Chrysostom there being in the former especially no more but the beginning of the Sentences Thus Ye Faithful for That he would instruct That he would reveal c. which are the initial Words of the main Periods of this very Form which S. Chrysostom expounds and it seems were so well known to the Deacons then that it was enough to set down the initial Words of some Sentences which proves it was constantly used and become familiar (z) Vid. Liturg. D. Basil Bib. Patr. Tom. II. pag. 45. Et Liturg. Chrys ibid. pag. 71. And it is much for the Credit of those Liturgies that S. Chrysostom in his genuine Works expounds a Form so very like those in the Liturgies that any Man may discern those are the Epitome of this Larger Form To this I must add That the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions hath set down this Litany at large many Petitions of it being the very same Words viz. To hear their Prayers To open the Ears of their Hearts To bless their going out and coming in c. And other Petitions are the very same things with very little alteration of the Phrase viz. To reveal to them the Gospel of his Christ To plant his holy and saving Fear in them To make them meditate in his Law day and night To grant them the Laver of Regeneration and the Garment of Immortality c. (a) Clem. Constit lib. 8. cap. 5. And indeed Excepting the difference in the order of some Petitions and some Phrases there is an exact harmony between this Litany in the Constitutions and that in S. Chrysostom the Variations being no more than may be expected from variety of Copies transcribed for the use of two several Diocesses and corrected by two several Bishops for their own Clergy This is certain That there was far more difference between the Missals of Salisbury and York than are in these two Forms yet both were used in one Kingdom by those who were Members of the same National Church Nor can we wonder at these little differences in the ancient Litanies considering the aptness of every Eminent Bishop to order something in the public Service it suffices to make my Position good that they were Forms prescribed that probably had all sprung from one Original For all these Old Eastern Litanies agree in the main but some Phrases and something of the order of the Petitions were varied in the Transcripts for divers Provinces And since this small Variety was in S. Chrysostom's Time we may conclude The Primitive Form from whence they were all derived must be much Elder The next part of Liturgy was the Prayers at the Eucharist when none but the Faithful were present And these S. Chrysostom describes also so exactly like that Office which is in the Apostolical Constitutions that it is evident either those very Forms or some little different from them were used in S. Chrysostoms time the Reader may compare the passages which I shall cite out of this Father with the places in the Constitutions noted in the Margen and he will be satisfied of this great Truth In this Office there was a Litany (b) Clem. Constit lib. 8. cap. 13. 19. wherein as S. Chrysostom saith they wâ—re bid to intercede with the merciful God for Bishops and Priests for Kings and all in Authority for the Land the Sea and the Air yea for all the World (c) Chrysost hom 2. in 2. Cor. pag. 557. Which is as plain a description of that Litany as a Lax discourse will admit And both S. Chrysostom and the Constitutions note this was said by all of them kneeling After this the Holy Father Observes they arose all together and then the Bishop imparted Peace saluting them in this Form Peace be with you The People answering and with thy Spirit (d) Chrysost hom 18. in 2. Cor. pag. 647. Clem. Const lib. 8. cap. 15. But as to this Form it was often used in divers places of the public Service as the old Liturgies shew and S. Chrysostom doth attest saying We everywhere Pray for Peace in the Church we desire Peace in the Prayers Litanies and Prefaces the Bishop frequently salutes us with Peace saying Peace be with you and Peace be with you all When he enters the Church he begins with this So also before Sermon (e) De isto ritu vide item Chrysost hom 36. in 1. Cor. So when he blesseth when he enjoyns the kiss of charity and when the Sacrifice is done he saith again Grace be with you and Peace you answering And with thy Spirit (f) Chrysost hom 3. in Coloss Tom. 4. pag. 106 107. After this followed these Primitive and Universally used Forms of Preface which are sound in all the ancient Liturgies with little Variation viz. Lift up your Hearts Answer We lift them up unto the Lord. Of which S. Chrysostom saith Did you not promise the Priest to be devout when he saith Lift up your Hearts and Minds And you replied We Lift them up unto the Lord (g) Chrysost ser 38. de Euchar. poen Item hom 22. in Hebr. Const Apostol lib. 8. cap. 16. Then he tells us the Praises were common and performed by both Priest and People For first saith he You receive their Words that is Let us give Thanks to our Lord God and then you joyn with them and add it is just and right so to do After which begins the act of Praise (h) Chrysost ut supr hom 18. in 2. Cor. which no doubt is that Form in the Constitution It is meet and Right so to do c. (i) Constit Ap. ut supr And as for the Hymn called Trisagion which is Holy holy holy and follows in the Constitutions S Chrysostom mentions it very many times in his genuin Works For he wonders how they dare Slander their Neighbours who with the Cherubins Sing Holy holy holy (k) Chrysost in Ephes hom 14. and he wonders they who are admitted to Sing the same Hymn with Cherubins Seraphins Angels and Archangels dare laugh or behave themselves unseemly in the Church (l) Id. in 2. Corinth hom 18. pag. 647. id Orat. 74. de Bapt. Servant hom 24. in act Ap. So that nothing can be more certain than that this Hymn was sung in this very Form in the Eucharistical Office at that very time And so was the Glory be to God on high also for he saith The Faithful know what the Cherubins sing above that is Holy holy holy and what the Angels sang below that is Glory to God on high (m) Chrysost hom 9. in Ep. ad Coloss intimating they were both sung in that Office S. Chrysostom also confirms this in another place saying in our Eucharist we say Glory be to God on high on Earth Peace good Will towards Men (n) Idem hom 3. in â—p ad Coloss To this we may add other ancient Forms which he occasionally mentions such as these to
Orthodox way of saying that Hymn (t) Theodoret. lib. 2. cap. 24. Sozomen also relates how the Arians in S. Chrysostoms time at Constantinople being divided into two Companies Sung Hymns after the manner oâ— Antiphones adding such Responses to them as favoured their Heresy (u) Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 8. I confess the Hymns themselves were corrupted but as they were Forms and sung alternately they were agreeable to the Churches method of praising God and therefore in that they were imitated by S. Chrysostom For thus the same Historian tells us Those Christians Sang their Hymns by way of Antiphone who Translated the Bones of Bubylas the Martyr in the time of Julian (w) Sozomen lib. 5. cap. 18. And another saith The holy Virgins Sang the Psalms in that manner even in defiance of that Apostate (x) Theodoret. lib. 3. cap. 17. So also Theodosius the Younger and his Sisters arose early to recite the Morning Hymns alternately (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 22. Now these Antiphones which were thus Sung alternately could be no other than prescribed Forms of Praise and so was that usual Hymn collected out of those Psalms beginning with Hallelujah from whence it had the name of The Hallelujah and was Sung both in the Eastern and Western Churches so frequently that a Pagan Philosopher knew it to be a sign the Christian Worship would be set up in Serapis Temple when in the middle of the night he heard that Hymn Sung there no persons visible being in the Temple (z) Vide Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 15. pag. 426. We may also here remember what hath been said of the Trisagion which was so known a Form in the time of Anastasius the Emperor that there was a dangerous Sedition at Constantinople upon his attempting to add a few Words to it (a) Evagr. lib. 3. cap. 44. which is sufficient to satisfie us that Forms of Praise as well as Prayer were then generally used in the Christian Churches But my Adversary who overlooks all this Evidence hath picked up some few passages out of these Historians to make out his imaginary liberty of Praying First He notes out of Socrates That Athanasius Commanded the Deacon to publish the Prayer or to bid it but to Read the Psalm (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. lib. 2. c. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodo lib. 2. cap. 13. Disc of Lit. pag. 8. From whence he infers that the Prayers then could not be Forms Read out of a Book But this inference is easily bafled by observing the true meaning of these Phrases to publish or bid the Prayer Which is meant of the Preface to that ancient Litanick Form repeated of old by the Deacon And before he began He summoned the People to be ready with their Responses after every Period by Crying out aloud Let us Pray or Let us Pray earnestly Which Form is found in the beginning of the Greek Litanies to this very day So that this Phrase supposes a Form in which all the People bore a part and was Read or repeated by heart by the Deacon no matter whether And it was not only a Form it self but the Preface to a known Form nor is the repeating of the Prayer called publishing or bidding it but the preparation for it and the notice which the Deacon gave of it with a loud Voice Wherefore this Phrase confutes his Opinion and confirms ours Secondly He twice quotes Socrates as saying That generally in all places and among all sorts of Worshipers there cannot be found two agreeing to use the same Prayers (c) Disc of Liturg p. 89. 