part of it We have now done with all his Arguments of this kind and will leave the Reader to judge of the Modesty and Truth of those mighty Brags which he makes of the narrow search he hath made into Antiquity and the full Answer he hath given to all that either he could meet with or that others had produced on Behalf of Liturgies whose Primitive Original and general Use is but more cleared by all his Objections against them § 12. My Adversary concludes his Book first by fixing the Period when Liturgies did come
quoted Oration he saith expresly I neither dare nor can justly accuse all (p) Idem Orat. â—0 in laud. Basilii p. 335. which Words in the same Page my Adversary must see and yet he omitted them on purpose to Arraign the whole Age. S. Basil doth not charge the Western Bishops with Ignorance in general but only That they did not or would not understand the case and condition of the Eastern Church (q) Basil ep pag. 285. Yet this Man produces this Passage to prove that the Bishops of the West and the Chief of them were a sort of Ignorant Fellows His Margen applies it to Damasus and he attempts to prove Siricius and Iâ—nocent deserved the same Character whose Vindication I leave to their own Friends it being no hurt to my Cause if two or three Bishops of one See were not so great Clerks since that Age was full of Learned Men and Famous Scholars And he can have no advantage to his Cause if he could prove the most of these were ignorant because Innocent the last of them lived almost an Hundred years before he will own Liturgies were imposed Pag. 193. That which he cites out of S. Chrysostom relates only to some few Evil Men as the Places will shew (r) Chrysost de Sacerd. Orat. 3. pag. 24. And as we noted before S. Ambrose is speaking of such only as came in by Simony (s) Ambros de dign Sacerd. cap. 5. That Epistle of Isidore's which he cites thrice in this Page seems plainly to refer only to one Simoniack (t) Isid Pel. lib. 5. ep 276. And his next Quotation speaks only of some Corruption in one small Diocess occasioned by an Evil Bishop newly admitted to Rule there (u) Id. lib. 3. ep 245. And I appeal to any Man whether these be fit Proofs that the whole Clergy were then depraved and corrupted Pag. 194. The like Appeal I may make concerning his next Quotations The first place out of Isidore is only about Zosimus one Ill Priest Ordained by one Evil Bishop (w) Isid Pel. lib. 5. ep 426. The next Epistle expresly owns that there were many Good Men remaining (x) Id. lib. 3. ep 259. The third place divides those Bishops into two Ranks Good and Bad and advises him to whom the Epistle is writ to be of the former number (y) Lib. 5. ep 481. The fourth Quotation shews how some especially the Bishop of Peleusium abused their Authority (z) Lib. 2. ep 50. The last Epistle saith no more but that some were much worse by their high Places (a) Ibid. lib. 2. ep 71. In the same Page his Editor hath blundered the Text by referring to wrong places in the Margen But we will follow the order of the Margen and First Sozomen is only relating the History of S. Chrysostom's Deposing 13 Bishops in the Lesser Asia and Palladius reckons them to be but six who suffered this Sentence (b) Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 6. pag. 452. Georg. Alex. vit Chrysost yet even these were thought to have so hard measure and their Crimes to be so small that Chrysostom was very much censured for it (c) See Doctor Cave's Life of S. Chrysost pag. 476. The Character of Theophilus of Alexandria's Ordination is cited from his bitter Enemies who hated him upon the account of Persecuting S. Chrysostom Yet it if it be true (d) Georg. Alex. vit Chrysost Pallad the whole Church ought not suffer by the Facts of one evil Bishop Nor must Chrysostoms account of those few Churches in Asia which he saw in his Exile (e) Chrysost Ep. 2. pass for an account of the whole World Pag. 195. The first place in this Margen relates to the same thing of which he discoursed in the last Page and here he saith Eusebius of Peleusium a creature of Theophilus and Isidore's Enemy Ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Plural number but Isidore speaks only of one Zosimus ordained by him who was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Ignorant Fellow (f) Ibid. Pel. lib. 3. Ep. 81. And the three next Epistles concern only Zosimus and two more ill Priests which Eusebius had ordained (g) Id. lib. 5. Ep. 51 52 53. The two next Epistles also only concer that single Bishop and some few whom he had ordained (h) Id. lib. 5. Ep. 140. 147. Only the Editor hath here made a woful jumble and in the midst of a word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. 147. hath broken that word to pieces and put down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and then goes on with a whole Sentence out of Epistle 140th as far as to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And then puts in the rest of the broken word and Prints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epistle 147th making it neither good Greek nor so much as good Sense In the same Page we have an account of the Ignorance of the African Church in the year of Christ 401. But this was 100 years before he will allow the use of Liturgies and by his account these Men were all to Pray Extempore for which they do not seem to be very well Qualified so that a Man who Reads this must be apt to think he hath dated the Original of Liturgies wrong because it is no way Credible that Aurelius the Bishop of Carthage and S. Augustin here also cited would allow Men to Pray after that manner who were so void of Learning and Judgment that they neither could avoid Solecisms nor discern Heresy But as to the matter of Fact we have sufficient Testimony for all this good Bishops complaint that there were at that time many very Learned Men in Africa and therefore this must be understood only of some few Churches Pag. 196. He rakes into the Subscriptions of Councils to find out some Bishops who could not Write their own Names but got others to Subscribe for them and hence he seeks to confirm his Notion of the Ignorance of the Clergy in this Age. But to this I must reply that the Subscriptions of some Councils are not of any great Credit nor void of Suspicion of Forgery (i) Existimoâ— subscriptiones illas quae hodie circumferuntur fictas esse Whitak de Concil Q. 4. But if we do allow those of Ephesus and Chalcedon to be genuine and his Quotations to be true though I can find but one of them in Binius and have not Crabs Edition of the Councils besides me There are but 4 Bishops in both these general Councils who are put to Subscribe by others because they could not Write their own Names But there were near 200 Bishops at the Ephesine Council and 630 at that of Chalcedon Now suppose among 800 Bishops there were 4 who could not Write I hope since there were 796 who could Write it will not follow that the Age was Ignorant or the most of the Bishops unlearned And besides he grants that these unlearned Bishops were not fit to
but if it be S. Basil's it will not help his Cause because these are Directions for the Monks private Prayers in their Cells and therefore do not belong to the Public Offices about which we dispute yet even in that Book he makes Forms both of Praise and Prayer for their private use and though he allow his Monk to collect Sentences of Scripture also for this purpose yet he would have those Sentences put into a Form and he was to offer that Form up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as devoutly as he was able by which we not only learn that S. Basil much approved of these Forms but we see that the Phrase of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about which he made such a stir in Justin Martyr doth properly signify The using a Form of Prayer with all possible devotion I shall only add That when these Monks prayed all together they had a Form also which S. Basil calls their Canon or Rule as we shewed before Lastly Out of the same Tract he observes that S. Basil would have his Monk in Prayer to have his Mind upon God alone and nothing else (t) Basil Constitut Mon. cap. 1. pag. 671. and he fancies this was very hard to do if the Monk had his Book to mind and thence he infers they had no Prayer Books (u) Discourse of Liturg. p. 121. But we may remember that S. Basil ordered his Monks to get the Psalms by Heart and if they got their other Prayers also by Heart that would utterly spoil his Inference Yet suppose they did read their Forms by frequent use they would soon be so perfect in them that a few glances sometimes on their Books would serve to help them to repeat them right and not divert their Mind from God at all And we who use our Common Prayer know by Experience that the Liturgy being early become familiar to us we have nothing to mind but only God when we pray whereas those who pray Extempore have their Fancy so busie in inventing new Phrases and Matter and their Thoughts so taken up with what they have said are saying and are to say next that they cannot steddily keep their Mind upon God And the Congregation also are so busie in observing the new Phrases that they cannot have such fixed Thoughts as they who being accustomed to their well known Forms have no other thing to do than to watch their own Hearts and keep them close to the Duty they are about And this may suffice to confute all his far fetch'd Objections out of S. Basil and to shew they are all of them very insignificant § 15. But we must carry this Matter further and will prove that S. Basil The Liturgy of S. BASIL not only approved Forms but made a Liturgy himself which we shall make out by sufficient Evidence in every Age since it was Composed First His dear Friend Nazianzen who knew him best of any Man saith in his Encomium That the Prayers which he composed were the Ornament of his Throne (w) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Naâ— Orat. 20 p. 34â— Secondly The Life of S. Basil said to be writ by Amphilocius tells us He prayed to God for such Grace Wisdom and Vnderstanding as might enable him to offer up the unbloody Sacrifice in Words of his own by the direction of the Holy Ghost And the Author saith our Saviour appeared to him telling him His Request was granted whereupon he first pronounced and then writ down the Liturgy which bears his Name (x) Vita Basil per Amphilâ—c inter Opera D. Basilii I shall not undertake to justifie the Miracle that may have been added by some Admirers of this Liturgy but the Matter of Fact on which it was grounded was always taken for a certain Truth in very ancient Ages and as I need not this Testimony so I had not cited it at large but to check our Adversaries Confidence who cites Bishop Jewel saying That Basil besought God he might celebrate with Prayers of his own making (y) Disc of Lit. Marg. pag. 73. by which he hopes to abuse his Reader into thinking that Basil desired to make daily new Extempore Prayers Whereas Bishop Jewel refers to this Passage in S. Basil's Life and it was a Liturgy of his own Composing that he begged abilities for We proceed to Proclus who was Bishop of Constantinople within fifty years after S. Basil's Death and who personally knew S Chrysostom and he saith That S. Basil seeing Mens sloth and degeneracy made them weary of a long Liturgy though he thought there was nothing unnecessary or tedious in that of S. James which was used before yet to prevent the weariness of Priests and People He delivered a shorter Form (z) Proclus de tradit divin Lâ—â—urg The reason is fair and the Authority of this Writer being so near S. Basil's Time is very weighty Again Petrus Diaconus Contemporary with Fulgentius who lived in Africa not very much above an 100 years after S. Basil's Death cites this Liturgy as an undoubted piece of his genuine Works in his Dispute against the Pelagians in these Words S. Basil Bishop of Caesarea in his Prayer made at the holy Altar which all the Eastern Church useth among other things saith Grant O Lord of Hosts our defence we beseech thee that the evil may be made good and those that are good keep them in their goodness (a) Petrus Diac. de Incarnat c. 8. From whence we note first That these Words are still in that very Liturgy which bears S. Basil's Name Secondly That within little more than one Hundred years after S. Basil's Death it was used as S. Basil's Liturgy by all the Eastern Church and known even in Africa by that Name Thirdly That it was of so great Reputation and Authority then and there as to be quoted for unquestionable Evidence even against Hereticks Wherefore we conclude it was certainly of his Composing it being morally impossible that any Forgery in his Name should be so early and generally received in the Eastern Church where he was so well known and should get such Credit among the Africans that even Hereticks durst not except against it To this we may add Leontius a Monk of Constantinople who lived in the same Century with Fulgentius and cites this Liturgy for Evidence against Nestorius (b) Lâ—ont adv Nestor lib. 3. An. â—90 In the very next Age it was quoted as good Authority against the Error of the Armenians by this August Title The Mystical Service delivered to us in Writing c. and then they cite a Passage of S. Basil's Liturgy as that which was daily used in their Church (c) Concil 6. Constant in Trull Can. 32. An. â—â—0 Beveâ— Tom. I. pag 192. We need proceed no lower because the whole Greek Church gives constant and universal Testimony to it ever since as a genuine Composure of S. Basils However we will hear our Adversaries Objections
agreement among the Churches or that the Apostles and Apostolical Men set up this variety Fifthly For remedy hereof he advises all those Churches which had their Original from Rome to follow those Customs which S. Peter had delivered to that Church and were kept there ever since Which place so clear for the Antiquity and Necessity of Uniformity our Adversary cites over and over and spends many Pages to shew that this very Epistle proves there were no Forms prescribed at Rome in those days (h) Disc of Liturgies p. 40 41. pag. 78 79 80 81 82. For saith he when the Bishop of Eugubium enquired of divers particulars concerning the Church-Service he doth not refer him to any written Orders but to what he had seen practised at Rome and he will not write down the Words used in the Office of Chrism calling the Words of Consecration Those things which he might not publish Adding That it was matter of enquiry then whether the Kiss of Peace should be given before or after the Consecration and whether the Names of the Offerers should be recited before or after the Prayer over the Oblation Concluding from these passages That there could be then no setled Order or Form at Rome and that which Innocent would have fixed was no more than a Rubric or Direction and this for Imitation not for strict Conformity so that in Innocents Time every one in Italy Consecrated as he thought fit This is the sum of his Inference In Answer to which I must observe First That those particulars which the Bishop of Eugubium enquired about and for which Innocent refers him to what he had seen used at Rome were Rites and Ceremonies as appears by the several Matters treated of in this Epistle viz. Cap. 1. Of the Kiss of Peace Cap. 2. Of reciting the Offerers Names Cap. 3. Of the Anointing the Baptized Cap. 4. Of the Saturday Fast Cap. 5. Of the Leavened Bread Cap. 6 7. Whether a Priest might lay Hands on the Possessed and the Penitents Cap. 8. Whether he might not Anoint the Sick Now these things being all external Rites which he might see and hear at Rome and so commit to his Memory the Method used there it was not necessary to refer him to the Roman Liturgy nor doth it follow there was no such Liturgy for the Prayers themselves because when the Pope was ask'd about the Rites and Customs of Rome he doth not as my Adversary saith refer him thither for satisfaction in these Matters Yet Secondly this very Epistle makes it plain they had certain Forms at Rome for their several Offices for when he speaks of Anointing the Baptized he saith Verba verò dicere non possum ne magis prodere videar quam ad consultationem respondere Ibid. Cap. 3. I cannot tell you the words lest I betray the Church under pretence of answering your Question And so about the Forms used in the Communion-Office he thus expresseth himself Post omnia quae aperire non debeo c. The Kiss of Peace comes after those things which I must not publish And a little after Quae scribi sui non erat Those things which it is not lawful for me to write down Ib. Cap. 8. All which places necessarily suppose they had certain and fixed Words which were capable of being written down but since in that Age divers as he notes out of Chamier pag. 41. Marg. were not initiated some being then Pagans and others as yet but Catechumens Innocent would not set down the Forms in a Letter which might be intercepted or fall into the hands of such as ought not to know these Sacred Mysteries But now if at Rome every Priest had prayed Extempore and not only differed from others but daily varied from himself then Innocent could not have discoursed at this rate but must have said As for the Words I cannot write them down not because it is unlawful but because it is impossible for you know every Priest varies them daily as he pleases Wherefore this Notion of keeping the Words secret which was strictly observed in that Age proves they were stated Forms capable of being writ down and learned by Unbelievers if they had been published to them And nothing can be weaker to say no worse than to argue as he doth Innocent would not write the Forms in a Letter which might miscarry therefore they were not written down in Books closely kept by the Bishops and Priests at Rome Thirdly For his Objection That it was matter of Enquiry then what place in the Eucharistical Office should be assigned to the Kiss of Peace and to the recital of the Offerers Names (i) Disc of â—it pag. 78. which he thinks could not be if there had been setled Forms at Rome It is very frivolous For the Bishop of Eugubium doth enquire of these Matters because he knew there was a certain Order at Rome and though he had seen it and perhaps knew it very well yet his Neighbouring Bishops having different ways as to the order of these He desires to have it under the Popes hand what was the Custom at Rome hoping by this to bring his Neighbouring Bishops to an Uniformity in these Matters For Eugubium was a small Bishopric under the immediate Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishops as he was a Metropolitan being but 70 Miles distant from Rome it self and he having no power over his Equals gets the Popes Letter under whose Jurisdiction all these Neighbour Bishops of his were thereby to unite them all by conforming to their Mother Church which as Innocentius affirms had one certain Form in these Offices received from S. Peter Fourthly Since this Bishop was so desirous to settle Uniformity even in these Ceremonies of far less concernment we may reasonably believe there was no difference in the Forms themselves that is in the Prayers used in all Divine Offices by these Bishops who lived so near to Rome because if they had varied in the substantial parts of the Office Decentius must have complained principally of that Variety and Innocents chief labour would have been to have agreed and setled that Matter it being ridiculous for them to be so earnest for Uniformity in Order and Ceremonies if these several Diocesses had differed in the main and had infinite variety in the Offices themselves so that both Innocent and Decentius being silent as to any such variety gives us Reason to believe they had all the same FORMS Fifthly What he saith of Innocents design being only to settle a Rubric is easily answered For the difference was only in Rubrics which my Adversary at last confesseth when he saith this Epistle is most concerned about Riâ—es and Order (k) Disc of Lit. pag. 83. he might have said as appears by the several Chapters before only concerned about Rites and Order the Preface alone excepted For there is not one Answer nor Question that supposes any difference in the Words or Forms of these Offices therefore it was
enough for Innocent to settle that wherein the only difference lay which was variety of Rites not of Prayers Sixthly He adds that Innocent setled this Rubric rather for Imitation than strict conformity (l) Disc of Lit. pag. 80. I Answer This is not setling any thing at all for where every Priest is Arbitrary nothing is fixed But Innocent when he hath declared the custom of Rome expresly requires of this Bishop First to take care that his own Diocess and Ministring Clergy were well instructed in it and then that he should give a Form to other Bishops which they ought to imitate or follow (m) ut tuam Ecclesiam Clericos nostros qui sub tuo Pontificio divinis famulantur officiis bene instituas aliis formam tribuas quam debeant imitari Innoc. Ep. 1. vers fin Where we see he requires he should carefully instruct his own Clergy in order to their strict conformity no doubt for otherwise to what end did he teach them these Rules And then he doth expect he should give this Form to others that is to his neighbor Bishops and affirms it is their Duty to observe it For since he is speaking of Acts and Ceremonies there is no way to imitate them but by doing them there is no Medium between strict Conformity and total Non-conformity in these cases so that his distinction between Imitation and strict Conformity is nothing but Words without Sense I conclude this passage with my Adversaries censure of Pope Innocent out of Erasmus (n) Disc of Lit. p. 81. 82. as if he were fierce in his Nature and no good Orator And shall note that Erasmus doth not censure him for pressing an Uniformity nor doth he give any ill Character of him for this Epistle but for others which he Writ in the Pelagian Controversie (o) Vid. Aug. ep 91. ep 96. cum notis Erasm Coci censura p. 111. And what Erasmus saith of two other Epistles if it be never so true cannot prove that in this Epistle wherein he Writes of the Customs of his own Church he is not a good Evidence for matter of Fact and if that be granted then we have here this Popes Testimony that the Metropolis of Rome had certain Forms of Words for their several Offices and one way and Method both in their Service and Rites and that all Churches under her immediate Jurisdiction ought to be uniform even in their Ceremonies by conforming to their Mother Church which is sufficient to shew how falsly my Adversary affirms that in Italy in Innoconts time every one Consecrated as he though fit For the Question was not about all Italy but only about Eugubium and the neighboring Diocesses not about private Ministers but Bishops not about the Words or Forms of Consecrating c. but about Rites and Ceremonies in the Eucharist and other Offices yet even in these he labours to settle an Uniformity and gives sufficient indication not only that they ought to have but then had one prescribed Liturgy for the Offices themselves differing only in some Rubrics § 2. Prudentius the Famous Christian Poet Aurelius Prudentius Ann. Dom. 405. is but once cited by my Adversary who speaks of his Cathemerinon that is Hymns or Forms of Praise and Prayer suited to the several Hours of the Day and Night wherein the Christians then Solemnly worshiped God and he might have noted of many of them what he saith of one That they were afterwards made use of as Church Hymns (p) Disc of Lit. marg p. 161. Now that which I shall observe from hence is this That these Hymns consist of Petitions and Prayers as well as Praises and are drawn up in the Plural Number suitable to their intended use for a public Assembly to which soon after they were applied But if Prudentius had been of my Adversaries mind and thought Forms prescribed were unlawful it had been Ridiculous in him to draw up and sinful for the Christians in public to use these Written Forms of Praise and Prayer Again if the Gift of Extempore making Prayers and Praises for the several Hours of Devotion had then remained in the Church it had been not only lost labour but a very bold thing for Prudentius to compose Forms and if that Age as my Adversary pretends were utter strangers to prescribed Forms doubtless Prudentius had not answered his name rashly to undertake so novel and daring a thing without making any Apology We conclude therefore that Forms even in these very Hours of Prayer were customary and used in his time I could also here particularly shew that this Divine Poet frequently alludes to divers passages in the greater Offices and Liturgies then in use viz. The Amen Hallelujah the Trisagion which he calls the Hymn Sung by Cherubins and Seraphins c. But since Poetical strains are not so solid proofs in our Case I will only mention one place (q) Si quid trecenti bis novenis additis Possint figurâ noverimus mysticâ Mox ipse Christus qui sacerdos verus est Parente natus alto ineffabili Cibum beatis offerens Victoribus Parvam pudici cordis intrabit casam Prud. praef ad Psycomad pag. 228. where in a Mysterious way he intimates the repeating of the Nicene Creed immediately before the Celebration of the Eucharist comparing the 318 Fathers who composed this Creed to Abrahams 318 Servants with whom he met Melchisedec and the Sacramental Elements to the Bread and Wine which Abraham then received from that High Priest And Ant. Nebrissensis hath shewed that this passage is not any otherwise intelligible than by thus expounding it Not. in Prudent pag. 118. Which implies they used then as we do now to repeat the Nicene Creed in the Communion Office § 3. My Antagonist had diligently Read Isidore of Pelusium Isidor Peleusiota Ann. Dom. 412. as appears by his citing him for golden Sentences (r) Disc of Lit. p. 2. Title P. and also by his weeding this Author for all the hard things he saith of some bad Bishops in that time (s) Ibid. p. 182 185. c. ad pag. 195. and Maliciously applying it as the Character of the whole Order in this Age which I shall confute hereafter and now only observe that since he disparages Liturgies by their beginning as he pretends in so bad and corrupt a Time as he makes this to be it must follow that he believes Liturgies are as old as Isidore's Time or else his Allegations must be not only spiteful but impertinent And for his baffled Argument from Isidore's concealing the Words of the Mysteries and appealing to the Faithful as being acquainted with them (t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isid lib. 4. ep 162. lib. eod ep 40. cited under Synesius name Disc of L. p. 34. This plainly proves they did not Officiate then Extempore but in plain Words constantly used and well known to the Faithful who daily heard
them repeated Again he cites this Father to prove that those who were Baptized were taught the Words of the Lords Prayer (u) Isid lib 4. ep 24. Disc of Lit. pag. 2. Which shews that Forms were not held unlawful in that Age. But if my Adversary had not been obliged to keep back all that makes for Liturgies it is not easy to be imagined why he should never mention that Famous Epistle which Isidore Writ on purpose to expound that old piece of Liturgy Pronounced by the Bishop in the public Forms as we saw in the Constitutions S. Chrysostom and others that is Peace be with you unto which as Isidore tells us the people answered and with thy Spirit (w) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isid lib. 1. ep 122. This Form so well explained by this Father gives us reason to believe that the rest of those Liturgies wherein this known Form is found were used in his time and that when he advises a Clergy-Man not to abuse the Holy Liturgy (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. lib. 1. ep 313. he means that he ought not to profane and desecrate the sacred Forms by a most unholy Life and Conversation especially since he was not only a Scholar of S. Chrysostoms who made a Liturgy but also tells us (y) Id. lib. 1. ep 90. that the Women in his time Sung their part of the Church Service and when they were deservedly Excommunicate they were not all wed this great Priviledge which sufficiently shews there were Forms prescribed in his days wherein all the People had their share § 4. His Contemporary was the Learned Synesius Synesius An. Dom. 412. who lived also in the same Country he was bred among the Gentile Philosophers and not Converted till he was come to be of a good Age So that he had learned before he became a Christian what silence and secrecy was due to Mysteries and therefore he furnishes my Adversary with divers Passages concerning the Heathens care to conceal them (z) Disc of Lit. pag. 34. but since he hath owned the Pagans writ their Mysteries down He must not conclude that the Christians had no written Prayers in this Age wherein they called them Mysteries for though they were concealed from the Infidels and Uninitiated they were daily used among the Faithful And that they were Forms prescribed hath been fully proved However though we cannot expect that Synesius should write down the Sacred Words in his Books or Epistles which might fall into common or profane Hands yet there are intimations in him that there were Forms of Prayer in his time and long before For when he speaks of the Worship of God he saith The Sacred Prayers of our Fore-fathers in the holy Mysteries do cry unto that God who is above all not so much setting forth his Power as reverencing his Providence (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Synes de Regno pag. 9. Now these Sacred Prayers could not be Extempore since they were delivered down to them by their Fore-fathers therefore they must be ancient Forms Extempore Devotions are properly our own Prayers but the Prayers of our Fathers are Forms received from the Ages before us Besides we may note that he describes the Service in which these Prayers were used by this Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and elsewhere he styles it The hidden Mysteries (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes Ep. 57. pag. 194. And Nicephorus his Scholiast explains 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be such things as are mystically delivered both as to the words and actions (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nâ—ceph Scholia id Synes p. 401. That is in a Form of Words and an order of Ceremonies which are the two essential parts of a Liturgy Which Name also we have in Synesius where he is reciting the Injuries done to him by Andronicus for he saith The Devil endeavoured by this Mans means to make him fly from the Liturgy of the Altar (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. 67. p. 193. that is as he explains himself afterwards to make him omit the celebration of the Sacrament and give over reciting the public Offices which were then performed by a Liturgy in all regular Churches And though he be very nice of writing down any of the Forms in his common Writings yet he gives us either the Substance or the Words of one of his Prayers which he used not only in private but in the public Offices viz. That Justice might overcome Injustice and that the City might he purged from all Wickedness (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. Ep. 121. p. 258. Which Passage probably was a part of the Liturgy then used in his Country there being something very like it in other ancient Liturgies which were used elsewhere in that Age. However our Adversary who cites Synesius so often and to no purpose about Mysteries could not or would not see any of these places which shew there were ancient and prescribed Forms in his days Celestinus Ep. Rom. A.D. 423. § 5. Pope Celestine as is affirmed by many Authors ordered the Psalms to be sung in the Communion Office by the whole Congregation in the way of Antiphone (f) Vita Celest ap Bin. Tom. 1. par 1. pag 732. Bena. rerum Liturg. lib. 2. cap. 3. p 502. That is as Isidore expounds it with reciprocal Voices each side of the Choir alternately answering the other (g) Isâ—â—â—r Orig. lib. 6. cap. 19. And Platina adds That he put some particulars into the Offices then in use (h) Platin vita Celest pag. 61. Which shews That the Roman Church was accustomed to Forms in his days Yet my contentious Adversary twice produces this Popes Testimony to shew that in his Time at Rome there was no more than an Order and Uniformity as to the persons and things prayed for but that they did not pray for them in the same Words (i) Disc of Lit. pag 6. p 29. and he cites the same place again to prove that Forms cannot be justified from that Passage (k) Ibid. p. 138. But to manifest his Mistake I will first transcribe and then explain these Words of Celestine from whence he makes this false Conclusion The Words are these Let us look upon the Mysteries of the Priests Prayers which being delivered by the Apostles are uniformly celebrated in all the World and in every Orthodox Church That so the Rule for Praying may fix the Rule of Believing For when the Bishops of the Faithful perform their enjoyned Embassy they plead with the Divine Mercy for all Mankind the whole Church Praying with them They intreat and pray That Faith may be granted to Vnbelievers that Idolaters may be delivered from their impious Errors that the light of Truth may appear to the Jews by the removing of the Veil from their Hearts that Hereticks may repent and receive the Catholic Faith that Schismatics may be revived by the Spirit