133. And by this he would prove that all Ministers might Pray as they pleased and that there was no agreement in using the same Prayers in any place But I will first set down the Words both of Socrates and Sozomen and then explain them The former saith And generally you cannot find two agreeing together in all places and in all the kinds of Worship as to their Prayers (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scorat lib. 5. cap. 21. The latter tells us It cannot be found that the same Prayers Psalms or Lessons were used by all at the same time (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 19. cited Disc of Lit. pag. 9. Now both these Historians are speaking not of single Congregations but of several Nations and several Diocesses among which there was not indeed so exact an agreement but that you might find some difference in some Offices Which signifies no more but only that in the Order of placing the several Parts of Worship and in the very Words of the Prayers different Countries differed so far that they could not be said to agree in all things but both the Histâ—rians suppose that in many things they did agree And Socrates gives the reason of this variety saying The cause of which diversity as I judge hath been the Bishops who in several Ages have presided over their several Churches from wâ—om their Successors did receâ—ve this variety and Writ it down for a Law to those who should come after them (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—crat ut supr pag. 698. So that these differences were not Arbitrary Variations of private Pastors proceeding from Extempore Gifts as my Adversary fallaciously pretends they were such Varieties as were Written down and prescribed by ancient Bishops in their several Diocesses as a Law and Rule for the Worship of that Diocess Which plainly shews that though there was not the same Liturgy used all the World over yet that every Country had one Liturgy which was a Law and Rule to Guide them received from their Primitive Bishops who had long before this Age introduced some things into the Liturgies for their own Churches and those under their Jurisdiction and by that means it came to pass that the Liturgies did not agree so exactly as to use the same Psalms Prayers and Lessons however not in the same Order in all places Which cleer and genuine Sense of these Authors is so far from justifying his Notion of variety of Arbitrary Prayers in single Congregations that it proves there were prescribed Liturgies every where differing only in some few things which were differently Writ down and enjoyned by the ancient Bishops who had formerly presided over these several Churches Had Socrates and Sâ—zomen been of my Adversaries side they must have told us in short that there could be no agreement in Prayers any where bâ—cause all Ministers were at liberty to Pray as they pleased Had that been the custom these Historians need not have set it down as a Memorable thing That no places agreed in all points for the Wonder would have been if they had agreed in any thing Nor could Socrates have ascribed the variety to the Orders of divers ancient Bishops he must according to my Adversaries Notion have ascribed it to the Various Gifts and Elocution of every
Approbation for all that space of Time which cannot be proved concerning any thing that is a notorious Corruption Secondly That the gross Mistake of laying the Original of them so late is all along supported by perverting those places which speak of reducing some Countries which had been over-run by the Goths and Vandals Hunnes and Franks with other different sorts of People to one Form of Liturgy As if these were meant of the first imposing of Forms of Prayer in the Christian Church Whereas it is plain that some of these Countries needed a New Conversion and the various and different Inhabitants of other Provinces had brought in great variety of Rites which this Age strove to reduce to an Uniformity not by inventing a New Way but by following the Primitive Way of establishing One Liturgy for every Kingdom or Province Thirdly I must note That my Adversary frequently repents of this despicable Concession and after he hath granted the use of Liturgies in this Age he omits all those Authorities which clearly prove the continuance of this ancient Practice and with all his might strives to wrest those Passages which he doth produce in this Period as if they did not prove so much as he hath granted So that I must first supply the wilful Omissions of his Discourse by setting down the Evidence which he conceals and then rescue the Places he doth cite from his Misinterpretations And first we will see what the industrious Centuriators say of this Age They have as was shewed owned that Forms of Prayer were generally used in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries and in this they take notice That the Nicene Creed was repeated in their Divine Service that The Lords Prayer was sung by all the People together in the Greek Church That the People at Constantinople did frequently use Litanies That Antiphons were usually Sung in the Gallican Church That we may see by the Histories of this Age that solemn Masses had now filled all places That they had public Prayers in their Temples and sometimes celebrated Litanies in the Night And they add That they had many Forms of Prayers One of which they reckon to be That Litany used in the Eastern Church wherein the Peoples part was to Sing Lord have mercy upon us (b) Magdebâ— Cent. 6. cap. 6. pag. 330 c. ad pag. 339. This was their Opinion of the Way of Praying and Praising God which had begun in former Ages and was continued in this to be performed by Prescribed Forms Caesarius Arelat An. D. 503. § 1. The first eminent Writer of this Age is Caesarius Bishop of Arles in France who was present at most of those Gallican Councils which enjoyn an Uniformity in the Public Offices and settle one and the same Liturgy and thence we may conclude he was for the use of Forms of Prayer Which may appear also by his Homilies where he intimates That the whole Service for the Communion the Prayers Lessons c. took up an hour or two yet he reckons those are very Criminal who for their Souls good will not stay till the whole Office was compleated that is till they had received the final Blessing after the Lords Prayer with which as we have shewn in former Centuries the Communion-Service was concluded (c) Caesarii hom 8. edit a. Baluz pag. 60. Now since the Office ended exactly as it had done in former Ages we may from thence infer it was the same ancient Form And we will observe further that when the Admonition given by a single Bishop would not reform this vile Custom of the Peoples going out of the Church before the Prayers were fully ended The Councils of this time began to make Canons to forbid the People to depart from the Divine Service before the Blessing was pronounced (d) Concil 1. Aurel. Can. 28. An. 507. Bin. Tom. 2. par 1. pag. 562. item Concil 3. Aurel. Can. 28. An. 540. ibid. par 2. p. 29. Which Blessing was an ancient and well known Form as also was the whole Office For this same Caesarius very clearly witnesseth in another place That the Preface Lift up your Hearts c. was still used in the Communion Office a Form which had been in all Churches down from the days of S. Cyprian and probably long before (e) Caesar hom 14. vid. Bona rer Liturg. pag. 552. and yet continued without any variation § 2. But because we have mentioned some Gallican Councils Concil Agatheus A.D. 506. we must here observe that after the Kings of France had received the Faith That Church was every where restored to that good Order and Regularity from which under Pagan Princes and in difficult Times it had fallen and this was the occasion of the many Councils held about this Time and of those Canons that do labour to reduce all the Gallican Church to one Order of Service So in the Council of Agatho of which Caesarius was President one of the Canons is in these Words Since it is convenient that the Order of the Church be equally kept by all We Ordain as it is every where That after the Antiphons the Collects shall be said in order by the Bishops or Priests And that the Morning and Evening Hymns shall be sung every day and in the conclusion of the Mattins Vespers and Masses the Sentences out of the Psalms shall be read And the People after the Common Prayer shall be dâ—smissed in the Evening with the Bishops Benediction (e) Et quia convenit Ordinem Ecclesiae ab omnibus aequaliter custudiri c. Concil Agath Can. 30. Bin. Tom. II. par I. pag. 556 Before which Blessing the People are forbid to go out of the Church (f) Ibid. Can. 47. Here then we see there is an Order of the Church that is as the word then signified A Liturgy enjoyned to be observed by all in that Province as it seems it was now by other Councils setled every where Which Liturgy consisted of the Antiphons and Collects every one set in its proper place as also of Morning and Evening Hymns and Prayers together with the Communion-Service then called the Mass and the Responsory reading of the Psalms with a common or general Prayer for all Estates of Men and all was concluded with the Bishops Benediction Now it is certain that these Antiphons Collects Hymns and this General Prayer were Forms and the Canon supposes them all written down at large in that Order they were to be used by all Bishops and Priests and this is plainly a prescribed Liturgy But my Adversary who cites this Canon at large after he had falsified the Words of it (g) Disc of Lit. pag. 174. where he set down Collationes for Collectiones and leaves out per ordinem attempts to pervert the Sense and would perswade us it amounts to no more than a Rubric or Directory which is a gross and I doubt a wilful Mistake For though we should grant That the
of it sent to this Bishop is called An Order of Prayer Which therefore doth not signifie a bare Rubric for Method but a Book containing the Prefaces Hymns and Prayers themselves And thus it is used in the Life of S. Laetus a Monk who about this Time was ordained Deacon and He in a short time learned the Psalter and all that the Ecclesiast cal Order required so as to be more perfect in them than many were who had been longer used to them (s) Cointè Annal Eâ—â—les â—raâ—â— An 533. pag 413. This Ecclesiastical Order was a Book as well as the Psalter and this ingemous Monk got to say the very Words of them both by Heart But to return to Pope Vigilius He was so tenacious of Forms that he warns Etherius not to permit one Syllable to be altered in the Gloria Patri Which the Catholics by ancient Custom use to say after the Ps â—ms thus Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost but some Heretics a little before presumed to leave out the last and saying it thus and to the Son the Holy Ghost which he coâ—demus as an Heretical Variation (t) Vâ—â— Ep. 2. ibid. pag 4. But it had been impossible to secure the Orthodox Forms if my Adversaries pretended liberty of varying the Words of their Prayers and Praises had then been allowed in the Church Nay if that had been permitted in former Ages there would have been no certain Primitive Forms left by which they could have corrected these Heretical Innovations § 8. In the East we have further Evidence of the continuance of Liturgick Forms Concil Mopsevest An. D. 550 for in the Council of Mopsvestia the Fathers there assembled pray for the Emperour in that ancient and generally received Form O Lord save the Emperour And hear him whensoever he calls upon thee (u) Salvum fac Domine Imperatorem exaudi eum quacunque die te invocaverit Vid. Synod Quint. collat 5. apud Bin. Tom. II. par 2. pag. 83. Anastasius Sinaita Patriar Antioch An. Dom. 560. But soon after this we have sufficient Proof that the whole Liturgy transcribed in the Apostolical Constitutions and shewed to have been the Antiochian Office some Ages before was still in use there For Anastasius who had been a Monk of Mount Sinai being now Patriarch of Antioch hath some Homilies owned to be genuine still extant wherein he refers to and expounds the Words and Actions prescribed by that ancient Liturgy As first He bids them mind the Deacons Voice when he crieth Stand with reverence stand with fear bow down your Heads And again The Priest saith he engages you to attend when he bids you Lift up your Hearts And what do you Answer Do you not Reply We lift