when the New-fashion Directory ha◠got possession of a Mans fancy he may dream that an Order or an Ordinal mus◠needs signifie some such thing Voconius Episc Musaeus Presb. Marscil An. Dom. 458. § 12. It was in the same Country and much about the Time of this Council that Voconius a Bishop and Musaeus a Priest of Marseilles did Compose very famous Volumes of Sacraments and Offices as Gennadius who lived also at Marseilles and flourished not above 30 years after this doth testifie (x) Gennad lib. de Script Eccl. in Musaeo Which still confirms my Observation That upon this Second Conversion of France after the Northern Pagans had overspread it the most Learned and Eminent of the Clergy began to reduce the several Provinces to one Form of Divine Service For it was not long after that the eloquent Bishop of Auvergne Sidonius Apollin Ep. Avern An. Dom. 472. Sidonius Composed a Book of Masses that is as the Phrase then signified a Book of Forms of Prayer c. (y) Vid. vit Sidonii praefix oper and Gregory of Tours who writ his History in the next Century tells us That he had written a Preface to this Liturgy and published it as Sidonius had reform'd it (z) Greg. Turon lib. 2. cap. 22. And not long before this viz. about the Year 458 Mamercus Bishop of Viennè had set up the use of Litanies after the manner of the Eastern Church ordering all the People with Fasting and great Devotion to use them in a public Procession when they were pressed with heavy Calamities (a) Greg. Turon lib. 2. cap. 34. Sidon Epist lib. 7. ep 1. And Sidonius tells us That there were Litanies used in the Gallican Church before but they were not said with that fervency vigour and frequency no nor with such strict Fasting as Mamercus had appointed (b) Sidon lib. 5. ep 14. And therefore as the Diocess of Viennè had been delivered by this devout use of the Litany so he thought fit to appoint it should be repeated in the same manner in his City when the Goths broke into that Province From which Relation we learn That Litanies were used in France before this Age though not with so much devotion and success and therefore we must by no means think Mamercus was the first Author of these Prescribed Forms of public Supplication There is another memorable Passage in the Life of Sidonius which confirms the general use of Written Forms in his Time which is That being to celebrate a Festival in his Church some wicke◠persons had stollen away the Book by which he was wont to Officiate but h◠was so ready a Man that even without Book he went through the whole Office for the Feast to the wonder of all the Congregation who thought he spake rather like an Angel than a Man (c) Vit. Sidonii Praef. oper Greg. Turon lib. 2. cap. 22. Now here we have express Testimony of a Common-Prayer which this excellent Bishop was wont to use and it seems it was a Wonder in this Age to see any Clergy-man perform the public Office without a Book which could not have been strange if my Adversaries way of Extempore Prayer had been usual For if every Bishop and Priest as he pretends had daily prayed without Book it had been ridiculous to have written this as a singular Excellency in Sidonius to be able to repeat the Office by the strength of his Memory without that Book which used to guide him therein And if it be Objected That this Relation seems rather to suppose he made a new Office Extempore I Reply That still makes out my Assertion Since it could not be the common way to pray on the sudden because it was thought almost a Miracle in Sidonius to do so therefore other Clergy-men generally used written Forms and made use of Common-Prayer-Books as we do now The same Sidonius tells us in one of his Epistles That the Monks and the Clergy celebrated the Vigils together with the Chanters of Psalms in Tunes which they sang alternately (d) Sidon lib. 5. ep 17. And it was in his Time as that Historian remarks they used to sing the Antiphons in the Church of S. Martin at Tours (e) Greg. Turon histor pag. 83. Now these were Forms of public Worship and as we have often noted must be either written or however certainly known before to those who make use of them and therefore prescribed Forms were the way by which God was worshiped in this Age Not only in France but also in Africa where Victor relates That it was the Custom at Carthage to bring up Boys in the skill of Music for the public Service of the Church Twelve of which Boys fell into the hands of Hunnericus the Vandal King (f) Victor histor persec Vandal lib. 5. Ad. Dom. 478. Now these Singing-Boys were not capable of bearing a part in the public Service if it had not been in Prescribed Forms Petrus Cnapheus Eplsc An ioc◠An. Dom. 483. § 13. And the same way was continued in the East for Petrus Cnapheus about this Time ordered the Creed to be daily repeated in the public Office at Antioch as my Adversary doth confess (g) Disc of Lit. pag. 102. and other Authors testifie (h) Theod. Lect. lib 2. pag. 189. Bona de rebus Liturg. p 537. And no opposition was made to this it being a known Form as well as the rest of the Service But when the same Bishop being infected with Heresie did attempt to make an addition to the ancient Hymn called the Trisagion and would have put in these Words Which was Crucified for us the People who had been long accustomed to that Orthodox Form delivered down to them from their Fore fathers would not endure it (i) Baron Annal. An 483. p. 381. and when others at Constantinople added this Sentence to the Response as the Chanter was singing the Hymn in the accustomed way there was a very great Tumult made upon that occasion (k) Theodor. Lect. Synops pag 187. Disc of Lit. pag. 2◠compar'd with pag. 25. And here I cannot but wonder at my Adversaries rare dexterity who when he had undertaken to prove that there could be no Liturgies in these Ages because we never read of any change or alterations made in them pag. 25. within two Pages relates The great tumult at Constantinople and the wise which was made through the World by attempting to alter this ancient Hymn Which was an eminent part of the Communion-Service to which the People had been so long used that they soon perceived and highly resented this Alteration of their Sacred Forms Which strongly proves not only that they used prescribed Forms now but had done so long before And as to this very Trisagian he mistakes in saying it was first used in the Time of Theodosius the Younger (l) Disc of Lit. pag. 177. For we have proved by divers Testimonies that
Canon it self do only direct the Order in which these several parts of the Service shall be used and forbid the altering that Order yet withal it refers to these several parts of the Service and calls them by their proper Names supposing a Book well known in which they were written down in the same order which is prescribed by this Canon It is plain the Antiphons Hymns Collects c. were certain fixed Forms not made in this Council but supposed to be commonly known by all long before and since some variety in the reciting these Forms had crept in so as one Diocess differed somewhat from another that Variety though it were but in the order of using these Forms is forbid here and the same Uniformity established in this Province which had been setled every where else And indeed this Canon convinces me there was no difference in the Forms themselves the same Antiphons Hymns Collects c. were used every where that needed not any regulation only they were differently placed in the Liturgies of divers Churches and this they Reform by setling one Liturgy for the whole Gallican Church which is called Ordo Ecclesiae and This Order contained not only the Rubrics or disposal of these several parts of Service but also The Forms themselves so disposed and set in Order And doubtless if any had then been so bold to vary the Hymns and Forms of Prayer these Fathers who would not suffer any Variety in the method and placing them would much less have endured the presumption of altering the Words and Expressions but that was a piece of Confidence that was not heard of in this Age. The next Year was held the first Council of Orleance Concil Aurel. I. An. Dom. 507. which again forbids Any of the People to go out of the Church before that final Blessing after the Lords Prayer in the end of the Communion Service (h) Concil Aurel. I. Can. 28. Bin. Tom. II. par l. pag 562. and enjoyns the Litanies shall be used three days before Ascension day and orders the People who had so large a share in this ancient Form to leave Work and joyn in presenting this general Supplication to Almighty God (i) Ibid. Can. 29. Agreeable to which is that Passage in Caesarius his Homilies where he tells us That the whole Church throughout the World then celebrated these Three Days with Litanies and then no Christian ought to be absent from that Religious Assembly (k) In tribus istis diebus quas regulariter in toto mundo celebrat Ecclesia nullus se à sancto Conventu subaucat Caesar hom 1. Now can any man doubt of the use of Prescribed Forms when these Litanies were so generally observed both in the Eastern and Western Churches Is it not plain the Communion Service was the same in all these Provinces since so many Authors and Councils agree That that Office every where ended with the Lords Prayer and the Blessing An Order now must signifie more than a Rubric For undoubtedly they had a prescribed Rule containing both the Forms and the Method also And the better to secure this Liturgy from being altered Concil Epaun. An. Dom. 509. the Council of Pamiers Ordains That all Churches in the Province shall observe the same Order in celebrating Divine Offices which was used by the Metropolitan Bishop (l) Ad celebrandum divina Officia â—â—dinem quem Metropolitani tenent Provinciales observare debent Concil Epaun. Can. 27. Bin. Tom. II. par I. pag. 553. And a few years after the same Order was made in Spain where Variety of Nations and Opinions had made some difference in their Liturgies But at Girone in Catalonia it was decreed That as to the appointing of Divine Service as it was performed in the Metropolitan Church so in Gods Name let that same Vsage be observed through the whole Province of Catalonia as well in the Communion-Office as in that of Singing and Ministring (m) De institutione Missarum ut â—uâ—modo in Metropolitanâ Ecclesiâ fuerâ—t ita in Dei nomine in omni Tarraconensi Provinciâ tam ipsius Misa Orao quam psallenai ministrandi consuetudo servetur Concil Gerund An. 517. Can. 1. Bin. ibid. pag. 618. that is The Order of Divine Offices which by a prescribed Rule was setled in the Metropolitan Church for the Communion-Service the Hymns and other Administrations were to be the Guide to all the Diocesses under the Jurisdiction thereof Which supposes that the Original Liturgy was written and kept carefully there by which all the Books of Divine Offices transcribed for the several Diocesses of his Suffragans were to be corrected which was a very fit Means to preserve that Unity both as to the Forms and Order which they now laboured to restore in all these parts of the VVorld The last named Council also mentions Litanies in two Canons Can. 2 and Can. 3. And informs us That the Lords Prayer was there repeated daily in the end both of Morning and Evening Prayer Can. 10. And all this leaves us no room to doubt of their using those ancient Forms which after these great Confusions began to be restored in these Countries upon the Conversion of both Pagans and Hereticks to the Faith and their beginning to incorporate with the People which they had Conquered in the last Age. And I have a little transgressed the Order of Time that I might lay these Canons together which were all made upon the same Occasion and do mutually explain one another Fulgentius Ep. Ruâ—pens Ann. Dom. 508. § 3. We must now step into Africa where that Pious Bishop Fulgentius flourished who was the most Eminent Champion for the true Faith against the Arians then very numerous in that Country And this holy Confessor hath left us sufficient Evidence of the continuance of the ancient African Forms For he largely expounds that Primitive Petition so generally used at the Consecration in all the old Liturgies viz. That God would send down the holy Spirit upon the Elements to sanctifie them and make them the Body of his deer Son (n) Fulgent ad Monim lib. 2. cap. 6. p. 79. Yea he confirms the Orthodox Faith from this ancient and well known Form of Prayer He also discourses very fully upon that general conclusion of the Collects which the Arians cavilled at Through Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord who liveth and Reigneth with thee in the unity of the holy Spirit (o) Per universas pene Africae regiones Catholica dicere consuevit Ecclesia Per Jesum c. Fulg. ad Ferrand Diac. Resp ad Quaest 4. pag. 266. Assuring us that the Catholick Church in almost all the Regions of Africa concluded their Prayers in this Form which he proves is agreeable to Scripture to the usage of the Primitive Church and to the Doctrin of the Orthodox Fathers And that must be a very ancient piece of Liturgy which is of Authority in dispute with
Prefaces to be received into the Sacred Catalogue which for many Ages past the Roman Churches Truth hath hitherto observed (o) Sacrum Ordinem Romanum sacraque constituta nostrorum Antecessorum solertèr relegentes invenimus has novem Praesationes in sacro Catalogo tantuminodo recipiendas quas longa retro veritas in Romanâ Ecclesià hactenus servavit Pelag. Ep. 11. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 259. And then he proceeds to reckon up the particulars viz The first at Easter The second at Ascension-day The third at Pentecost The fourth at Christmass The fifth at the Epiphany The sixth on the Festival of the Apostles The seventh on Trinity Sunday The eighth on the Feast of the Cross The ninth in Lent and time of Fasting From which Answer it appears the holy Roman Order was a Written Book a Liturgy containing not only the Method in which the several parts of the Offices were disposed but the very Forms themselves at large and particularly the several proper Prefaces for the great Festivals As also it is affirmed That these proper Prefaces of which he hath here occasion to treat had been prescribed in this Roman Liturgy long before this Time and for divers Ages had been preserved therein Which shews there were Written Forms at Rome in very early Times and that they were no invention of this or the last Age. And we may give the more credit to this Assertion because even to this very Time the Church of Rome was wholly free from the corrupt and superstitious Worship which since they have given to the Blessed Virgin Mary there being not to be found at this Time one Festival dedicated to her Honour which had a special Preface appropriate to it in the Offices then used at Rome to the shame of the later Popes who have made the Worship of the Virgin the main part of all their Offices Leander Episc H â—pal An. Dom. 588. § 11. After the Steps made toward one uniform Liturgy among the Suevians in the Province of Gallicia by the Consultation of Vigilius and the Council of Braga Leander the famous Bishop of Sevil Converted Reccaredus King of the Goths from Arianism within a few years after these Goths had Conquered the Suevians and were become Lords of all Spain And the first Care he took was to purge out the Errors from the Gothic Office and to take away the various Forms used in the several Provinces of Spain which had been Peopled with several Nations governed by different Kings and had held divers Opinions in Religion but he now composes one Office for the whole Kingdom which his next Successor Isidore perfected and fully setled there For which Reason the Writers of this History generally ascribe it to them both Roderic of Toledo calls it The Office of the Mass instituted by the Bishops Leander and Isidore (p) Roderic Tolet. de reb Hispan lib. 6. cap. 25. And Jo. Vasaeus in his Chronicle saith The Christians who lived among the Arabians were called Mozarabes that is Mixt with the Arabians and therefore they used that Ecclesiastical Office then which S. Leander and Isidore composed and all Spain used it until the days of Alfonso the Sixth (q) Jo. Vasaei Chron. Hispanâ— pag. 579. But that Leander first put this Office into order is plain from the Testimony of Isidore himself who faith Leander took no small pains in the Ecclesiastical Offices and in the Hymns at the Communion and Psalms he Composed many sweet things (r) Isidor de script Eccles in Leandr vict Bona de reb Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 11. p. 364. Another Historian saith Leander writ one Book of Prayers and another of the Communion (s) Fran. Taraph de reg Hisp pag. 704. Wherefore we conclude that this Leander having before him the Liturgy used by the Arian Goths the Order made for the Suevians in Gallicia And probably the Gallican Roman and African Forms made up one Office out of them all which afterwards when the Moers who spake Arabick came into Spain and were some of them Converted to the Faith was called the Mozarabic Liturgy which is extant to this day in the Bibliotheca Patrum and elsewhere (t) Bib. Patr. edit Colon. Tom. 15 p. 777. vid. Ben. de reb Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 11 12. in Appendice For that this was not the first time that prescribed Forms were used in these Parts of the World is evident from what hath been shewed before concerning the Goths and Suevians both in France and Spain and may further appear by these few Observations viz. That the old Gothic Office yet retains a Collect on S. Martins-day wherein he is called A Man whom our Age hath produced Now S. Martin died An. Dom. 402. and therefore the Missal from whence Leander or Isidore took this Form must have been composed in the Fifth century that is as soon as the Goths in France became Christians And Gregory of Tours mentions an Embassador coming from Leonigild the Father of Reccaredus who was an Arian and so was this Embassador for he would not Communicate with them in France because they did not say Glory be to the Father by the Son as they did in their Offices in Spain (u) Greg. Turon lib. 6. cap. 48. pag. 289. And in the Third Council of Toledo under Reccaredus the First Orthodox Gothish King when Leader had begun to correct the Arian Forms they pronounce an Anathema against all that say Glory be to the Father by the Son and will not say To the Father and the Son (w) Concil Tolet. 3. An. 589. ap Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 276. So that we see the Goths had Forms suited to their Heresie while they were Arians but made Orthodox as soon as they embraced the Catholic Faith Moreover this same Council which was before Isidore's Time in order to discover those who yet secretly favoured Arianism Ordain That the Creed shall be repeated by all the People with an audible Voice before the Lords Prayer in the Communion (x) Concil Tol. t. 3. Can. 2. ibid. Which Usage still is kept in the Mozarabic Liturgy and is peculiar to that Office From all which we may infer That Leander compiled this Office but did not first invent the Forms only he collected them out of more ancient Liturgies especially the old Gallican Missal which the Arian Goths had corrupted but he now restored it to its ancient Purity and therefore there is a very great Agreement between the old Gallican and Mozarabic Missals and they are nearer to each other than either of them are to the ancient Roman Forms Which confirms our Observation That this Age did not first Worship God by Liturgies but continued the ancient Way only by the New Conversion of divers Countries from Paganism or Heresie one pure Liturgy was collected and published for the use of that Country or Province from which none of their Ecclesiastics were allowed to vary The