them up unto the Lord Adding That the Peoples joyning their part to the Priests made the Prayers to be more effectual He goes on to tell them The Angels minister at the holy Liturgy The Cherubins stand round about and with sweet Voices sing the Trisagion Holy Holy Holy and the Seraphins bow and adore He mentions also the Lords Prayer as being daily repeated by all in the Communion-Office and Comments upon that ancient Form Give holy things to those that are holy (w) Arastas Sin Orat de sacr Synaxt in Auctario Bib. Pati Tom. 2. col 9 10. Now these Passages and in this Order may be seen in divers ancient Liturgies particularly in that which is set down in the Constitutions which shews that the same Forms were used at Antioch in this Age which had been used there in divers of the fore-going Centuries And though in these Homilies he doth transcribe no more of them but only such parts of the Liturgy as were proper to move the People to come to the Communion with Devotion and Reverence Charity and holy Resolutions yet by those which he occasionally mentions and by the Order of them we may discern the ancient Forms were still in use there with little or no Variation § 9. By this Time divers Parts of Spain had embraced the Catholic Faith Concil Bracar I. An. Dom. 563. and therefore now the Orthodox Bishops met in a Council at Braga and after they had caused the Book of ancient Canons to be publicly read before them they gather out of them some that were of present use and revive them by a fresh imposing them The first thing they labour to regulate is that variety of Forms and different ways of Divine Service which the mixture of divers Nations and Opinions had produced among them therefore the first Canon is That one and the same Order of Singing shall be kept in Morning and Evening Prayer and that no different Customs either of private Men or of Monasteries shall be mixed with the Ecclesiastical Rule (x) Ut unus atque idem Psallendi ordo in Matutinis vel Vespertinis officiis teneatur non diversae ac privatae neque Monasteriorum consuetudines cum Ecclesiasticâ regulà sint permixtae Concil Brac. Can 1. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 211. The Morning and Evening Offices consisted chiefly of Psalms and Hymns with some proper Collects and were all or the most part of them chanted and sung which cannot be in a public Congregation unless the Form and Words be known before Wherefore for these Mattens and Vespers they had established One Order Besides these there was the Communion-Office before Noon and for that they had also a Prescribed Form which they call here The Ecclesiastical Rule and since some private Persons presumed to alter this and others followed some of the Forms prescribed by the Rules of certain Monasteries they utterly reject these Variations and bind them all to the public Liturgy This is the plain sense of the Canon and therefore Ordo Psallendi and Ecclesiastica Regula must be more than a Rubric for these confined them to Sing the Mattens and Vespers in the same words and to celebrate the Communion-Service by such a certain Rule as admitted of no Variation And the following Canons make this still more plain The Second is That on the Vigils of Feasts and at the Communion all shall read the same and not different Lessons in the Church The Third orders That Bishops and Priests shall use the same Form of Saluting the People viz. The Lord be with you To which they shall Answer And with thy Spirit even as the whole East hath retained it from the Apostles and not as the Priscillianists have altered it The Fourth Canon is That the Communion-Office shall by all be celebrated by that same Order which Profuturus formerly Bishop of this Church received in Writing from the Apostolical See The Fifth enjoyns That none pass by that Order of Baptizing which the Church of Braga anciently used and which to avoid all doubts concerning the same Profuturus had received in Writing from the See of S. Peter (y) Concil Bracar l. Can. 2
3 4 5. apud Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 212. Here we have one Kalendar fixed appointing the very same Lessons one Form of Salutation derived from the Apostles one Written Form for the celebration of the Eucharist and another being the Order of Baptism which in the days of a Bishop who was dead some years before this Council were sent in Writing from Rome and had been ever since used in these Provinces which can be nothing else but a Liturgy from which they will not suffer any Minister to vary in the least And it signifies nothing to alledge That this is one of the first Injunctions for such Uniformity in this Country that had been for an Age and more over-run with Barbarous People and overspread with Heresies because there are evident Supposals That the Ancient Churches which had not been renversed by these Calamities but kept to their old accustomed Ways furnished the New regulated Churches with ancient Forms which had been used among them from the Primitive Ages and that sufficiently proves the Antiquity of Liturgies My Adversary who conceals all this Evidence cites the 30th Canon of this Council but very falsly for he reads it thus Besides the Psalms of the Old Testament let nothing Poetically Composed be Sung in the Church and he false dates it also (z) Disc of Lit. pag. 179. Concil Bracar Can. 30. An. 565. But the Words of the Canon are a Translation of the Canon of Laodicea made 200 years before Forbidding the Singing of any Poetical Compositions in the Church except the Psalms and what Hymns were taken out of the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament (a) Vid. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 212. which was designed to set aside the late composed Hymns of the Arians used among the Heretical Goths and other corrupt modern Composures Not to reject the Magnificat the Benedictus Nunc dimittis and other Canonical Hymns which our Dissenters now totally disuse He adds That Ordo Psallendi in the Council of Tours signifies not what but how many Psalms shall be Sung (b) Disc of Lit. pag. 174. But let the Canon be consulted and any Man who knows the Custom of the Age will see that the design of that Canon was to establish a Kalendar which did appoint and prescribe the very Psalms as well as the Number which were to be Sung at the certain Seasons there mentioned (c) Vid. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. in Concil Turon 2. An. 570. Can. 19. p. 228. And he unfortunately forgot one Canon of this Council of Tours which enlarges the former Canon of Braga and takes in all the ancient Hymns which he pretends are rejected by that Canon for it says Though we have the Hymns of Ambrose in the Canon yet since we have other Forms worthy to be Sung we willingly receive them unless they have no Authors Name in the Title because if they be agreeable to the Faith they ought not to be left out of use (d) Ib. Can. 24. pag. 230. So that we see this Canon owns the Te Deum the Benedicite and other Hymns provided they be Orthodox and the Authors were known Friends to the Catholic Faith and here are Forms supposed as generally used and a Council to allow them after which the Church may use them though they be not taken out of Canonical Scripture I have no more to add here but a scattered Passage or two to confirm the continuance of the old Forms in the Gallican Church First Whereas there was a necessity of leaving the Priest at liberty to put the Names of those who Offered into the Prayer for all Estates of Men some ventured to take more freedom and in that part of the Office varied from their Mother Church Which occasion'd a Council at Arles to Decree That the Oblations made at the Holy Altar should not be offered up by any of the Bishops of that Province otherwise than according to the Form used in the Church of Arles (e) Concil Arelat An. Dom. 554. Can. 1. apud Cointe Annal. pag. 799. Or if with some we expound this Canon of the Prayer of Consecration still it proves That the Forms used in the Metropolitan Church were to be an invariable Rule to all the Churches in that Province The Council of Tours also before cited mentions Litanies Antiphons and the Hallelujah (f) Concil Turon 2. An. 570. Can. 18 c. And we have a farther account of the Use of Litanies there in the first Council of Lions (g) Concil Ludg. 1. eod An. Can. 6. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 232. All which are the Forms which we have shewed were in use in the preceding Centuries And when Chilperic a King of France about this Time pretended to Compose new Hymns and Prayers our Author tells us They would by no means receive them into the Churches Offices (h) Greg. Turon lib. 6. cap. 46. pag. 308. for those were fixed before and none but a Council of Bishops could be permitted to alter or add to them I had almost forgot Martin Bishop of Braga Martin Episcop Bracar An. Dom. 572. who came into that See very soon after the fore-mentioned Council and being a Grecian by Birth he collected and translated divers Canons of the Greek Church into Latin for the use of Spain in which Collection of his we have very many plain Indications of a Liturgy One of these Canons obliges every Clergy-man in a City or any place where there is a Church to be present at the daily Office of Singing Mattens and Vespers (m) Canones Martin Bracar Can. 63. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 246. And another forbids New composed Psalms made by some of the Vulgar to be said in the Church (n) Ib. Can. 67. For indeed the Hours of Prayer and the Offices appointed for them were then so fixed that as none might neglect them so none were allowed to change them or add to them in any sort whatsoever And I must note by the way that this very Martin who collected these Canons was he that had Converted the Suevians in Spain to the Catholic Faith that so we may be satisfied that part of Spain a little before this had a second and New Conversion and that gave occasion to divers of these Canons for an Uniformity in the Divine Service which was to be established there Pelagius II. Ep. Rom. An Dom. 577. § 10. To proceed with the Western Church the Bishops of France and Germany about this Time desired Pope Pelagius the Second to inform them what were the Prefaces then used in the Roman Church that is what Festivals there were upon which they made a peculiar Addition to the Primitive Form of Lift up your Hearts c. suitable to the occasion of that particular Festival And his Reply is this Having diligently read over the holy Roman Order and the sacred Constitutions of our Predecessors we find only these Nine
express mention is made of prescribed and known Forms then setled in the Spanish Church that it is impossible to deny or evade so manifest a Truth To which may further be added his Epistle to Ludifredus Bishop of Corduba about the several Ecclesiastical Officers and their Duties wherein he mentions The known Forms of Lauds and Responsals the Office of Prayers and reciting of the Names the giving of Peace and indeed all other Parts of Liturgy so that nothing is more clear than that he hath respect to the prescribed Forms then in use (l) Isidor Ep. ad Ludifred pag. 615. And the like Reference he makes to the particular Offices and Forms used by the Monks in their private Oratories within their Monasteries where they also prayed by Forms (m) Idem in reg Monach. cap. 6. de Offic. pag. 701. So that it is impossible there should be any thing more evident than that a Liturgy and prescribed Forms of Prayer and Praise were used in this Country of Spain in Isidore's Time who was Bishop of Sevil Thirty three years together and the most learned Man that can be found in the Western Church in this Age. § 2. Concil Toletan 4. An. Dom. 633. This very Isidore was President of the Fourth Council of Toledo called by King Sisenandus wherein there were Sixty two Bishops and seven more subscribed by Proxy being Summoned out of all the Provinces in France and Spain then subject to the Gothic Kings who had much enlarged their Empire since the Mozarabic Office was first composed Wherefore many of the Canons of this Council were made to settle the use of that one Liturgy every where in Sisenandus his Dominions for it seems before this National Council it was not universally received or at least not used without some variety but here the Second Canon saith We Decree that as we Bishops are joyned in the Vnity of the Catholic Faith So will we do nothing differently or dissonantly in the Sacraments of the Church lest any difference of ours among the Ignorant and Carnal should give suspicion of Schism and the variety of several Churches prove a Scandal to many Therefore one Order of Praying and Singing shall be observed by us through all Spain and France one manner of Communion Service one manner of Morning and Evening Prayer nor will we who are Vnited in one Faith and one Kingdom have any longer divers Ecclesiastical Customs For the ancient Canons also Decree this That every Country shall have the same way of Singing and Ministring (n) Unus igitur ordo Orandi atque psallendi nobis per omnem Hispaniam atque Galliam Conservetur Unus modus in Missarum solennitatibus Unus in vespertinis matutinisque officiis nec diversa sit ultra in nobis Ecclesiastica consuetudo qui in una fide continemur Regno hoc enim antiqui Canones decreverunt ut unaquaeque Provincia psallendi ministrandi parem consuetudinem contineat Concil Tolet. 4. Can. 2. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. p. 345. From which Canon we may Observe First That the different ways of celebrating Divine Service was looked on as a Corruption broken in upon them contrary to the ancient Canons that is those of Laodicea Milevis Vannes Pamiers Gyrone and others cited before Secondly That these differences were occasioned by the Bishops having been formerly of different Opinions in matters of Faith and lived under different Kings but being now all of one Faith and under one Prince it was necessary to have one Form of Service Thirdly That these Differences were Scandalous to the Bishops and an Offence to the People while they did continue Fourthly Therefore they settle one Form of Morning and Evening Prayers and one Form of Communion-Service throughout all the Dominions of Sisenandus who Ruled all Spain and in some Parts of France lately gained by his Ancestors they now will have but one Order that is One Liturgy as that Word signifies without the least difference And since Isidore had so lately corrected and compleated Leander's Office and was President here we may conclude that this Canon was to settle that very Liturgy And because some Bishops might be so much in love with their former ways of Service that without the Authority of so great a Council they would not change them there follow divers Canons to forbid the Particulars wherein they differed and to settle those prescribed in the Mozarabic Office of which being many I will only repeat the Heads which are these The 5th Canon forbids the Trine Immersion in Baptism and orders it to be done but once The 6th enjoyns all to observe the Office for Good-Friday The 8th orders that on Easter-Even there shall be Tapers Consecrated in the Churches of France as had been anciently done in the Churches of Spain The 9th Canon Commands the Lords Prayer to be said every day and not only on Sundays The 10th forbids the singing Allelujah in Lent since the Vniversal Church omitted it in that time of Fasting The 11th enjoyns the singing Glory be to thee O God after the Gospel according to the Old Canons and not after the Epistle as some used The 12th condemns those who rejected all Hymns not found in Scripture and orders the use of those made by S. Ambrose S. Hilary and other Ecclesiastical Doctors The 13th Censures those who would not sing the Benedicite or Song of the Three Children in the Communion-Office on Sundays and Festival-days being an Hymn used all over the Catholic Church The 14th directs the Singing of Glory and Honour be to the Father c. exactly as it yet prescribed in the Mozarabic Liturgy and in no other And the 15th is about the Gloria after the Responsals that it be always used alike The 16th asserts the Revelations of S. John to be Canonical and orders them to be read between Easter and Pentecost The 17th orders the Benediction of the People as well as the Lords Prayer to be used before the distribution of the Sacrament (o) Concil Tolet 4. Can 5. Can. 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17. Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag 346 347 c. An Usage which as we noted before is also peculiar to the Mozarabic Liturgy Now from these Canons we may gather First what were the Particulars wherein the several Diocesses had differed viz. not that some of them had no Liturgy and others had but that whereas all of them used prescribed Forms there was some variety in the use of some of the particular Parts of Liturgy at least in the Order or the Time of using them but as for my Adversary's pretended Liberty for Private Ministers to vary daily these Offices here is nothing can be meant of that it was several Diocesses which differed not by reason of Extempore or Arbitrary Prayers but only about some Liturgic Forms or the manner of using them Every Bishop and Diocess had an Order and Now they Decree there shall be but
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
1. r. Roman Bishop p. 28. l. 19. r. generally p. 31. marg l. 2. r. Ecclesiâ p. 37. l. 25. r. Table-Book p. 41. marg l. 4. r. Eccles p. 46. l. 1. r. Babylas p. 54. l. 27. dele all p. 68. marg l. 21. r. Barnes p. 136. l. 27. r. have been p. 141. l. 6. r. faithful deceased p. 166. l. 7. dele Jew r. few Bishops ibid. l. 10. r. reckons ibid. l. 11. r. contained p. 176. l. 10. r. to the French p. 193. l. 2. r. ancient PART II. CHAP. I. Of LITVRGIES in the Fifth Century AFTER so full and clear Evidence for LITURGIES in the former Ages wherein the Church was so Pure and the Fathers so very Eminent the main Point as to their Antiquity is gained and if my Adversary could prove there were no prescribed Forms in this Century it would only follow that the Primitive way was changed for a new sort of Liberty and then Extempore Praying or such a freedom as he pleads for would be an Innovation which crept into the Church in an Age of which he gives the worst Character imaginable (a) 〈◊〉 of Liâ—â— pag. 1â—â— But it is as certain that the use of Liturgies continued in this Century as it is that they had their Original in the Foregoing Ages and therefore though all his odious Representations of the corrupt state of the Church in this Time were true yet that could not blemish their continuing to use those holy Forms which they received from their Forefathers if they added any of the Corruptions of the Age to them they are blame-worthy for that and we do not defend them therein but the Method it self of Praying by prescribed Forms about which we dispute is ancient and therefore not liable to any Exceptions from those Additions all which also are now put out of our Churches Forms and so we are not to excuse or answer for them Now that this Century followed the former in the use of Liturgick Forms is plain from the Centuriators who as was shewed not only own That Forms of Prayer were prescribed in the Third and Fourth Ages but declare concerning this Fifth Century that The Bishops ordained holy Prayers for all things necessary (b) Magdeb. Cent. â— cap 7. pag. 742. And that there was frequent use of Litanies and Supplications in this time (c) Ibid. cap. 6. pag. 651. And what these Litanies were Du Plessis one often cited by my Adversary doth inform us The form and manner saith he of Litanies was this They contrived and drew into certain Articles the public Necessities and Calamities that did press or threaten them unto every one whereof as it was uttered by the Priest or Bishop which went before them the People answered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord have mercy on us or Lord hear us (d) Mornay of the Mass lib. 1. chap. 7. pag. 54 55. So that they had Forms of Prayers and Litanies not invented by private Ministers but ordered by the Bishops even as we have proved they had also in former Ages But because my Adversary labours hard to find out some passages in the Writers of this Century which give countenance to his arbitrary and unprescribed way I will consider all that he produces in the Order of Time and as I go on take notice of such other Testimonies as are omitted by him and do assure us of the continuance of Liturgies in this Century also Innocent l. Ep. Rom. An. Dom. 402. § I. Pope Innocent the First begins this Age in whom we cannot expect much Evidence in our Question because he hath nothing extant but only some few Epistles which treat of different Subjects Yet first he argues against the Pelagian Doctrin of our not needing the assistance of Gods Grace from that old Roman Form taken out of the Psalms which still is the beginning of their Mass Deus in adjutorium c. The Priest saying O God make speed to save us O Lord make haste to help us Now saith he Pelagius and Celestius would set aside this whole Response out of the Psalms and abdicating this Doctrin hope to perswade some that we neither want nor ought to seek the help of God whereas all the Saints bear witness that they can do nothing without it (e) seposita omni responsiâ—re Psalmorum aliquid abdicatâ doctrinâ suasuros se aliquibus esse confidunt nos Adjutorium Dei nec debere quaerere nec egere c. Innoc. ep 24. B n. Tom. 1. par l pag. 622. Where we see he argues from this Form used in the Liturgy by all the Saints or holy Men against the false Doctrin of these Hereticks which shews it was a known and usual Response in that Age. The same Author though he was shie in writing Mysteries in a Letter yet plainly enough describes The Prayer for all Estates of Men in which the Names of the Offerers were recited and God was desired to accept their Alms and Oblations as also those Prefaces of which we spake before (f) Prius ergo oblationes sunt commendandae ac tunc eorum nomina quorum sunt oblationes edicenda ut inter sacra mysteria nominentur non inter alia quae ante praemittimus Id. Ep. 1. cap. 2. ibid. pag. 609. And which is most considerable in the Preface of the same Epistle to Decentius Bishop of Eugubium Innocent declares (g) Si instituta Ecclesiastica ut sunt à beatis Apostolis tradita integra vellent servare Domini sacerdotes nulla diversitas nulla varietas in ipsis ordinibus consecrationibus haberetur Sed dum unusquisque non quod traditum est sed quod sibi visum fuerit hoc estimat esse tenendum inde diversa in diversis locis vel Ecclesiis teneri aut celebrari videntur Id. ibid. That if those Ecclesiastical Institutions which the Apostles delivered had been kept intire by the Bishops we should not have had any diversity or variety in the order of Worship or Consecration But while every one thinks he must hold not that which was delivered but which best pleases him thence we see divers ways of celebration are used in divers Churches Now from hence we note First That this Pope believed there was one way of Worship and Consecration that is one Form of Prayer and administring the Sacrament setled by the Apostles at first and delivered to all the Churches they planted Secondly That the variety which then appeared not in the same Church but in divers Churches was an Innovation proceeding from several Bishops called here Sâ—cerdotes who forsook that one Original Rule and followed their own Devices Thirdly That this variety was not a liberty taken by private Ministers in the same Church but by divers Bishops in their several Diocesses Fourthly That this diversity as Innocent there adds was a scandal to the People who not knowing that human Presumption had corrupted the ancient Traditions fancied either there was no good