Liturgies and chose out the best things from each put them together in one Volume and then required these Forms should be daily used so that both Priests and People might be accustomed to them And as S. Gregory did not impose the Roman Liturgy or Canon upon Augustin the Monk who lived in a distant Country and in a distinct National Church so we do not impose ours upon Denmark or Sweden upon the Dutch or the Helvetians But to argue from hence We are not for imposing our own Liturgy upon our own Clergy is so weak so obvious a Fallacy as deserves to be laughed at rather than seriously confuted Again because Gregory the Patriarch of the West took the liberty to correct the Roman Offices by that which he approved of in the Forms of other National Churches (w) Disc of Liturgies p. 87. And because he would not impose the Trine Immersion used at Rome upon Leander's New Converted distant Church in Spain (x) Gregor Ep. 41. ad laeanat lib. 1. Therefore every Parish-Priest and private Minister may vary from the Liturgy of his own Church daily if he please And therefore no Bishops ought to impose any Liturgy upon their own Clergy living under them in the same Diocess or Nation This is such woful Sophistry that I am sure he cannot impose this sort of Arguing upon any rational Men yet if these Inferences be not drawn from S. Gregory's Answer it makes nothing to his purpose unless it be to prove there were no Forms imposed in Gregory's Time But how can that be squeezed out of any of these Passages The Epistle first cited supposes a Form of Prayers extant and imposed at Rome before S. Gregory's Time wherein the Hallelujah was never sung but between Easter and Pentecost which ordered the Sub-Deacons to wear Surplices when they sang the Litany in Processions in which Litany by the old Form they did not repeat the Kyrie Eleeson often nor was the Lords Prayer in the Communion Office of that old Book prescribed to be used immediately after the Canon But this Epistle shews that Gregory had altered the ancient Liturgy of Rome in all these Particulars and made it agreeable to the Liturgy at Constantinople from which place he was lately come And this he was censured for by some this he excuses in the whole Epistle (y) Gregor Ep. 63. lib. 7. pag. 230. Wherefore here was a Form imposed before his Time and he imposes it again with his Corrections upon his own Church or else what need the Clergy under his Jurisdiction complain Indeed he did not impose it on Spain France or Britain which were not in that Age under his Authority but he was strict enough at Rome and in the Churches then subject to that See He corrected the Book of Gelasius and imposed that there He compiled Hymns and Antiphons and brought in a New way of Singing them teaching Boys to do it with skill so that soon after all the West imitated that Way (z) Johan Diac. vit Greg. lib. 2. cap. 6. He compiled that Book for the Communion-Service which still is called his Sacramentary wherein are all the Forms used at Rome for the Eucharist (a) Id. ib. c. 17. He brought in the Sevenfold Litany and prescribed how and when it should be used (b) Naucler Gen 20. p. 743. Platin. pag. 82. Johan Diac. in vit And all these Parts of Liturgy were by him imposed on the Roman Church and will my Adversary still pretend he was against the imposing Forms of Praise and Prayer Did he take all this pains for his own private use Did all the West voluntarily conform to this and yet was it not used and observed at Rome any further than the Clergy pleased These are wild Conjectures But he saith Cassander publishes the Ordo Romanus in which there are no Forms of Prayer but only the Order wherein they proceeded I Reply Those Copies which Cassander publisheth are only a Breviat of S. Gregory's Liturgy and therefore the Hymns and Prayers he composed are not set down at large there yet when this was writ out these Forms were so well known that they are named often only by two words of the beginning of each Form Ex. gr Gloria Patri Kyrie Eleeson Gloria in excelsis Dominus vobiscum c. (c) Cassander de Liturg. lib. â— Which shews the Forms were then well known and had been so long used as to be understood by short hints in this Epitome of the Gregorian Office But my Adversary knew well that the Sacramentary of Gregory is extant in his Works wherein all the Prayers and Antiphons c. are set down at large which Gregory made and imposed on the Roman Church and therefore it is disingenuous in him to argue for his pretended liberty from this Epitome There is but one thing more in my Adversary relating to this Matter which is That Augustin being not imposed on by S Gregory would not impose it on the Britains (d) Disc of Lit. pag. 87 88. which he gathers from this viz. That the Britains and Scots were Enemies to the Roman Use in Gildas his Time and had no Uniformity in Worship long after Now to his Position I say That if Augustin followed Gregory's Advice as no doubt he did then he did impose not the Roman Forms but those of his own collecting upon the Saxons which I shall prove more largely afterwards But as for the Britains they were a distinct Christian Church then and did owe no manner of subjection to Augustin so that it had been ridiculous iâ— him to have imposed a Newly compâ—â—â—d Liturgy upon them They were no more obliged to receive his Forms than we are to receive those of Geneva or they to observe ours Again as to his Proof How doth the Britains rejecting the Roman Use in Gildas's Time prove That they had no Forms imposed on them by Augustin Gildas died according to Bishop Vsher An. 570. that is Thirty years before Augustin the Monk came in (e) Cave Cartoph Eccles in Gild. Badon pag. so that their dislike of the Roman Usages then is nothing to Augustin's Impositions Besides The Roman Liturgy and Augustin's were two different things and therefore it is very weak to prove they did not receive Augustin's Liturgy from their rejecting the Roman Usage since they were different things So that this would be a good Argument if it were not as destitute of Logic and Chronology as it is of Truth For Augustin did make a Form and impose it on the Saxons under his Jurisdiction and they received it and used it long after As for the Britains Scots and Irish in that Age they belonged not to him and so he could impose nothing on them And for their Uniformity I shall clear that Point after a little while For what hath been observed I hope may suffice to prove That imposed Liturgies were in use in all Churches long before the Time of
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)
before (s) Usher Rel. of anc Irish Chap. 4. pag. 26. So that Bishop Vsher beleived that at first both Britons and Irish had one Form one Liturgy And the variety which my Adversary calls an ancient Liberty was an Innovation and a Corruption of the truly ancient way of Serving God by one and the same Liturgy And the Reader must have seen this to have been Bishop Vsher's Opinion if he had not cut off half his Discourse and begun in the midst of a Sentence But to make this still more Evident Bishop Vsher in another Tract produces a very ancient Manuscript called A Catalogue of the Irish Saints Wherein they are reckoned up in three Orders and the Chronology is so very exact that we may reasonably believe it was writ by a very good hand The words are these The first Order was that of Catholic Saints in the time of Patricius and they were famous Bishops full of the Holy Ghost in number 350 Founders of Churches having one Head even Christ and one Leader S. Patric one Mass and one manner of Celebration The Second Order were Catholic Presbyters among whom were few Bishops and many Priests 300 in number having one Head even our Lord they Celebrated divers Masses and had divers Rules The Third Order of Saints were Holy Presbyters and a few Jew Bishops 100 in number and they had divers Rules and Masses (t) Usherii Antiqu. Britan Eccles pag. 473 474. Then a little after he recokons the time that these Orders cotained The First which was most Holy continued from An. 433. to An. 534. The second which was Holy of Holies continued from 544. to 572. The 3d Order which was Holy continued from 598 to 665 (u) Vid. Ibid. pag. 490. Now by this account we see That the First and best Times from S. Patric had only one Form of Divine Service and thus it contiued for above 100 year from towards the midst of the Fifth Century that is from their first Conversion till toward the middle of the 6th Century And then about the time that Monkery came into request in the Western Church as Superstition encreased variety of Rules were made and in them were prescribed various Forms of Prayer and Divine Service or as they called it of Masses For as Bishop Vsher tells us The public Liturgy and Service of the Church was of old named the Mass even then also when Prayers were only said and so the Evening Mass signifies no more than that which we call Evening-Prayer (w) B. Usher Rel. of anc Irish Chap. 4. pag. 26. So then when Variety was brought in it was not as he falsly pretends a liberty to pray Arbitrarily it was various Forms prescribed in each Diocess or Monastery And every Clerk and Monk was bound to the Form of his own Diocess or Monastery and so were Strangers too when they came among them which occasioned Gillibert to complain That it was Indecent and Schismatical to see a very Learned Man of one Order to be like a private Lay man when he came to the Church of another Order (x) Gillibert in Usher Relig. anc Irish pag. 24. That is because he could not make Responses nor Vocally joyn in their strange Form Wherefore when Superstition had destroyed their Ancient and Original Uniformity they had no Liberty but were as much under Forms as ever only different Churches had divers Forms which I will make still more evident For Bishop Vsher expounding the aforesaid Passage of divers Masses and divers Rules shews it was meant of divers Forms and reckons up four several Rules written down by these Irish Saints all differing from each other (y) Uâ—â—er Antiq. Briâ— Eccles pag. 476. And two more one writ by Daganus approved of by Pope Gregory the Great Another made by Columbanus who flourished Anno Dom. 614. which is yet extant and differs in some things from the Rule of S. Benedict (z) Id. Ibid. pag. 476 477. of which Ordericus Vitalis saith That though his Scholars followed the Rule of S. Benedict yet they forsook not the Orders of their Master For from Columbanus they learned the Manner and Order of Divine-Service and a Form of Prayers for all Orders of Men that are in the Church of God (a) Orderie â—ital Hist Eccles lib. 8. ad An. 1094. So that this Learned Primate took all these Varieties to be various Forms of Prayer and my Adversary shamefully abuses his great Name to give colour to a false and groundless device of his own of Praying Arbitrarily and Extempore which he would dress up as one of the General Usages of the ancient Church whereas there is not one Syllable in Bishop Vsher tending to prove That the Irish retained this liberty of Praying for 1100 years and the Britons and Scots for a long time after Augustin This is his own Invention and is as false as his Reflections upon the present Church of England in that Page are malicious and without ground (b) Disc of Lit. pag. 89. As for the Britons he saith They were Enemies to the Roman use in the Eucharist in Gildas 's time but he produces an Author there which saith They followed the Asian Manner in Preaching Baptizing and celebrating Easter (c) Ibid. pag. 88. Spelm. Concil Tom. I. pag. 107. Now the Asian and Eastern Churches had Forms of celebrating the Eucharist and Baptizing in the Fourth Age as we shewed before out of the Apostolical Constitutions and many other Authors therefore if they followed the Eastern Manner then they had Forms for the Eucharist and Baptism and though they had no Uniformity with Rome yet if they followed the Asian Manner he hath no Reason to assert That they were averse to and unacquainted with any Vniformity and that they had no prescribed Liturgies for such Vniformity long after A pitiful piece of Sophistry to conclude from their not receiving the Roman Liturgy and agreeing to be Uniform with them to infer that the Britons had no Uniformity or Liturgy at all If we may believe Bishop Vsher Saint Patric was the Apostle both of the Irish and Welsh and brought the same Liturgy into Wales that he brought into Ireland and therefore he saith of the Britons That their Form of Liturgy was the same with that which was received by their Neighbours the Gauls (d) Usher Rel. of anc Irish pag. 26. for which he cites the fore-mentioned Ancient Manuscript And if they had any variety among them it was a variety of Forms not his Arbitrary liberty For Baleus informs us That Kentigern who was Bishop of that Church which was afterward called S. Asaph Writ a Manual of his Ministrations (e) Balaeus de script Brit. mihi fol. 32. That is the Forms by which he celebrated Divine Service and Bishop Vsher shews That he and S. Columba meeting together their Disciples alternately sang Forms of Praises to God and the latter Company with Hallelujah (f) Usher