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
the same Offices together and when all orders and degrees of both Sexes unite their Affections for the same end (f) Id. Serm. 3. 〈◊〉 Sept. 〈◊〉 pag 240. These must be Prayers made â—â— such Forms as made up one Office wherein all the People could bear a part and all joyn in the Responses c. And these Forms thus unanimously recited he thinks must needs be very prevalent with Almighty God At the same Time lived Abbot Nilus Nilus Abbas An Dom. 440. who calls the public Prayers The fixed Laws of the Church (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nâ—â— â—â—â—aenes 10â— So that in his days doubtless they were not left arbitrary to the Fancy of every Man who was to Officiate He would have his Monks receive the Sacrament in the Church but if there was not any celebration of the Eucharist he allows them to depart after the singing of the Epistle and Gospel (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. 105. Bibl. Patr. edit Paris Tom. 2. p. 1172. Which shews they used at that Time to Sing those portions of Scripture in the Communion-Office and implies that the rest of that Service was agreeable to our Forms in other things as well as in the Epistles and Gospels but these Passages fell not under my Adversaries observation § 10. Socrates Sozomenus Theodoritus Histor Encles Cire Ann. 440. The Church Historians who writ after Eusebius within little more than one hundred year after the setling of Christianity viz. Socrates Sozomen and Theodoret are next to be considered And in them we find divers passages to confirm us that prescribed forms were used both in and long before their Times and this we shall make out by some instances both as to Praises and Prayers contenting our selves of many to select only a few Testimonies And First No sort of Prayer is more ancient nor more certainly a Form than the Litany Yet of this we have express Testimony in Socrates who relates the Story of that great Storm which happened at Constantinople when Theodosius the younger and the People were beholding the sports of the Hippodrome saying that the Emperor Commanded the People to give over their sport and to joyn all of them in one Common Litany to God adding that they obeyed him and all of them with great alacrity said the Litany and with agreeing Voices sent up Hymns to God So that the whole City was but as one Church and the Emperor began the Hymn himself After which devout recital of these Offices the Storm ceased (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 22. pag. 749. Where we see the Litany and Hymns were such known Forms that all the People on a sudden could say and sing their part of them which can be no Wonder because we have shewed before that in the elder Theodosius his time it was usual to repeat the Litany in procession at Constantinople in times of Common Danger Yea I doubt not but Litanies are mentioned by Eusebius as used in Constantine's Time For he saith the Bishops at Jerusalem offered up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Supplicatory Prayers For the Peace of the whole World For the Church of God For the Emperor himself and for his Children beloved of God (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb vit Constant lib. 4. cap. 45. p. 405. Which are almost the very Words of those ancient Litanick Forms yet extant in the Constitutions and alluded to by many of the ancient Fathers although Eusebius here rather describes than cites these ancient Forms Theodoret speaking of the same Emperor saith Constantine prepared a Chappel in his Camp where they might Sing Hymns to God and Pray and receive the Mysteries For there were Priests and Deacons following the Army who according to the Law of the Church performed the Order for these things (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. lib. 1. cap. 8. p. 205. In which passage we have express mention of an Order for Hymns for Prayers and for the Eucharist which was setled by the Law of the Church and this amounts to no less than a Common Prayer enjoyned by Law For this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Constitution or Order no doubt contained those prescribed Prayers which Socrates calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (m) Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 15. that is prescribed Forms of Prayer which we may learn from Sozomen also who speaking of Nectarius that from a Lay-man was suddenly advanced to be Bishop of Constantinople saith He was sent to Ciriacus an ancient Bishop of Adana that he might learn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Order of officiating used by the Bishops which plainly signifies learning his Book of offices (n) Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 10. p. 420. it being one Requisite in a Bishop to be very exact in that point As for those short Prayers which the Monks of Egypt used mentioned in my Adversary it is Evident they were Forms though he is not willing to confess so much (o) Sozomen p. 397. in the Disc of Liturg. pag. 75. For that place of Sozomen which he cites concerning Paulus who said 300 Prayers in a day and was forced to use 300 little Stones for Beads Foreheads saith his frontless Editor to count them by is taken from Palladius who writ Anno Dom. 401. and tells us that he had 300 prescribed Prayers (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pallad Hist Lausiac cap. 23. and because they were short Forms committed to Memory Paulus was constrained to use these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 little Stones that so he might know when he had repeated them all And since we have mentioned Palladius who wrote at the very begining of this Century we may Note here that he also affirms Maâ—arius another Monk said an hundred prescribed Prayers every day (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pallad ib. cap. 24. And another called from his Charity Eleemon used to go to the Church to say the accustomed Prayers (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. c. 115. By which we may see that the ancient Monks who lived before this Century began of whom Palladius Writes were accustomed to Forms of Prayer both in their Cells and in the Churches when they went thither nor can I find in any of these Historians an account of any that pretended to Pray in public in the Extempore way by the Spirit except those Hereticks called Euchites and Enthusiasts upon whom Theodoret is so severe as to say he believes they were inspired by the Devil (s) Theodoret. lib. 4. cap 10. pag. 116. And this may suffice for the Prayers Secondly As to the Praises the last cited Author assures us there was a known Form of Gloria Patria at Antioch concluding as it doth now World without end and this as early as the time of Leontius who because he altered the ancient Form repeated it with a low Voice but was soon discovered by the People who were well acquainted with the
several Minister but it is plain that Fancy of Ministers exercising such Gifts in public Prayers was not so much as thought of in that Age it is a Novel invention of Modern Enthusiasts and utterly unknown to these ancient Times Thirdly He cites Socrates about the Prayers used at the time of Candles lighting (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 21. which he saith were accomodated to the Season (h) Disc of Lit. pag. 161. But I must ask who it was that suited these Prayers to the Season Was it private Ministers by their Gifts who daily varied them If not it is nothing to his purpose For if they were fixed written Forms fitted by the Bishops of several Countries and prescribed to those under their charge for constant use then they justisie prescribed Forms which will be plain enough when we consider what Socrates saith of these Evening Prayers in this very place cited viz. That in Greece Jerusalem and Thessaly the Prayers at Candle-lighting were made after the same manner which was used by the Novatians at Constantinople So that this passage if my Adversary durst have produced it a large shews First that the three several Provinces did all Pray alike at this hour of Prayer and all of them followed the way of the Nâ—vatians at Constantinople Now if the Novatians there had daily varied these Prayers Extempore No Provinces nor places could have exactly used the same Prayers as they did and every one of these places must have differed from another So that when so many distant Churches agreed in the same way and made the same Prayers no doubt they all Prayed by prescribed Forms And this is all that is needful to say as to these Historians Concil Vinet Ann Dom. 453. § 11. Though there passed neer an hundred years between the Council of Laodicea and this of Vanues yet my Adversary was so unfortunate that he could find nothing for Liturgies in all this space of Time for he tells us the next Authority he meets with after the Council of Laodicea is the Synod at Vannes (i) Disc of Lit. pag 173. which he labours both to disparage and pervert because it hath a Canon for uniformity in the Liturgy But we will first cite the Words of it at large and explain the sense of it And then Answer all his Allegations The Words are these We also think it fit that at least within our Province there should be one usage for holy Offices and for the Order of Singing That as we hold one Faith in the confession of the Trinity so we may hold also one Rule in our Offices lest by various usages our Administrations be thought to differ in some things (k) Rectum quoquâ— dâ—ciâ—â—◠〈◊〉 vâ—l in◠〈…〉 Sac◠〈…〉 â—rdo 〈…〉 Ut sicut 〈◊〉 câ—m Trinitatis câ—nfâ—ssion◠〈◊〉 teneâ—at◠〈◊〉 