Antiq Brit. Eccles pag. 370. An. Dom. 560. Moreover Baleus further tells us That S. Asaph the Scholar and Successor of Kentigern writ a Book Of the Ordinations of his Church (g) Balaeus de script Brit. fol. 34. An. Dom. 590. which seems to be the Forms used there in Ordaining Presbyters and Deacons and perhaps in Admitting of Monks This may suffice to shew us the Britons had written and prescribed Forms before my Adversary will allow them to have been used any where and if any require further satisfaction he may consult the Learned B. Vsher's Antiquity of the British Churches where there are divers Evidences of this Truth We proceed therefore to the Saxons who were Converted by Augustin the Monk about the end of the Sixth Century And He no doubt according to S. Gregory's direction made a Liturgy for them taken out of the Roman the Gallican and other Forms which continued in use for some time But after Gregory's Roman way of Singing began to be so generally admired in all these Parts of the World That was also laboured by Augustin's Successors to be brought in here For Bede mentions one James a Deacon who was skilled both in the Roman and the Canterbury way of Song saying of him That Paulinus leaving York and returning to Rochester left this James behind him in the North who when that Province had Peace and the Number of the Faithful encreased being very skilful in Singing in the Church became a Master of Ecclesiastical Song to many after the way either of Rome or of Canterbury (h) Bedae histor lib. 2. cap. 20. circ A. D. 640. Which must signifie his teaching Clerks how to recite Gregory's or Augustin's Forms of Service because in that Age they chanted their Prayers and Praises both About Thirty years after this in Theodorus his Time They learned to Sing the Office all England over and one Eddi after the aforesaid James was their Master in the Churches on the North of Humber (i) Beda ibid. lib. 4. cap. 2. circ An. 670. And a little after those who Instructed Men in Ecclesiastical Offices are called Masters of Singing (k) Idem lib. 5. cap. 20. because the Offices were set to some certain Notes and that alone is enough to prove they then Prayed by certain prescribed Forms it being impossible to set Arbitrary or Extempore Prayers to Notes which though some have affirmed liable to be Canted yet none ever thought them capable to be Chanted But we proceed I doubt not but the Gregorian Forms as well as his way of Singing came into use here before the Year 700 For in the late elaborare Collection of Old Saxon Books and Manuscripts put out by my Worthy Friend Dr. Hicks there is a Sacramentary of S. Gregory which is at least a Thousand years old (l) Grammatica Maeso-Gothic D. Hick p. 148. and then it must be Written about the Year 690. But this is more plain in the Famous Council of Clovesho which sat 24 year after wherein there is not only clear Testimony for the use of Forms but a full Evidence of the prevailing Interest of the Roman Offices For there it is appointed That All Priests shall learn to repeat the whole Office by Law appointed for their Order and shall be able to interpret the Creed the Lords Prayer and the holy Words pronounced in the Mass into the Vulgar Tongue Can 10th As also That all Priests shall perform all their Offices after the same way and manner Can. 11th And further it is Decreed That the Festivals in memory of our Lord be celebrated in one and the same manner in all Offices belonging to them as to Baptism Administring the Communion and the manner of Singing according to the Written Form which we have received from the Roman Church and that the Festivals of the Martyrs shall be observed on the same day according to the Roman Martyrology with the Psalms and Hymns proper to each of them Can. 13th And finally That the Seven Canonical Hours of Prayer be observed with the proper Psalms and Hymns and that the Monasteries shall all Sing alike and shall neither Sing or Read any thing but what is generally used and is derived from Scripture or permitted by the Custom of the Roman Church that so all may with one Mind and one Mouth glorifie God Can. 15th (m) Concil Clovesho Can. 10 11 13 15. apud Spelm. Concil Tom. l. p. 249. circ An. D. 714. From which Canons it is very plain that the Saxons within one Century after their Conversion had Written Forms of Prayer for all Offices and that the Roman Liturgy was now beginning to be generally received in this Land I shall make but one Remark more in so clear a case which is That Venerable Bede dying on Ascension-day is by ancient Historians said to have repeated the Collect for the Day in these Words O King of Glory and Lord of Hosts who as on this day didst ascend triumphantly into the Heaven of Heavens leave us not comfortless but send us the Promise of the Father even the Spirit of Truth (n) Gul. Malms de gest reg lib. 1. cap. 3. pag. 12. Sim. Dunelm lib. 1. cap. 15. and soon after he gave up the Ghost Now this is the Collect in the Old Roman Forms and is yet continued in our Liturgy almost Verbatim which gives that Collect the honour of having been received in this Nation for near a Thousand years But since my Adversary dares not attempt the Saxons and Spelman's Councils afford so many undeniable Proofs of prescribed and imposed Forms used here from the Time of their Conversion I shall not heap up needless Instances but proceed to the Kingdoms and Churches in France and Germany where the same Order and Method of Praying was observed § 5. I have so fully proved Ecclesia Gallicana ab An. Dom. 450. that there was a Form of Service peculiar to the Gallican Church that I need not have added any thing on that Subject but that my Adversary hath the confidence to say In France they had Books for public Service in the 8th Century yet they were used at the discretion of those that officiated who added and left out as they thought fit till Charlemain in the beginning of the Ninth Age would have them Reformed after the Roman guise And this he proves by a Passage cited out of the Chronicle of Engolism related in Mornay of the Mass (o) Disc of Lit. p. 134. but the whole Story is nothing else but Falshood and Fallacy For First He speaks of Books for public Service in France in the 8th Century as if they had none before Whereas we have made it appear That S. Hilary made a Book of Hymns for the Gallican Church in the Fourth Age An. 354. That Museaus of Marseils composed a Book of Prayers for Consecrating the Sacrament in the Fifth Century An. 458. We have shewed That the Gallican Office which is
still extant was made at least as early as the Age in which S. Martin lived (p) Bona rerum Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 12. in Append. And that in the Time of Sidonius Apollinaris the Clergy there generally used a Common-Prayer-Book in that same Fifth Century An. 475. We have proved That in the end of the Sixth Age Gregory the Great directed Augustin the Monk to read over the Gallican Liturgy as well as the Roman which shews it was then Written in a Book Yea my Adversaries own Author Mornay in the place cited by him which he must needs see affirms That before the Time of Gregory there was another manner of Service in France than there was at Rome and that Innocent and Gelasius who were Popes in the Fifth Century as well as Gregory had used their utmost endeavours to bring them to conform to the Roman Order (q) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap. 8. pag. 63. Which supposes plainly they had a Service of their own differing from the Roman in Innocents and in Gelasius his Time that is in the Fifth Century and that Epistle of Hildewinus to Lewes the Gentile An. 825. mentioned in Mornay implies the same thing For Hildewinus saith We have still divers very ancient Mass-Books almost consumed with extreme Age containing the Order of the Gallican Service which was used from the time that the Faith was first received in this part of the West until we admitted the Roman Order (r) Hildevinus Abb. praefat ad opera Dionys Areop Where we see He not only affirms they had a Form of Service from their first Conversion but that in the beginning of the Ninth Age some of the Copies of that Service were worn out with extreme Antiquity so that probably these Copies were writ in the Sixth Age And from hence we may discern the falshood of my Adversaries Pretence That there were no Service-Books in France before the 8th Century Secondly He affirms That these Books were used at the discretion of him that Officiated But this is as false as the former for we have proved by divers French Canons in the Fifth and Sixth Ages That all the Clergy in one Province were bound to use the same Form of Service which was used by their Metropolitan And in the Eighth Century Theodulphus Bishop of Orleance enjoyns his Clergy When they came to his Synod to bring their Common Prayer-Books with them and two or three Clerks who assisted them in the celebrating Divine Service that so it might appear hour exactly and diligently they had performed their Duties (s) Theodulph Aurel. Ep. ad Cler. cap. 4. ap Bon. rer Liturg. p. 349. which is a stricter course than is now taken in our Church But my Adversary pretends he hath Evidence for this Liberty out of an ancient Chronicle in Mornay (t) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap 8. pag. 64. which saith That every one at his pleasure had depraved the Book of Offices by adding and diminishing To which I Reply That these Words are not in Mornay and if they be in the Chronicle of Engolism as the Margen recites them The meaning is plainly this That those who writ out these Forms had depraved them by leaving out some things and putting in others Not that those who used these Books altered or added at their pleasure for he who officiates cannot properly be said to have depraved a Book by not reading it aright it was the Scribes who writ the Copies falsly and variously that had depraved the Old Office so much that it gave a good Pretence to French Kings to bring in the Roman Service Herein therefore he hath no ground for his false Assertion That these Books were used at the discretion of him that did Officiate Thirdly He mistakes again in saying That Charlemaign in the beginning of the Ninth Age reformed them after the Roman guise For first his own Author Mornay affirms That King Pepin for reverence of Pope Steven received the whole Order of Rome and cites two Capitulars for this wherein Charles the Great declares That his Father Pepin first put down the Gallican and set up the Roman Service in France (u) Capit. lib. 1. cap. 80 lib. 5. cap. 219. in Mornay ut supr pag 64. Now Pope Steven died An. 755. which is near Fifty years before the Ninth Age began Moreover the Centuriators out of Sigebert and divers ancient Historians tell us That it is apparent there was a different way of Singing in the Roman and the Gallican Churches till Pepin upon his being made King of France by the Pope brought in the Roman Rites and way of Singing into the Gallican Church (w) Magdebur Cent. 8. cap. 6. pag. 342 343. Now this was in the year 751. that is in the midst of the Eighth Age. 'T is true Charles the Great did go on with the same work but then it was before the beginning of the Ninth Age which is the Period that my Adversary assigns to this Matter For finding still that some Churches kept up the Old way of Singing he sent two Clerks to Rome to learn there the Authentic way of Singing and they first taught the Church of Metz and then all France (x) Magdeb. ibid Sigeb Chron. An. 774. But this was in the year 774 Six and twenty years before the Ninth Age began Again He owns this Uniformity was brought in by his Father Pepin and enjoyns it once more (y) Capitul Franc. Tom. I. in Cap. An. 788. pag. 203. about the Year 788. The next Year in another Capitular Charles the Great obliges the Monks also to follow that Roman Order of Singing which his Father appointed when he put down the Old Gallican way (z) Capitul ibid. An. 789. cap. 78. p. 239. In the same year also was this Law made That the Clergy should have Orthodox Books very well Corrected lest those who desire to pray to God aright by Ill written Books should ask amiss and therefore none was to write out the Gospel the Psalter or Missal but a Man of mature Age (a) Capitul ibid. Tom. I. cap. 70. p. 237. And finally The last Persons sent from Rome about compleating this Uniformity were Adrian's two Chanters who came into France An. 790 (b) Magdeb. Cent. 8. cap. 6. pag. 343. Sigebert An. 790. Wherefore he is out in his Chronology as to this Matter because the Roman Order was brought into the Gallican Church by Pepin first and then universally setled there by Charles the Great before the Ninth Age began But to let that pass it is certain there was no more liberty allowed to any Ministers in the Gallican Church before the Roman Offices came in there than there was afterward because it is plain they had a Liturgy before imposed strictly by divers Canons of several Councils and while that Gallican Office was in Force the Clergy were as much bound to use those Forms as they were to use the
Roman Forms afterward and therefore his pretended liberty of Praying Extempore in public or changing the public Forms at pleasure hath no Foundation among the French of those Ages and is grounded only upon false and wrested Quotations for in fact and reality there was no such liberty in the Gallican Church since the second famous Conversion of that People no nor before as far as we can find by those few Memoirs we have of those obscure Times Ecclesia Germonica ab An. Dom. 600. § 6. My Adversary is as much mistaken in the Proofs which he brings for his Imaginary liberty in Germany For he saith Long after Boniface had been stickling to reduce it to the Roman Vniformity the whole Country was so far from submitting to any one prescribed Order of Service that in one Diocess there were various Modes of Administring Which he proves by a Decretal and by a Passage in the Life of Bruno Archbishop of Colen in the Midst of the Tenth Age who was then to correct the diversity of Divine-Service in his Province (c) Disc of Lit. â—ag 13â— To shew the weakness and mistakes of which Argument and Instances let us Note That Germany as well as other of its Neighbouring Countries was early Converted to the Christian Faith for Irenaeus mentions the Churches founded in Germany which believed as other Orthodox Churches did (d) Iren. adv haer lib. 1. cap. 3. pag. 53. And in a Council held at Colen An. 347. Six of the German Bishops were present (e) Bin. Tom. I. par 1. pag. 460. And from their nearness to and Correspondence with the French we may conclude they used the same Method in Divine-Service which was used there But when the Northern Nations broke into these parts of Europe many of the Germans relapsed to Paganism yet not so generally but that some of them were still Christians and retained one Form of Divine-Service using it in their Mother-Tongue Now Boniface was sent thither in the Year 722 and though his Pretence was to convert Pagans yet his main business was to bring those who were already Christians to submit to the Roman Service in the Latin Tongue in this he was stoutly opposed by divers Bishops of Germany who would not part with their old way of Serving God but by the help of the Popes and the French Kings he was so successful in his Attempts That as his great Author saith he induced the People of Franconia Hessia Bavaria Saxony Frisia c. to receive the Roman Order oppressing such as did oppose him by Force But after this an holy Man named Methodius turned the Scripture into the Sclavonian Tongue and re-established the Ancient Service in all the Churches of this Language attempting also to do the same in Bavaria Austria Suevia c. Abolishing the Latin Mass and the Ceremonies of Rome (f) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap. 8. pag. 65. Or as the Centuriators relate it (g) Magdeb. Cent. 9. cap. 10. pag. 491. He began to persuade some That casting away the Latin Tongue they should celebrate Divine Service in the Vulgar Tongue for the edification of the Church and return to their former Vsage which they had before the Time of Charles the Great From which Relation and from the good Agreement between the Old Gallican and German Churches we may see there were Forms of Prayer before Boniface came into Germany and Methodius restored the use of those Forms and rejected the Roman Liturgy So that here were Forms used by all and no Side desired or expected any liberty from them None pleaded for Extempore Prayer the change being no more than exchanging one Liturgy for another And in this Boniface did prevail and Methodius did not prevail much in Germany being soon after banished from thence into Moravia where he died But my Adversary cites the Canon Law to prove there were afterwards various Modes of Administring in one Diocess Now this Decretal is generally ascribed to Pope Celestine the Third who died An. 1198. above 450 Years after Boniface and B. Bilson thinks it was made by Innocent the Third in his Lateran Council An. 1215. near 500 Years after The Words are these Because in many Parts there are in the same City and Diocesses mixt People of divers Languages having but one Faith and yet divers Rites and Manners We strictly Charge the Bishops of such Places to provide fit Men who according to the diversity of Rites and Tongues may celebrate Divine Offices and minister the Sacraments of the Church unto them (h) Decret lib. 1. Tit. 3 1. de Offic. Jud. cap. 14. mihi pag. 452. Now this Decretal only provides for such Cities wherein there were Merchants from all Nations of Christendom some of which suppose might be Greeks others Armenians others Sclavonians others Spaniards all which had different Forms of Liturgy and some of them in different Languages Now in this case they were to be allowed so many several Priests of their own to Officiate by their own Liturgy But this no more proves that Priests who Officiate to their own Nation then had a liberty to vary or that there were various Offices for People of the same Country than the allowing of French Dutch or Greek Churches to serve God after their several ways in London proves That the Clergy of London are not enjoyned to Read one Liturgy or that the Church of England hath divers Forms of Common-Prayer This Fallacy is so gross that to be imposed on by it would shew as little Judgment as the pressing it expresses of Modesty in him who would put such Shams upon this Age. His second Instance is about Bruno Bishop of Colen who as he cites the Relation not out of Rotgerus but out of the Centuriators Correcting the diversity of celebrating Divine Offices in his Province appointed there that the same Order should be every where observed (i) Diversitatem sacra peragendi in totâ sua Provinciâ corrigens ac ut eadem ubique esset ratio constituens Mag. Cent. x. pag. 608. But first he fraudulently leaves out the Word Totâ which signifies this Diversity was not in any one Diocess but in the Archbishop of Colens whole Province to whom all Germania Secunda of old was subject (k) Heylin Cosm lib. 2. pag. 47. And even at this day Miraeus doth reckon up five Diocesses beside that of Colen all under this great Metropolitan (l) Mirai notitiae Episcopat pag. 300. So that whereas in these several Diocesses there were some differences in the Divine-Service This famous Bishop reduced them all according to the Old Canons to that one Order which was used at Colen Now this makes nothing for that liberty of private Clergy-men to vary the Offices as they please which my Adversary pleads for especially if what Du-Plessis say of this Matter be true That Bruno then reformed the Order of the Mass in his Diocess he should say Province according to that