Ospâ—◠〈◊〉 reâ—ulâ—m tâ—neamâ—â— variatâ observâ—tione in alâ— no observatio nostra discrepare creaaâ—ur Concil Viâ—tet Can. 15. Bin. Tom 1. par 2. p. 422. This Canon is as plain an Injunction of one Liturgy as can be expressed one Custom in Administring the Sacraments and one Order of Singing Hymns Which is afterward called one Rule for the Offices which was to be observed by all the Clergy in this Province Again they compare this to one Creed Now the Creed was one known Written Form of Words in which they all confessed their Faith and they think it reasonable that their Prayers and Hymns should be so also that is performed by one prescribed Rule and in the same Forms Lastly The reason they give why they would have but one Form or Liturgy in all their Province is to prevent the Scandal and Offence which might be given by variety in these Offices as if there were no good agreement among these Bishops which might easily be believed if every Diocess varied in the manner of Worshiping God but if every private Minister at that time had daily varied his Prayers and Praises it had been very ridiculous in these Bishops to be affraid of seeming to differ in any thing And in vain had they setled an agreement in the Rubries if the substance and Words of the Prayers had been changed every day However my Adversary tries all his Art to undervalew and pervert this plain Decree For first he falsly thrusts this Council down to the latter end of the Fifth Century whereas it was held but three years after the midst of it Ann. Dom. 453 Then he saith this Canon was made only by Six Bishops in one Province where there were Fifteen or Seventeen and this not till the latter end of the Fifth Age when all things were grown very bad (l) Disc of Lit. pag. 176. To which I reply That this Council supposes there was an Order in every Diocess of this Province only whereas there was as Socrates observed in the East some difference between them they now reduce all to one Form those under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan of Tours of which Perpetuus was now the Bishop and came to Vannes with five of his Suffragans to ordain a Bishop there and being assembled they made this and oâ—her Canons and Writ to Victurius Biâ—hop of Mans and Thalassius Bishop of Anjou two absent Bishops of this Province to see this and the rest of these Canons observed in their Diocesses And in all probability these Eight were all the Bishops of that Province in those early Times for Miraeus reckons now in this Age but Eleven Bishops who are under the Metropolitan of Tours (m) Miraei notitia Episc lib. 4. p. 194. so that my Adversary is mistaken to say there were Fifteen or Seventeen And he is as grosly out in his calling this a late Decree For it must be considered that France was overrun by Barbarous and Pagan Nations within less than an hundred Years before so that it needed a new Conversion a little before this Century began and therefore Lidorius was the first setled Bishop of Tours who had a Church Builded there for Christian Worship and he died as Gregory Turonensis relates Ann. Dom. 370. that is only 80 Years before this Council S. Martin also the great Apostle of this part of France and Bishop of Tours died only 50 Years before this Câ—non was made and Perpetuus the President of this Council was the Fifth Bishop after â— Mâ—rtin (n) 〈…〉 §. 14. p. â—â— and hold this Synod at least 30 Years before the Conversion of Clâ—vis the first Christian King of France So that it is very frivolous to say no worse for my Adversary to call this a late Decree with respect to the whole Church Since as to this Province and with respect to France it is a very early Decree made soon after their Conversion to the Faith and considering each great City after the Barbarous inundation was Converted by a several Bishop it is no wonder if there were some variety in their Liturgies But we see
it was used in the Third and in the beginning of the Fourth Century in all the Churches of the World 'T is true there was an Orthodox Addition made to it in the Time of that Theodocius grounded on a Miracle as Nicephorus reports (m) Niceph. Histor lib. 2. cap. 46. But the Original of this Hymn is taken from the Prophet Isaiah and it was used in that Form long before this Emperour was born yea it seems it was accounted to be a Form very Sacred since they durst not alter it but by the direction of a Miracle so tenacious was that Age of their ancient Forms of Worship Gelaâ— us Episc Rom. A.D. 492. § 14. Pope Gelasius was one of the most Learned of the Roman Bishops and though as we have seen in the Life of Damasus and of Innocent there was a Liturgy at Rome before yet he took great pains to polish and reform it For all Authors affirm That he made Hymns for his Church like to those of S. Ambrose (n) Pâ—ntifical vit â— las item Platâ—na in vit Cent. Magâ—eb 5 Cent. p. 1271. c. And that he Composed some Graduals Prefaces and Collects (o) Pontif cal ut supr item Câ—sâ—andr Liturg And Durandus affirms that this Gelasius the One and filtieth Bishop from S. Peter was he that principally put the Canon into that Order wherein we now see it (p) Durand â—at lib. 4. fol. 67. iâ—em Burnes v a Gelas pag. 55. and some add that he enlarged the Preface and put in It is meet and right so to do But let us hear the Learned Du-Plessis Gelasius came in the Year 490 and he ranged and set in order the Collects and Complâ—nds amongst the which are some that do yet stand and continue pure and uncorrupted (q) Mâ—rnay of the Mass Book l. cap. 60. So that if we regard the account which we had before in the Life of Pope Innocent (r) See the beginning of this Century §. 1. or the full Evidence of these Authors ancient and modern we must grant there were prescribed Forms at Rome long before Gelasius Time but being by continuance of Time and frequent Transcribing become somewhat imperfect he undertakes to rectifie them by some Alterations and by adding something of his own made the Offices more compleat His putting the Canon into Order adding to the Prefaces and his ranging the Collects into a Method shews there were Collects and a Preface and a Canon before so that the use of prescribed Forms did not begin in his Time and yet because he took so much pains about the Liturgy of the Roman Church That Book which he had Corrected and put in Order was called Codex Gelasianus The Gelasian Book And John the Deacon who writ the Life of Pope Gregory saith that He contracted this Gelasion Book and out of it compiled the Gregorian Office (s) Johan Diac. vit Gregor 1. lib. 2. cap. 17. yet so as it seems the Book still remained in some places for the Chronicle of the Abby of Saint Richerius (t) Chronic. S. Richerii apud Dacherii Spicileg Tom. 4. reckons up Nineteen Missals of Gelasius among the Volumes in their Library And it is plain enough that Pope Gregory took the same liberty with this Gelasian Office that he had done with those our of which he first extracted it For there were Forms from the beginning and none but great Bishops presumed to alter them which had been a very impertinent labour if after they had thus Corrected the Offices they had not imposed the use of them on their subordinate Clergy and doubtless they would never have taken this pains if every private Minister might vary the Office every day at his pleasure Which fancy this Book of Gelasius utterly confutes and proves there was a Canon for the Consecration of the Eucharist written down in a Book at least an hundred years before S. Gregories Time yea we see this very Book of Gelasius was taken out of elder Forms which makes it to be somewhat strange that my Adversary should cite and own this Gelasian Book and at the same time and in the same Page affirm There was no setled Form of Consecration at Rome before Gregory 's time (u) Disc of Liturgies p 83. But of this I shall have occasion to say more in the next Century And shall conclude this Age with observing That Clovis the first Christian King of France soon after his Conversion placed certain Monks in the City of Rheims giving them great Priviledges and Possessions and the Rule which they were governed by was that which Macarius had Composed about One hundred years before for his Monks of Nitria the Ninth Article whereof enjoyns them To love the Course of their own Monastery above all things (w) Cursum Monasterii super omnia diligas Reg. S. Macar art 9. ap Cointe Annal Eccles Franc. Tom. 1. pag. 178. An. â—96 That is That they should delight in that Form of Service which was prescribed for their Monastery for a Course signifies an Office for Divine-Service And therefore Gregory of Tours saith That he himself writ a Book of Ecclesiastical Courses (x) Gregor Turon lib. 10. cap. 31. that is of Divine Offices and the same Author calls Saying the whole Service Fulfilling the Course (y) Post impleâ—â—m in Oratione Câ—râ—um id de glor Confess cap. 38. So the Roman Course is put for the Roman Missal (z) Spâ—lm Concil Tom. I. pag 177. An. 680. And in one of our ancient Saxon Councils it is Ordained That in all Churches the Course shall be reverently performed at the Canonical hours (a) Concil Calcuth Can 7. An 787. ibid. p. 295. From which use of the word we may learn That the most ancient Monks long before the Time of Benedict had their prescribed Forms of Prayer which they used in their own Oratories though among these Men who did a little incline to Raptures and some degrees of Enthusiasm if any where we might have expected to have found Extempore Prayers I shut up this Century with the Words of Du-Plessis Thus we are come to the Five hundredth year after Christ finding in all this time One Service consisting of Confessions and Prayers Psalms Reading Preaching Blessing and Distributing the Sacraments according to the Institution of our Lord. Mornay of the Mass Book I. Chap. 6. pag 44. So that he did not think this Age was much corrupted And yet we have proved and he owns that Prescribed Forms were now generally used CHAP. II. Of LITVRGIES in the Sixth Century WE need go no Lower for Authorities to prove the Use of LITURGIES because our Adversary freely and frequently grants that they began in the end of the Former and the beginning of This Century But I must here note in general concerning this Concession First That if they began no sooner yet they prescribe to at least Twelve-hundred Years and to universal Practice and
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
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