old Form which all Agree to be certainly right but it is disputable and uncertain whether any other Form be so or no And surely certain things are much to be preferred before uncertain (n) idem ibid. pag 379. Thus this learned Man represents the Matter and if my Adversary who transcribed his Instances had imitated his Ingenuity He could not have framed any Argument from hence for his Liberty of varying Prayers because he reckons his Liberty a Priviledge a Duty and an advantage to the Worship But this variation in Baptism was an irregular Fact generally disliked and censured so as to make the very Office Null or at least very liable to be counted so it was an Illegal thing seldom done never commanded nor directed to be done only when it was done it was condemned by many and excused by very few And suppose now varying the Prayers be such a Fact as this is it Advisable or Eligible No the Comparison shews the taking such Liberty would be an ill thing for which scarce any would undertake to make an Apology And so I have done with his Comparison between Forms of Prayer and the Form of Baptizing § 10. His next Excursion is about the Creeds and being deckt in the Plumes he hath borrowed from Grotius Vossius and Bishop Vsher he fills Four Pages with Pompous Margens to dress up this Argument viz. That in the Primitive Times there was an Agreement in sense not in Words as to the Creed it self and he thinks that they who left themselves and others at so much Liberty in Forms of Creeds would not limit themselves nor others by Forms of Prayer If the Apostles Creed be objected he looks on Ruffinus his Relation to be a Fable and saith that no Writer for 300 years took notice of it And since the Ancients would not be confined to this Creed it argues they would never be confined to Forms of Prayer composed by others and he notes that the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions hath set down a Form of Creed different from that of the Apostles (o) Disc of Lit. pag. 99 100 101 102 103. This is the sum of his Reasoning Which when it is strictly examined will all appear to be either mistaken or fallacious He first directs us to Grotius upon Math. xxviii 19. where that Author brings in Justin Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Tertullian Novatian c. using various Expressions when they give an account of its several Articles But Grotius his Inferences which he cites in his Margen pag. 100. are two First That when they say the Rule of Faith was immutable they do not respect one certain Form of words received in all places but they respect the Force and meaning of the Interrogations And Secondly That Cyprians words seem to him to shew that the Creed or Rule of Faith in his time was not yet tied to those words in which it was afterwards found written and yet it cannot be doubted but the Sense of it was always the same (p) Grot. Com. in Math. XXVIII 19. p. 288 289. Now though Grotius here be not so just perhaps as he ought to be to the Antiquity of Creeds and being a Modern Author his Affirmation in this weighs no more than his Instances prove Yet I will wave that Dispute and for the present admit what he saith were true and then make Parallel between Creeds and Liturgies And in his First Inference he only saith That when the Ancients use various ways of expressing their Faith they do not refer to one certain Form of Words received in all places but only to the force and meaning of the Interrogations Which shews Grotius did not think as my Adversary grosly doth That every one of the Ancients in the places cited pretended to repeat the very Form of the Creed but only to shew the main Doctrins of it which in these occasional Discourses is all that we can expect And therefore the variety of expressions doth not prove there was not one Form of Creed but that these Fathers in these places do not refer to that Form Yet Secondly These Fathers all lived within 250 years after Christ and if we grant to Grotius that then there was not one Form of Creed every where received we may allow the Parallel with Liturgies and suppose that in Cyprian and Novatian's Time and so upwards to Tertullian Irenaeus and Justin Martyr there was not one Form of Liturgy every where received yet for all this Liturgies might be used and received before the year 300 that is before the quiet settlement of the Christian Church 1400 years ago and above 200 years before my Adversary allows them to have come in And this also is all that can be inferred from his words in the second Passage viz. That in S. Cyprians time the Creed was not tied to that Form of words wherein it is found written down afterwards Though he speak this modestly and only say it sâ—ems so to him Yet let it be supposed true and certain and then make the Parallel and no more will follow from thence but this That the Liturgies of the Church were not written down in so many words in the year 250 as we find them written in afterwards Now this being in the Ages of Persecution and while the Miraculous Gifts lasted it will not prove that because the Church then had no such Form of written Liturgy therefore now when the Church is setled and Inspiration ceased we neither need nor ought to have such a Form In the next Page in the Margen he grants the Creeds had more stated Forms in the Fourth Century though even then the Creeds of several Cities in the same Country were not Vniform and he instances in Rome Aquileia and Ravenna in Italy referring us to Vossius and Bishop Vsher (q) Disc of Lit. Marg. p. 101. And a little after he saith it was not put into set Form till the Fourth Age or neer it but the Forms varied in several places in the same Country Now because the Antiquity of Creeds is not our business here we will also for the present suppose this to be true And then if I may Argue from the History of Creeds to that of Liturgies as he evidently doth the Consequence will be That Liturgies were put into set Forms somwhat before the beginning of the Fourth Age though those great Churches which were at that time independent of one another though in the same Country as Aquileia and Ravenna in Italy which then were not subject to Rome had some difference in the Words and Phrases as also in the Order and Method of their Liturgies But as the Roman Creed was imposed upon all those Churches which were under the Popes Jurisdiction properly so called and the Aquileian Creed and that of Ravenna were respectively imposed upon all the Churches subject to these two great Metropolitans So it must follow if Liturgies and Creeds kept pace as he supposes that the Roman
Liturgy was imposed on the Roman Clergy and those of Aquileia and Ravenna upon the Clergy subject to those Churches And then my Adversaries whole Book which is written to assert that Liturgies were not imposed before the end of the Fifth or beginning of the Sixth Age that is 200 year after is false and utterly wrong And then also the Church of England both in composing a Form and imposing it imitates a very pure Age of the Church viz. The time a little before the begining of the Fourth Century or thereabouts and hath the Prescription of 1400 years to justifie her in both But because his main Author is Vostius we will here observe what that learned Man freely owns as to Creeds viz. That there was a â—orm in the Oriental Church very like to that which is called the Apostles Creed long before the Council of Nice And this which we call the Apostles Creed was the Roman Form bâ—fâ—re the time of that same Council and the Creed of Aquileia differed from this but very little (r) Vosâ— de trib â—ymb diss 1. §. â—0 pag. 24. Again he saith these Forms were not made by any General Council and were so old in Ruffinus his time that they were taken to be Apostolical (s) Ibid. §. 45. pag. 31. And the Church of Jerusalem had a Form which seems to have been elder than any of them being explained by S Cyril An. 350. and then delivered as from a very ancient Tradition (t) Ibid. §. 51. pag. 34. And both he and Grotius who fancy the Creed consisted at first of no more Articles than those of the Trinity do believe the remaining Articles about the Catholic Church the Remission of Sins the Resurrection of the Body and the Life everlasting were added as early as Tertullian's Time So that if these Authors Conjectures be allowed then there were Forms of Creeds in every great and eminent Church before the Third Century began From whence I thus Argue in my Adversaries own way and almost in his very words It is not probable that they who had a Creed in a Set Form in every Principal Church and did impose this Form to be learned and used by all that were Admitted Members of that Church by Baptism even before the Third Century should not also have their Set Forms of Prayer to the use of which all the Members of that Church and all under its Jurisdiction were obliged How credible and likely is it that they who did not leave their Creed at liberty also did not allow Arbitrary Prayers Since Heresies might creep in by the way of Extempore Prayers and Hymns as easily as by the use of various and arbitrary Creeds If they thought it requisite to limit the Rule of Faith for this Reason there was the very same Reason to Limit the Prayers Supplications Lauds and Litanies (u) See the Disc of Lit. p. 102 103. This is his way of Arguing upon a false Supposition That the Creed was not in a Set Form in the First Ages Wherefore since it appears by his own Authors that it was in a Set Form in or before the Third Century he must allow this to be a firm Argument against him It is nothing to my Question to enter into the Controversie Whether the Apostles themselves made that Creed which goes under their Name But after I have considered all that Vossius c. have said in this Matter I am verily persuaded That the Apostles themselves did make one Form of Faith at first but did not commit it to writing because it was to be taught orally to every Christian at his Baptism and kept as the Cognizance to distinguish between Hereticks and true Believers and the likeness of all the ancient Forms to one another shews they had one and the same Original at first and were derived from the first Planters of Christianity As for the variety between these ancient Forms in several Churches it was the natural and necessary effect of delivering it Orally which in distant Countries and in tract of Time by passing through divers hands must needs produce some small difference in the Order and Words and that shews That Oral Tradition is not so safe a way to convey Articles of Faith as Writing and though the Apostles had left the Scripture to be a standing Rule to secure the Creed from any dangerous Corruption yet it was necessary to have this short Form besides to teach the Candidates for Baptism But if the Reader desire to see this more fully proved I refer him to a Learned Book writ by a very Worthy Author Mr. G. Ashwell Wherein both by Arguments and evidence of Antiquity it is strongly and clearly made out that this Creed was made by the Apostles themselves (w) 〈◊〉 Apoâ—â—â— or â— Dâ—scourse aâ—â—â—ting the Antâ—â—s and Autâ—◠〈…〉 Creed P inted at Oâ—â—a 1683. And there it may be seen how bold my Adversary is to give Ruffinus the Lye since all the Writers of that Age generally agree in the same thing There also it appears that my Adversary is grosly mistaken in affirming that the Ancients took no notice of this Creed for above 300 Years As for his Arguing That the subsequent Creeds varying from it shews they did not own that to be Apostolical especially since they preferred their own Forms before it on the most solemn occasions (x) Disc of Lâ—t 〈…〉 it proceeds upon a Mistake For Vossius owns that the later superadded Creeds were only taken to be Commentaries on the Former and clearer explications of such Articles as the Hereticks had attempted to pervert and he shews that they did not cast off nor disuse the ancient Form when they made these New ones They kept the Apostles Creed still and used that in the most solemn Office of Baptism Yea they gave it the precedence before all other Creeds and therefore the Third General Council says They received in the first place the Creed delivered to them by the most Holy Apostles and then the Confession made by 318 Holy Fathers in the City of Nice (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Act. Concil Ephesin Bin. Tom. I. par 2. pag. 415. Wherefore this was used and reckoned in the first place even after other Creeds came in Finally He need not wonder that the Creed in the Constitutions is not the same with that which we call the Apostles because no Man pretends now that the Apostles made those Constitutions The Creed found there as we have shewed is the Apostles Form as it was varied at Antioch about the Year 330 which Daillé owns to be the Time when that Clemens writ the Constitutions (z) Daill praef ad Dissert de relig cult objecto not the Year 500 as my Adversary falsly pretends (a) Disc of Lit. pag. 111. Now it is no wonder that the same Form in 300 Years time should be varied as much in two several Churches so far distant as Rome and
Salmâ—s defens reg cap. 8. To him I will add another Man of incomparable Learning who had no Obligations to this Church of England but rather the contrary which is the Famous Hugo Grotius who saith I am sure the English Liturgy the Rite of Laying Hands on Children in memory of their Baptism the Authority of Bishops of Synods consisting of none but the Clergy and many such like things do sufficiently agree to the Orders of the Ancient Church from which we cannot deny but that we have departed both in France and Holland (*) Grot. ad Boetslaer ep 62. pag. 21. And whoever considers these most Eminent Writers great Judgment in Antiquity may very well allow them to be sufficient Witnesses in this Question But none of the Forein Divines are more full or more clear in determining this Matter than the deservedly famous Lud. Capellus who lived to hear of this very Independent Sect who rejected our English Liturgy and all prescribed Forms and writ a most claborate Thesis on purpose to answer and expose their frivolous Objections a Thesis deserving to be read by all English Divines and to be wholly translated into English for the Common Good out of which at present I will only recite a few Passages viz. That as soon as Miraculous Gifts ceased and Hereticks began to infest the Church there was a necessity for Liturgies which wise and pious Bishops composed for the use of all the Presbyters in their Diocesses (a) Theses Salmurienses Praesid Lud. Capello par 3. De Liturg. Formulis conceptis Thes 3. pag. 657. This was done chiefly in the Great Churches as that of Rome Alexandria Constantinople c. and followed by Lesser Churches (b) Ibid. Thes 4 These Forms were short and plain at first consisting of some few Prayers and Lessons cut of the Psalms and other Scripture with the Blessing Consecration and distribution of the Communion c. And such was the Roman Office in the first Four Ages till Damasus's time but augmented and corrupted by the following Popes (c) Ibid. Thes 5. And then he hath these Words which I will transcribe at large But about 140 years ago when there was a Departure from the Roman Church and the People came out of Babylon and withdrew themselves from the Pope's Tyranny The Authors of the Reformation then purged the Holy Liturgy from all the Superstition and Popish Idolatry and took away all that was burthensom and that did not tend to Edification And thus at that time there were divers prescribed Forms of Liturgies simple and pure Composed by the several Authors of the Reformation in Germany France England Scotland Holland c. which differed as little as could be from the ancient Forms of the Primitive Church which Liturgies the Protestants have used hitherto happily and with good success in their several Nations and Districts Vntil very lately there arose in England a sort of morose scrupulous and too nice that I say not down-right superstitious Men who for many trifling Reasons of no moment not only dislike the Liturgy hitherto used in that Church but would have both it and the whole Order of Bishops to be utterly abrogated and abolished in place whereof they would substitute that which they call their Directory To which some wild and frantick Men add this Opinion That it is unlawful to use any prescribed Form either in public or private Prayers and that no good Man can with a safe Conscience be present at these Prayers (d) Id ibid. Thes 6 7. pag. 658. After this he acurately states the Controversie by distinguishing about the several Parts of the Public Service and proves Forms may lawfully be used in any part of it but as to Prayers he reckons it is most requisite they be made by Forms (e) Thes 9. ad Thes 23. pag. 659 c. And then he brings in all their Objections against Forms and all their little Reasons for their Arbitrary way and very learnedly and solidly confutes them all I shall only mention the Heads and refer the Reader to the Discourse it self for his full satisfaction viz. 1. He shews this is not an imitation of the Papists 2. Not a burden to Mens Consciences 3. Not worse because it was not the way in the Apostles Times 4. A Directory is not sufficient security against Heresie 5 He shews That though Forms are most necessary for the Unlearned yet the Learned ought not to be left free in the Public Prayers 6. He proves this is not that Will-worship which is forbidden in Scripture 7. He confutes those who say These are not our own Prayers 8. And those who pretend they are against Christian Liberty 9. Or that they spoil Ministers Gifts 10. Or do not profit the Auditory And lastly He answers that Objection That the use of Forms hinders our lifting up our Eyes in Prayer (f) Id. ibid. Thes â—4 c. ad pag. 669. And after he hath called all these light and frivolous little Reasons and petty Objections He concludes the whole Question with five Positions First That Forms are not absolutely necessary for all Persons in all Times and Places Secondly That they would not be generally necessary but only because all things are to be done decently and in order Thirdly That where there are Unlearned Pastors there Forms are absolutely necessary Fourthly Even where there are Learned Pastors a public Form is very useful and necessary for the common Edification of the Church Fifthly The use of these Forms cannot justly be condemned or disliked since always and every where it is most convenient and hath obtained in the whole Christian Church throughout all the World perpetually for above 1300 years and it is now every where used but only amongst these Vpstart Independents (g) Id. ibid. Thes 49. p. 669 So that truly the Moroseness or Scrupulousness and Superstition or rather the petulant and obstinate boldness of these Men is senseless and prodigious superstitiously to condemn and foolishly to compare to an Idol forbid in the Second Commandment to be avoided by all a Thing which is in it self most innocent whose use is most profitable and its observation most convenient which hath so long been practised in the Vniversal Church and never was yet rejected by any Church and which all the Churches of God every where now use to their great benefit but they reject it out of meer Whimsey or out of a Vile design to bring in an unbridled Licentiousness and intolerable Disorder into the Church But amongst them such are most to be detested who either will not use the Lords Prayer or none but that Form and that without joyning it to any other Prayers public or private and hold it a Sin for any good Man to be in a Church or a Family where they use prescribed Forms and account this to be a just cause of Separating from such Worship lest they should be defiled with their Sin who use such Forms