that part of it which concerns the Divine Service that he prescribed to his Monks We have an Abstract of it in Card. Bona (c) Bona de divin Psalmod c. 18. pag. 895. And thereby it is manifest that although this Founder of Monastick Societies inclined to Enthusiasm in some things Yet he durst not presume to make a new Office consisting of new Forms nor did he leave his Monks to make Extempore Prayers but takes his Office wholly out of the Liturgies then in use Only because these Monks had nothing else to do but to serve God he allots more hours of Prayer and orders many of the Forms to be oftner repeated than was Customary in the Cathedral and Country Churches For this Rule enjoyns the frequent repeating of the Lords Prayer The Apostles Creed The Responses O Lord make speed to save us c. The Hymns and Antiphons particularly the Te Deum Benedictus and Magnificat The Collect for the Day the Kyrie Eleeson or Lord have Mercy upon us by which sometimes is meant the Litany the Allelujah and the like ordaining the Psalter to be Read over in their Office once every Week But all these are known parts of ancient Liturgy and every one of them prescribed Forms which by this time had gained so great Veneration for their Antiquity and general use all over Christendom that none durst presume to omit nor alter them And Benedict's prescribing them to his Monks shews that he took them out of the received Liturgies of his Time And by long usage the Forms themselves were so well known that they are described in the original Rule only by the first words of the several Forms In like manner at the same time that Benedict was Famous in Italy Tetradius Nephew to Caesarius Bishop of Arles Flourished in France and he also writ a Rule for his Monks wherein we have the same Method observed that is to oblige them to repeat the Psalms and all the ancient Forms divers of which are there briefly called by the two first words as Gloria in Excelsis is put to signifie that well known Hymn Glory be to God on High And so for the rest (d) Bibl. Patr. Tom. V. p. 866. Bona de reb Liturg. l. 1. c. 4. §. 4. pag. 512. The same is also to be observed in another Rule made within less than twenty Years after this by Valerianus Bishop of Arles (e) Bona ibid. Cointè Annal. Ann. 550. Now though these Orders of Monks did miserably degenerate afterwards Yet at this time they were the best Men of the Age Renouncing the World Sincerely and Serving God with Extraordinary Devotion yet every Order had its prescribed Forms of Praise and Prayer none of them differing much from others and all taken out of the public Liturgies then in use in the Country where they were first planted after the Example of those Egyptian Monks in the Fourth Century whom Cassian before described to us § 6. Let us now pass into the East Justinianus Aug. Ann. Dom. 530. and see what Laws the famous Emperor Justinian made concerning the Liturgies which we have proved to have been established there long before his Time And First He was much displeased at some who had been admitted into the inferior Orders of the Clergy though they were Illiterate Wherefore he requires that none shall for the future be ordained Priests and Deacons unless at least they be able to Read and can both instruct others in the holy Prayers and Read the Books of Ecclesiastical Canons (f) Authent Collat. 1. Tit. 6. Nov. 6. cap. 4. pag. 13. Again the Religious Prince complains that by the neglect of frequent Synods which would have obliged all the Clergy to be well skilled in the holy Liturgies some even of the highest Order were not perfect in the holy Office for the Communion nor in the Prayer for Baptism And therefore he appoints that before any Bishop be Consecrated He shall publicly Read over the Communion Office The Prayers for Baptism and all the other Supplications (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Idem Authent Collat. 9. Tit. 20. Nov. 13â— Praef. cap. 1. 2. Now here we may observe that the Prayers then in use were called holy Liturgies and were such as could be Read Learned and Taught And the Qualification of Persons to be Ordained was not to be able to make new Prayers but to Read the ancient Forms which it seems were used also in the Nunneries and therefore this Emperor orders the Bishop to take care that the Nuns might have one grave old Man to make the necessary Responses in their Service and that they should have a Priest and a Deacon of unblameble Lives to perform the Divine Liturgies and give them the holy Communion (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cod. lâ—b 1. Tit. 3. de Episc cler l. 44. pag 19. But if any had Built a private Oratory in his House though he might perform his Ordinary Devotions yet he Ordains that according to the Laws delivered in the Ecclesiastical Acts touching the Worship of God in public they do not presume there to do any of those things which are appointed by the holy Liturgy (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Authent Coll. 5. Tâ—t 13. Nov. 58. p 91. Moreover as to the public Offices the Emperor Decrees that Stripes and Banishment shall be inflicted upon any that come into a Church and injure the Bishop or other Clergy while the Divine Mysteries or the holy Offices are performing But to disturb the Liturgy it self is to be punished with Death And because Litanies were then said in the open Streets in procession the Emperor enjoyns the Bishops and Clergy to be always present at them and makes it capital to affront or disturb them in that part of Divine Service (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Authent Col. 9. Tit. 6. Novel 123. cap. 31. 32. p. 174. All which Laws suppose a prescribed Form of Service and have the very name of Liturgy for that Service as every one will grant who considers that the Liturgies of S. Basil and S. Chrysostom were constantly used in the Eastern Church both in and long before Justinians time I know my Adversary pretends 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Liturgie in these Laws signifies no more than the exercise of any Divine Ministrations (l) Disc of Lit. p. 157. 158. But if we grant that it will not help his cause nor hurt ours because in that Age and those Churches it is certain all those Divine Ministrations were performed by prescribed Forms so that it is all one as to our dispute whether we translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Liturgy or Ministration because we are sure they Ministred by Liturgies as we now call them For proof whereof we have a Memorable passage in the Council of Constantinople under the Patriach Menna in this Emperors Reign where it seems the Peoples extraordinary Zeal gainst Hereticks
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
of Rome (m) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap. 9. pag. 74. For then it follows That the ancient German Offices were still used in some Parts that were subject to the Archbishop of Colen So that still this is exchanging one Form for another and no proof at all of liberty in Praying a thing unknown in this Age. Agobardus Episc Lugdun An. 831. § 7. We have little more in this Discourse against Liturgies out of Antiquity excepting only some few pretended proofs from late Ages to shew that they used various words in the distribution of the Eucharist As First he tells us that Agobardus the Famous Arch-Bishop of Lions could not well like that Common Roman Form The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ c. since he was only for Scripture Expressions in the public Offices And then he intimates that Agobardus was censured for this by Baronius and his Epitomator (n) Disc of Lit. pag. 90. 91. To which I reply First That Baronius never censures this great Bishop at all for this passage is not in Baronius but only in Spondanus the Epitomator and from him alone my Adversary cites it (o) Vid. Baron Tom. 9. An. 831. p. 797. 798. Secondly Spondanus speaks not one word of Agobardus his correcting the Communion-Office but only that he took great pains in restoring the ancient Antiphonary or Book of Hymns (p) Spondan Epitom An. 831. Num. 2. And Baluzius hath now put out the very Tract which Spondanus refers to and there is not one Syllable in all that Book expressing any dislike at the Words used in the distribution (q) Agobardi lib. de divin Psalmod lib. de correct Antiph oper Tom. 2. edit Paris 1666. Yea there is a peculiar discourse of this Bishop against Amalarius his Comment on the Mass wherein he speaks of the Roman Canon Te igitur c. yet never makes the least exception against the Roman Order or any thing contained in it (r) Ibid. lib. contr Amal. pag. 101. So that this pretended dislike of the Roman Form of distribution is a meer Fiction of his own Brain And if it were true that Agobardus did not like any thing in Sacred Offices but what was Scripture Yet there is no cause he should for that cause dislike this which he calls the Roman but was the Primitive and is now our Protestant Form since the words are taken out of and grounded on express places of Holy Scripture The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ is a Scripture Expresion (s) Math. xxvi 26. Luk. xxii 19. 1 Cor. xi 24. and the next words Preserve thy Body and Soul to Eternal Life are grounded on Scripture Promises (t) John vi ver 50.51.53.54 58. so that if Agobardus were never so scrupulous he might very well like and use this Form But because my Adversary deals only in Epitomes I will now give a full Account of this matter We must observe therefore that Leidradus the Predecessor of Agobardus in the year 799. according to the desire of Charles the Great had brought in the Roman Order of Singing into the Church of Lyons and had put out an Antiphonary with an Epistle before it the Hymns whereof were generally taken out of the Holy Scripture (u) Leidradi Ep. ad Carol. Mag. inter oper Agob Tom. 2. p. 127. But about 30 years after Amalarius a busy Monk pretends to bring a new Antiphonary from Rome Corrected after the Roman Office in the time of Gregory the Fourth which he presented to Lewis the Godly and hoped by his Authority to impose it on all the Gallican Church But Agobardus the Primate of France rejects this new Antiphonary and writ a Book to prove there were Heresies Blasphemies and Nonsense in these Hymns of Amalarius and keeps to the old Roman Antiphonary established by his Predecessor the Hymns of which were for the most part taken out of the Psalms and other parts of Holy Scripture commending this to his Clergy and giving them his Reasons why he would not admit of the other And this Book of Agobardus concludes with these words As the Church hath a Book of Mysteries for Celebrating the Solemnity of the Mass digested Orthodoxly and with convenient Brevity and hath a Book of Lessons collected Judiciously out of the Divine Books so they ought to have this Third Book the Antiphonary purged from all Human Figments and Lies sufficiently ordered out of the pure words of Scripture through the whole Circle of the year That so in performing sacred Offices according to the most approved Rule of Faith and the Authority of ancient discipline there may be kept among us one and the same Form of Prayer of Lessons and of Ecclesiastical Songs (w) Agobard de correct Antiphon §. 19. Tom. ii p. 100. This is the whole Story and the passage which Spondanus ignorantly or at least rashly Censures and my Adversary Ridiculously brings in to shew Agobardus his dislike of the words of distribution Whereas these words refer only to the Hymns which yet probably were not all the very words of Scripture but were either Transcribed thence or agreeable thereto much more than the new Hymns of Amalarius And since Agobardus received and used the Roman Canon and the whole Roman Missal wherein were many things which are not the words of Scripture we must not expound these words cited but now so strictly as Spondanus doth as if he would not use any words in Divine Offices but those of Scripture For Agobardus means no more than that the Hymns ought to be either taken out of Scripture or agreeable to the Doctrine thereof for he proves that the Hymns of Amalarius were Heretical and Blasphemous contrary in many things to the Holy Scripture and therefore he rejected them But as to any Liberty in varying the Prayers Lessons or Hymns that were established or altering the Roman Forms This great Bishop was so far from it that he enjoyns the old Gregorian Office and imposes that prescribed Form together with the Lessons and the Hymns and opposes those Innovations and Alterations which some attempted to make because the Forms and Order then established were agreeable both to the Rule of Faith and to the acient Ecclesiastical Laws upon which occasion he produceth that African Canon before cited (x) Part. i. Cent. 4. §. 24. pag. 257. in these Words viz. That no Supplications and Prayers be said unless they have been approved in a Council nor shall any of these at all be Sung in the Church till they have been considered by the Prudent and approved of in a Synod lest any thing against the Faith be composed either my mistake or by design (y) Canon Afric ap Agob de correct Antiph §. ii p. 92. And now the Reader shall judge whether this Author be for my Adversaries purpose or no since he imposes Books of prescribed Prayers Lessons and Hymns and thinks the keeping strictly to them is