do good (c) Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 6. Now these being the constant and common wants of all Men and things daily needful for every one it was most fit to ask them in a set Form of Words and if they had pray'd for these things Extempore Clemens could not have been so positive in the Method as he seems to be I had almost forgot one of his Objections which is That the Christians then lifted up their Hands and Eyes to Heaven in Prayer which shews they had no Books (d) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 9. Clem. Alex. ibid. I reply It proves no such matter because though the Priest did read his part out of a Book the People might lift up their Hands and Eyes so long as he prayed alone and by frequent use of the common Forms both they and he would be so ready at the accustomed Words as to have liberty enough to look off from their Books and look up to Heaven as we in this Church often do in the use of our Liturgy § 4. At the same time flourished Tertullian Tertullian An. Dom. 192. in whose Works we have sufficient evidence that they used Forms of Prayer and Praises For he declares That Christ hath fixed a new Form of Prayer for us who are his Disciples viz. The Lord's Prayer which he expounds in a peculiar Tract (e) Tertul. de Orat. cap. 1. And in divers places calls it The lawful and the ordinary Prayer (f) De Orat. cap. 9. de Jejun cap. 15. pag. 553. de fuga in persec cap. 2. there being clear proof in him that the Christians daily repeated this very Form Now if they used but one Form in their Devotions they could not think Forms were unlawful nor imagine that Forms stinted the Spirit as our Dissenters now believe Yea that they used in public to pray by Forms seems to be intimated in that Passage That the Christians met together and as if they were drawn up to Battel did joyntly set upon God with their Prayers which Violence was acceptable to the Almighty (g) Quasi manu factâ precationibus ambiamus haec vis Deo grata est Tertul. Apol. cap. 39. for this implies their joyning Voices as well as Hearts And though he do not give us the very words of their Litany because he writ to the Unbelievers yet he describes some of the things which they desired of God to bestow on the Emperours viz. That they might have a long life and a quiet Empire that their Family might be safe their Armies valiant their Senate faithful their People virtuous and that the whole World might be in peace (h) Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. And it must be noted that Tertullian could not have quoted these particulars as a proof of the Christians Loyalty if they had not generally asked these very things Extempore Prayers would have been so various that they could have been no evidence in this or any other case Moreover he calls the Offices used in the celebration of the Eucharist Divine and Solemn Rites and adds That after these solemn Rites were finished the People were dismissed (i) Dominica solennia transacta solennia dimissa plebe Tert. de anim cap. 9. where though he studiously avoid reciting any part of the Office yet he intimates by that Phrase it was a Form because Solennes Preces Solemn Prayers among the Romans were those certain and solemn words in Prayer from which they might not vary (k) Brisson de formul lib. 1. pag. 61. He also saith concerning Baptism That Christ had not only imposed the Law of Baptizing but also prescribed the Form of it (l) Tertul. de Bapt. cap. 13. So that Baptism doubtless was performed then by a certain and set Form and though our Adversary argues that Tertullian uses variety of Words concerning this Form (m) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 94. 95. yet it is to be noted that this is only in his discoursing concerning it where Tertullian doth not pretend to cite the words but mentions the thing occasionally As to the Laudatory part of the Service it appears from him that they sang Psalms and Hymns alternately and therefore in Forms (n) Tert. ad uxor lib. 2. pag. 172. one of which Forms was the Gloria Patri which he describes as Irenaeus did by the last words World without end Amen For he asks the Christians If they could give testimony to a Gladiator in the Theatre with that Mouth which said Amen in the Church or if they could say World without end to any but God or Christ (o) Ex ore que Amen in sanctum protuleris gladiatori testimonium reddere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alii omnino dicere nisi Deo Christo Tert. de spectac pag. 83. From whence we may infer that the Glory be to the Father c. which was a Form in the Gallican Church in Irenaeus his time was also a Form used in Tertullian's time in Africa and so may be justly taken for one of the primitive and universal Forms by which all Churches did glorifie God And it will be very hard for our Adversary to give a Reason why they might not use Forms in their Prayers as well as in their Praises He urges against this one passage of Tertullian where describing their Love-Feasts he saith After they have washed their hands and brought in Lights they called for some to sing either Psalms or somewhat of their own Composing (p) Tertul. Apol. cap. 39. Discourse of Liturg. p. 126 143. But if we look on the place we shall find this was after the public Worship was done at their common Meal and if this Hymn was taken out of the Psalms then it was a Form most certainly or if it were of their own Composing probably it was made at home however it will not follow that now those miraculous Gifts of Inspiration are ceased we may compose Extempore Hymns because they did it in an Age when many had those Gifts Some other slight Objections he raises out of this Author against Forms of Prayer As First That Christians then looked up to Heaven when they prayed (q) Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. Disc of Liturg. p. 9. But this was answered before and yet we must add that Tertullian affirms they did not always look up to Heaven in Prayer For sometimes he saith They did not look up with confidence toward Heaven but imitated the Publican who prayed with an humble and down-cast Countenance (r) Idem de Oratione c. 13. And S. Cyprian observes That the Christians did not impudently lift up their Eyes to Heaven (s) Cypr. de Orat. Dom. §. 4. p. 310 So that no Argument can be drawn from the one posture or the other But his main Objection out of Tertullian is that Phrase of Sine monitore quia de pectore viz. That the Christians prayed without a Monitor because they prayed out of their Breast
p. 127 c. do not at all prove Extempore Praising or Praying was then in use Or shew That Ministers then used no Forms in the public Worship both because Origen saith this of all the People who cannot be supposed universally to have had this Gift of Praising God and Praying to him Extempore nor if any of them had it were they allowed ordinarily to exercise it in public Assemblies And also because the Phrases do signifie no more than Praying or Praising God by Forms with all possible fervency and devotion Origen therefore is a good Witness for Liturgies and all his Sophistry cannot draw one Argument from him against the use of them in his time § 4. The holy Martyr S. Cyprian S. Cyprian An. Dom. 248. witnesseth the very same thing For that he was not against the use of Forms of Prayer may appear from his allowing the Lords Prayer to be used as a Form of Prayer which Christ himself gave us (b) Cypr. de orat Dom. §. 1. pag. 309. And he would have us repeat the very Words of it because we may be assured The Father will know the Words which were made by his own Son (c) Id. ibid. § 2. Yea from the manner of drawing up this Prayer so as all the People are supposed to repeat it with the Minister he justifies the use of Set Forms wherein the Congregation bears a part for he observes That the Christians had a public and Common-Prayer (d) Publica est nobis communis oratio ibid. §. 5. p. 310. and that Christ Commanded us to Pray for all Men in a Common Prayer wherein all agreed (e) Oratione communi concordi prece pro omnibus jussit orare Cypr. ad cler pleb ep 8. pag. 24. Now suppose we grant that he speaks this of the Lords Prayer yet since all other Prayers were to be drawn up by this pattern this will prove that their other Prayers were in all things like to this that is that they were not made Extempore but were put into a Form as the Lords Prayer is and repeated by all the Congregation either with or after the Minister But there are still more evident Proofs in him not only of Forms but of a Liturgy viz. where he cites and explains those very Words of Common-Prayer in the Prefaces which were used in all Churches in the same Words for he persuades Christians to attend to their Prayers in public by putting them in mind that the Priest before the Prayer prepares the Hearts of the Brethren by a Preface premised saying Lift up your Hearts so that when they answer We Lift them up unto the Lord they may be admonished to think upon God alone (f) Ideo sacerdos ante Orationem praefatione praemissà parat fratrum mentes dicendo Surium corda ut dum respondeat plebi habenus ad Dominum admoâ—eatur se nihil aliud quam Dominum debere cogitare Id de orat Dom. §. 22. Now here we have a Form of Words used in the Eucharist not only in Africa but both in the Eastern and Western Churches and this also used by way of Response and divided between the Priest and People which is impossible to be done in any thing that the Priest saith Extempore And though he cites no more of this Preface than the first Words yet other Authors both in the African and Greek Church mention the rest of this primitive Form viz. It is meet and right so to do c. Even as it is yet in so many Words Transcribed in our Communion Service wherefore the Judicious Centuriators do rightly infer from hence That there were undoubtedly Set Forms of Prayer in S. Cyprians time (g) Magd. Cent. 3. cap. 6 p. 135. which they prove by citing this Preface Yea B. Bilson concludes from this and other passages that Christs Church taking her direction from S. Pauls Doctrin framed her public Prayers in such order that the Pastor and People both joyntly and interchangeably Praised God and Prayed to him each with other and each for other (h) Bilson of Christian Subjection Part. 4. pag. 435. Now how could there be these fixed places for Responses if the Priest had made only one long Extempore Prayer as our Dissenters do It is plain from this very method of Responses that there were then public Forms allowed and used And we may observe not only by this Preface but also by another passage that the African Church and the Eastern did hugely agree in these Liturgick Forms because as the Greeks say Give holy things to those that are holy (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lit. â— Basil Chrysost Clem. Constit So it seems they did at Carthage where as S. Cyprians Notes they were daily charged to keep that which was holy in a pure Conscience according to our Lords command not to cast that which is holy to Dogs (k) Cypr. ad Demetr p. 324. That is in the Eucharist which they then daily celebrated they used that Phrase Give holy things to holy Persons For though S. Cyprian writing to a Heathen will not express the very Form it self yet he comes so near it that he can mean nothing else being obliged to conceal the sacred Offices from Demetrian And that is the reason also why when he hath occasion to mention the Christian Litany he doth it only by setting down these general Heads of things desired therein viz. For driving away Enemies for procuring Rain and either for removing or moderating adversities we always pour out our Supplications and Prayers as well as for your peace and safety (l) Cypr. ad Demetr p. 324. so that our Adversary is very weak in despising those who urge this of as a Form of Prayer (m) Disc of Liturg. p. 137. because none of us think it was the very Words of the African Liturgy and we know Tertullian describes it when he also writes to Heathens in different Words but if we compare the two Fathers or both of them with the ancient Litanies wherein the general Heads of Evils which were to be Prayed against were named by the Priest and the People answered O Lord hear us or O Lord deliver us we may conclude they had a certain Form but concealed the Phrases of it from Unbelievers But the disputer against Liturgies who fraudulently conceals all but the last of these Testimonies picks up another passage or two by which he hopes to shew there were no Forms used in S. Cyprians time The first is in his Epistle to Pope Lucius where he saith we cease not in our Prayers and Sacrifices to give thanks to God the Father and to his Son Christ our Lord Praying and requesting that he who is perfect and makes us perfect would keep for you and perfect in you the glorious Crown of a Confessor (n) Cypr. Epist 58. p. 163. Hence he infers that being at liberty to put up any occasional Petition
mentions that so famous Form of Holy Holy Holy which the Greek call Trisagion (u) Id libr. de XLII Mansionibus And he speaks of the Morning and Evening Hymns wherewith God was delighted (w) Id. Com. in Psal 64. Tom. 7. pag. 158. Now it is certain all these were Forms of Praise and yet if these Christians had not sung them with the Spirit God would not have been delighted with them and therefore we may praise God devoutly acceptably and with the Spirit in and by Forms as S. Hirom and the holy Men and Women in his time did Nor have we less Evidence that they prayed by Forms For he occasionally mentions two Passages of their Litany The Church saith From thy remembring the Sins of our Forefathers (x) Hieron Com. in Psal 38. where Good Lord deliver us or the like must be added to make up the Sentence So again he tells us It is the Voice of the Church and he wishes God would hear her when she cries O Lord grant us thy Peace (y) Id ad Rustic ep 4 pag. 49. which very Phrase we know is used in all the ancient Litanies therefore he must refer to those public Forms when he cites those Words as the Voice of the Church As to the Communion Service no Man can doubt but that the People used there daily to repeat the Words of the Lords Prayer as a Form who considers that he saith Our Saviour taught his Apostles to appoint the Faithful every day in the Sacrifice of his Body to say Our Father c. (z) Idem adv Pelag. lib 3. pag. 469. He also calls the Prayer of Consecration The Solemn Prayer (a) Id Com. in Zeph. cap. 3. Tom. 5. p. 489. Now we shewed before that PRECES SOLENNES were always in a Set Form of Words He also mentions that Universal Form of receiving the Holy Sacrament and immediately saying Amen (b) Id. ad Theophil ep 62. Tom. 2. p. 270. which being used in the Eastern Churches in Africa and at Milan and prescribed by the ancient Offices of those several Churches those who followed them in this Rite probably did so in the rest of that Office Again It is evident from him that those who were Baptized were asked the very Words of the Apostles Creed (c) Idem adv Lucif Tom. 2. pag. 189. and he frequently refers to the Form of Renunciation there used Now considering S. Hierom did not write purposely of Liturgy these occasional Passages may suffice to shew us there was a Public Form used in his time and as we noted He commends S. Hilary for making a Liturgy and Book of Hymns (d) Hieron Catal. script in Hilario p. 378. and therefore could not dislike prescribed Forms yea Durandus doth not only say That he made an Order for reading the Scripture as our Adversary would have it (e) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 7â— but his Words are He appointed what Psalms Lessons Epistles and Gospels should be read every day cantum ordinavit magna ex parte that is He ordered many of the Forms of Prayer and Praise both which were chanted or sung in Durandus his time (f) Durand â—ational lib. â— cap. 1. sol 89. And he means no more but this which S. Gregory had Recorded before That the Missal of the Roman Church was corrected and set in order by S. Hierom in Pope Damasus his Time From whence we infer that S. Hierom was not like our Adversary for rejecting Liturgies but correcting them and sending them to such Bishops as had Authority to impose them Our Adversary though he pretends to have searched Antiquity very diligently could find nothing in S. Hierom which shewed the use of Forms and it seems he could discover but one Passage in him to urge against the use of them and it is a very slight one viz. That S. Hierom censures and reproves the Deacons because in the Offertory at the Communion they recited publicly the Names of such as offered and the Sums which they either gave or promised Now this Custom he thinks was not prescribed and therefore he infers that those who officiated were left to their Liberty to use what Expressions they thought sit (g) Disc of Liturg. p 65 66. ex Hieron Com. in Ezek xviii in Jer. xi To which I Reply That it hath been proved before there was a prescribed Form to pray for all Estates of Men and in this Collect they commemorated such Eminent Persons as died in the True Faith whose Names were read out of the Dypticks and this was a certain written Form which no Priest might alter Here also they mentioned the Names of such as had Offered at the Communion even from S. Cyprian's time who orders the Writing down and commemorating the Names of such as had contributed to redeem Captives (h) Cypr. Ep. 60. Epist 66. But the Names of these living Offerers varied every day and the Church could no more prescribe these Names than ours can prescribe what Sick shall be prayed for or what Christian Names shall be used in the Matrimonial Office And this miserable Logician may as well prove our Ministers are left to their liberty to use what Expressions they please in the general Prayer for the Sick because in some Churches they name twenty new Names there in one day Or in the Office of Matrimony because they put in William and Mary or John and Elizabeth as to pretend that the General Collect in the Primitive Church was not a prescribed Form from the Priests varying the Names of the Offerers As for their mentioning the Sums offered that was a Corruption no doubt but we see it came in at that part of the Office where the Church was forced to leave the Minister at liberty so that he hath spoiled his own Cause by this Instance which affords us a good Argument against Extempore Prayers and leaving Men at liberty in Divine Offices as being a dangerous Gap to let in Corruptions S. Chrysostom An. 397. § 19. The deservedly Famous S. Chrysostom hath left us so many rare memorials of his Piety and Learning and so many clear Evidences of his affection for Liturgies that he alone might be a sufficient Witness if our Adversary were not pertinacious And this Author is so dazeled with the brightness of his Testimonies that he grants enough to shew that Public Forms were used in his Time and approved by him though still according to the custom of his Party he denies they were used in this or the next Age holding the Conclusion when he is forced to quit the Promisses For he grants First That the Lord's Prayer is called by S. Chrysostom That Prayer which was established by Law and brought in by Christ (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys hom 2. in 2 Cor. And that the very Words of it were taught to the Baptized and the Form it self repeated in the Daily Service of the
which assures us they were Forms of Prayer And that Common-Prayer properly signifies such a Form in which both Minister and People have their several parts Of this Litany or Common-Prayer there are divers Petitions mentioned in S. Augustin upon occasion and though being writing Letters he doth not always cite them in the same Words yet the Phrases are so very much alike and the Sense and Order of them is so exactly the same that we may be sure he alludes to some known Form Thus he saith in one of the places afore cited the Church prays That Faith may be granted to unbelievers that Idolaters may be delivered from their ungodly Errors that the Vail may be taken away from the Hearts of the Jews so that the light of Truth may shine unto them that Hereticks may by Repenting receive the true Faith that Schismaticks may be restored by the Spirit of Charity that the lapsed may partake of the remedies of Repentance and that the Catechumens being brought to the Sacrament of Regeneration may have the Treasures of Heavenly mercy opened to them (k) Aug. de Eccles dogm cap. 30. p. 46. ut supra f In another place he describes so many of these Petitions more briefly as concern his present Question The Minister saith he prays For unbelievers that God would convert them to the Faith for the Catechumens that God would inspire them with the desire of Regeneration and for the Faithful that by his Gift they may persevere in that which they have begun (l) Idem ad Vital Epist 107. pag. 102. H and a little after The Faithful pray for themselves that they may presevere in that which they have begun (m) Id. ibid. pag. 103. H. eadem verba iterum ibid. p. 104. I. which Sentence is twice mentioned in one Epistle where also he saith When do you hear Gods Minister Praying with a loud Voice That God would make the unbelieving Gentiles come over to the Faith and do not answer Amen (n) Id. pag. 104. G. And in another Book When did not the Church use to Pray That unbelievers may believe And for the Faithful that God would grant they may persevere in him even to the End To which saith he the People answer Amen (o) Aâ—g de 〈…〉 7. â—â—g â—â—â— Now my Adversary makes it an Argument against Liturgies that S. Augustin here speaking of the same Prayers cites them in various Words (p) Disc of 〈◊〉 pag. 21 22. But I have already observed he is writing Epistles and doth not pretend to quote the very Words but yet he describes the things Prayed in Phrases so very like each other that we may be sure he referred them to a common Form the Words of which were so well known that he need not strictly tye himself to repeat them As if I were writing to two several Persons and should prove the Church of Englands Charity by saying in one Letter that on Good Fryday she prays for the Conversion of Jews Turks Infidels and Hereticks and in another Letter by saying she Prays that God would convert the Jews convince the Turks and make Infidels and Hereticks become true Believers Supposing those I writ to were well acquainted with the Collect for Good Fryday None but such an Arguer as I have to deal with would gather from thence That the Church of England had no prescribed Collect for this day and this occasion And there is the less regard to be given to this Scruple because there are so many other clear Proofs in S. Augustin that there were certain Forms in his Time in the African and in other Churches He tells us That all Nations Grecians Latins and Barbarians used that Form Lord have mercy upon us (q) Aug. Pascentio Ep. 178. pag. 164. Now this we know was the Response in the ancient Litany And that same Preface before the Trisagion which we have anciently met with in S. Cyprian and many others is often mentioned and expounded in S. Augustin's Works So often as the Priest saith Lift up your Hearts the Spiritual Man can boldly and safely say We lift them up unto the Lord (r) Ei quoties Sacerdos dixerit sursum corda securè fidelitèr dicunt se habere ad Dominum De Temp. ser 54. pag 153. In another place Our Heart saith he is in Heaven and therefore it is not without cause that we hear those Words Lift up your Hearts (s) Id Com. in Psal 148. pag. 377. And again to shew it was of universal as well as daily use he saith All Mankind throughout the World do daily as it were with one Voice answer That they lift up their Hearts unto the Lord (t) Quotidiè per universum orbem genus humanum unà penè voce respondet sursum Corda se habere ad Dominum Id. de verâ Relig c. 3. p. 158. Moreover he gives us as clear Testimony of the rest of this Preface You know saith he to Dardanus in what Sacrifice it is said Let us give Thanks to our Lord God (u) Aug ad Dardan ep 57. pag. 57. and the like he writes to Honoratus (w) Id. ad Honorat ep 120. pag. 124. To which the Answer was then as it is now in our Common-Prayer It is meet and right so to do For thus S. Augustin discourses That which is said in the Sacrament by the Faithful Lift up your Hearts And We lift them up unto the Lord is intimated to be the Gift of God and therefore the Priest admonisheth those to whom he had spoken To give Thanks to our Lord God and they Answer It is meet and right (x) ut Gratias agant Domino Deo nostro Et dignum justum esse respondent Aug. de bon persev lib. 2. Tom. 7. p. 276. Item Aug de bono videit cap. 16. There can be nothing plainer therefore than that this very Form was used in the very same Words both in the Eastern and African Churches and it was also used in the Western Church so exactly in the same Form that we may justly look upon this as a piece of Primitive Liturgy which no Church presumed to alter He also speaks of a Prayer of Consecration by which the holy Elements were blessed The Petitions of which were concluded almost in every Church with the Lord's Prayer (y) Quam totam petitionom fere omnis Ecclesia dominica Oratione concludit Aug. Paulino ep 59. pag. 62. and he tells us that the Sacrament was delivered to the Faithful in these Words The Body or The Blood of Christ to which they always answered Amen (z) Aug. de verb. Ap. Ser. 31. pag. 87. enar in Psal 32. pag. 49. which very Form had been used in Africa ever since Tertullian's Time as we shewed before and we have also found it in the Eastern Churches and at Milan as well as here Finally He mentions a certain Vow in the Post-Communion wherein the Faithful do
promise to remain in Christ and adds That the whole Office is concluded with a solemn Thanksgiving (a) Aug. Paulin. Ep. 59. pag. 62. that is with a known Form in Words prescribed as Solemn plainly imports Now this is exactly agreeing to our Liturgy wherein we have a Prayer with a Vow to offer up our selves to Christ and conclude with that solemn Thanksgiving Glory be to God on high And as for the Praises of God S. Augustin highly commends the Custom of Milan For the Priest and People to sing Hymns in the Church alternately which can be no otherwise than by Forms (b) Aug. Confess lib. 10. cap. 33. pag. 41. ad Januar. Ep. 119. p. 119. He also approves and defends the Custom of Carthage in singing Hymns at the Altar taken out of the Psalms of David (c) Id retract lib. 2. cap. 11. pag. 10. And particularly he mentions the Usage of Singing the Hallelujah at the Altar every Lords-day (d) Id. ad Januar Ep. 119. pag. 119. ad Pascentium Ep. 178. p. 164. So that Africa in his Time had many Forms of Praise and therefore Possidonius among other effects of the Persecution that broke out after his Death laments this especially That it made the Hymns and Praises of God in the Church to cease (e) Pâ—ssâ—â—â— vit D. Aug. prope finem To conclude This Holy Father was so great a lover of Forms that there is yet extant in his Works a very pious Form of Prayer which he used after his Sermons (f) Aug Oper. Tom. 8. p. ult so that where the Church had not prescribed to him he saw fit there to use a Form And if we had time to make a narrower search in the Works of this Learned Father no doubt we might trace out the whole African Liturgy used in his Time but those who will be satisfied with Reason and Truth will be abundantly satisfied by the Instances here produced That there were Forms both of Prayer and Praise daily used in that Church § 22. My Adversary who pretends to a narrow search into Antiquity had the ill Fortune to miss most of these obvious Passages but he hath found out divers that are more obscure which he urges to prove there were no prescribed Forms First he saith The Ancients did not think Christ enjoyned them to use the Lords Prayer in the Eucharistical Office and that S. Augustin declares Our Lord in delivering this Prayer did not teach his Disciples what words they should use but what things they should pray for (g) Disc of Liturg. p. 3. As to the first part of this Objection The Ancients generally expound that Petition of our daily Bread to be meant of the Sacramental Bread and most of them testifie They used the Lords Prayer as a Form in this Office Many of them and particularly S. Augustin call it The Prayer enjoyned by Christs Law (h) Aug. hom 42. de temp ser 126. and S. Hierom expresly saith That Christ taught the Apostles to appoint it to be said in the Sacrifice of his Body (i) Hieron adv Pelag. lib. 3. So that this Assertion of our Adversaries is a manifest Untruth And for the second part of the Objection S. Augustin is speaking of Mental Prayer as his own Quotation shews (k) cum in penetralibus mentis orarent Aug. lib. de Mag. cap. 1. Tom. 1. p. 122. Disc of Lit. pag. 3. and in that sort of Prayer wherein no Words are to be used he saith Christ by the Words of this Form taught them to whom and for what they should pray in secret But how impertinent is it in my Adversary to cite this as S. Augustin's Opinion about the use of this Form in public Offices and in Vocal Prayer about which alone we now dispute There are innumerable places in this Father to assure us he believed Christ did teach it to be used as a Form in Vocal and Public Prayer He calls it The daily Prayer which the Lord taught by daily saying whereof our daily Sins are blotted out (l) Id. de Civ Dei lib. 21. cap. 27. p. 232. yea he affirms The Faithful used to say these Words every day (m) Id. Hom. 14. pag. 79. and repeated them with united Voices among the holy Brethren and therefore he charges all both Men and Women to learn this Form (n) Id. de Temp. Serm. 126. pag. 191. and tells the Catechumens They must say this Prayer daily when they are Baptized because it was daily Repeated at the Altar in the Church the Faithful hearing it (o) Id. Hom. 42. pag. 116. So that the truth of this Matter is that S. Augustin plainly declares Christ taught it as a Form and so the Primitive Christians used it and he only intimates that it is also a direction to draw up other Prayers by to the same sense in other Words and they made that use of it also in drawing up Liturgies by that Pattern and in modelling their private Devotions into Forms agreeing in sense with this Divine Form which is the true meaning of that place (p) Discourse of Lit. pag. 5 6. pag. 60. ex Aug. ad Prob. Ep 12. which he twice cites viz. that it was lawful to use other Words in Prayer if it were to the same sense Secondly He saith S. Augustin complains that some of his Brethren used Heretical Prayers in their Sacramental Administrations which he supposes could not have been if they had then any allowed Liturgy Which Argument according to his Custom he urges in two several places (q) Disc of Liturg. p. 46. p. 113. ex Aug. de bapt contr Donat. lib. 6. cap. 25. I Answer That he ought not to have brought this in to prove there were no Forms for the Eucharist as he here doth See Discourse of Liturg. pag. 44. because the Father is only speaking of Prayers made at Baptism not of Prayers made at the Lords Supper so that he abuseth his Reader and S. Augustin both in applying this to the Eucharist But Secondly These Prayers were no essential parts of the Office of Baptism there was as S. Augustin in this place assures us a certain Form besides which none might vary from and these Bishops did use this Form which made the Baptism to be valid notwithstanding these additional Prayers newly thrust into the Old Office which were composed by Hereticks or Babling Persons (r) Certa illa Evangelica verba sine quibus non potest Baptismus consecrari Non est Baptismus Christi si verba Evangelica quibus symbolum constat illic defuerint Aug. de bapt contr Donat. But it seems these weak Brethren who were also Bishops and therefore Augustin who was a Bishop calls them Brethren designed to make the Office of Baptism more compleat by adding some Prayers before and after the essential Form of Baptism and wanting Judgment chose either silly or Heretical Prayers for the use of their