necessary to make the Clergy Uniform and the use of them agreeable both to Scripture and Antiquity § 8. Adrian ii Episc Rom. An. Dom. 8â—8 Another instance of Liberty taken in varying the prescribed Form of the words of distribution is a Relation of Pope Adrians adding divers Solemn words to the usual Form when he gave the Sacrament to Lotharius the French King and his Attendants Which Lotharius had been Excommunicated by Pope Nicolas for living in Adultery with one Waldrada and Lotharius came to Rome for Absolution and promised for ever to Renounce her for the security of which promise this Pope obliges him to take the Sacrament upon it together with his Nobles And upon that Extraordinary Occasion post Missarum Solennia after the usual Consecration the Pope added some words for that once only which was to let them know their Danger if they did Dissemble in so Solemn an Ordinance but so that probably either before or after he used the old Form of distribution which the Historians also intimate though since this is only an Historical Narration they have not perhaps so clearly expressed it However what can my Adversary infer from hence to his purpose supposing Adrian mixed the Form of distribution for this once with his occasional Commination (z) Disc of Lit. p. 91 92. First doth he think the Pope did well or ill in this If he did ill why doth he urge it for a Precedent It seems to be a varying not only from the Churches Form but from the design of Christ who did not institute this Sacrament to be a Rite to purge Men from Accusations or Seal Curses on Men who brake their Leagues and therefore this is not a good Example for our Church to follow nor ought the Dissenters to desire the same Liberty till they have proved the Fact was not Evil. Yet if it were well done what consequence can they draw from it may private Ministers do all that the great Bishop of the West may do Or because he did take this Liberty once upon a very Extraordinary occasion ought they to have it always when there is nothing Extraordinary in the Case I dare say my Adversary could not imagin that this Pope gave his Clergy Liberty to vary this Form as they pleased nor to draw this Act of his into an Example and therefore I cannot see any reason why he should urge it The like may be said of his next instance of one Leuthericus Leuthericus Episc Senon An. Dom. 1004. Arch Bishop of Sens who used these Words in the delivery of the Sacrament Receive if thou art Worthy And my Adversary saith Robert K. of France Checkt him for it not because he Transgressed the Established Order but because the King by mistake supposed none were Worthy to Receive (a) Disc of Lit. pag. 92. I shall easily Answer this when I have First set Right the Matter of Fact For Spondanus tells us out of an old Author That this Leuthericus held not a right Opinion of Christ and seeking to prove some whom he hated by the Body of the Lord the King sharply reproved him for that whereas the Priest who gave the Communion use to say The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve thy Body and Soul he with a Rash and polluted Mouth said If thou be Worthy Receive it Whereas indeed none can be truly said to be Worthy (b) Spondan Epit. ad An. 1004. §. 2. p. 798. è Helgald in vit Roberti Regis Here we see the old Author for these are his Words brings in an Irregular Fact of an Heretical Bishop which ought to be no Precedent and is no Evidence what was the Custom of the Orthodox Clergy in that Age. Again this instance shews that the old Form was generally used then and that his not using it was the True Reason why the King reproved him viz. for daring to alter the Established Form For the last Words that none are truly Worthy are not the Words of the King but of the Writer of his Life Wherefore the usage of that Time was for all to Administer by the ancient and Established Form and that when an Eminent Arch Bishop presumed to vary from it he was sharply reproved for it by a Religious King and is censured by an ancient Historian as one that did not amend but deprave the Office by this pretended Correction As for Spondanus his supposing Leuthericus refused the old Form out of a dislike of Transubstantiation it is wholly groundless For this Form was used in the Roman Church long before Transubstatiation came in and is retained in those Protestant Churches which have rejected that false Doctrin He tells us also of Pope Gregory Gregorius Sept. Episc Rom. An. Dom. 1077. the 7th who having been accused of great Crimes and being about to receive the Sacrament made a Solemn Protestation of his Innocence holding the Eucharist in his Hands (c) Disc of Lit. pag. 93. But the Historian cited by him doth not say he omitted or altered the usual Form he rather supposes the Pope First said these Words for clearing of his Innocence and then after those terrible Words he did receive it probably with the Common Form But however it was we say that this Extraordinary and perhaps unlawful Fact of a Pope on that occasion is no Evidence of the Custom of that Age nor is it to be alledged to justifie any private Ministers taking Liberty to vary the Forms as he please Besides we see that in this Corrupt Age the Holy Sacrament came to be used for a Canonical Purgation as in this Case And in confirming secular Leagues as in the next and it is no great wonder if when they used the Eucharist to new purposes they were forced to invent new Forms as in his next Instance Pope Pascal the Second did when he delivered the Sacrament to the Emperor Hen. 5th as a Confirmation of the Peace and League then made between them (d) Disc of Lit. pag. 93. e Sigâ—bâ—rto Now if this matter of Fact be true it is nothing to our Question which is about the Forms commonly used in Divine Service As for odd and Extraordinary Cases and especially when the Ordinances of Christ were prostituted to secular Ends and Purposes they ought not to be alledged in an enquiry about the Custom of those Ages which all grant was to Pray and Administer the Sacraments by prescribed and imposed Forms and no Liberty was allowed to any in the least to vary from them And those who did vary were either so great as to believe themselves above Rules or so irregular as to be censured for it wherefore these few Cases do not at all prove that the Clergy had or ought to have a Liberty to vary from the prescribed and established Forms in the Ordinary Service of God I find nothing more in my Adversary out of Antiquity and had he not started these trifling Objections I should not have
Singular Number the Holy Bible to make his Reader suppose it was meant alone of that Book But the Original speaks of more Books and therefore since a Liturgy was then in use at Alexandria no doubt that was one of the Holy Books which they here falsly accused Macarius for Burning And since the Author calls them Holy not Divine Books it is more probable he meant it of the Books of Offices which were counted only Sacred than of the Scripture which they generally call Divine or Divinely inspired Books Which distinction is very evident in Eusebius where he relates how in the Persecution under Dioclesian They Burnt the Divine and Sacred Books in the Mâ—rket places (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 8. cap. 2. p. 217. In which place the Divine Books are the Holy Scriptures and the Sacred Books those which contained the Service of the Church The same Author in the Life of Constantine makes a plain distinction between these Books as being several Volums For he saith the Emperor took the Books for the explaining the Divinly inspired Scriptures and after for repeating the prescribed Prayers with those who dwelt in his Roy. al Palace (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb vit Const lib. 4. cap. 17. First he took the Bible into his Hands and then after that it seems he took the other Book wherein the usual Established Prayers were written For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Books implies more Books than one Secondly As to the Books which Constantine sent to Eusebius into Palaestine to procure for his Churches at Constantinople he calls them Those Divine Books which he knew most necessary according to the Ecclesiastical Catalogue to be prepared and used (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. l. 4. cap. 35. And this might be expounded of Books of Offices as well as Bibles but suppose we grant this Catalogue here mentioned to be the Canon of Scripture agreed on by the Church and so the Books he sent for were only the Canonical Books of Scripture His inference that the Churches in Constantine's Time had no other Book will by no means follow Eusebius lived in Palaestine where the Scriptures were first written and best understood and there the best Copies were to be had and Eusebius who lived there was the fittest Judge of them therefore Constantine sent thither and to him perhaps for no more but Bibles Not because Churches were furnished then with no other Books but because we know Constantine had Prayer-Books at home and could get acurate Copies of the Service writ out at Constantinople and need not send so far as Palaestine for those Books but it was most proper to send thither for Copies of Canonical Scripture Thirdly The Council of Carthage also doth mention a Book of the Gospels held over the Bishops Head a Book of Exorcisms to be given to the Exorcist and a Book of Lessons to be delivered to the Reader at their Ordination But doth not mention the Service-Book delivered to any that entred into Orders (k) Concil 4. Carthag can 1. 7 8. But it is too much from thence to conclude there was no Service-Book there in the year 498 because we have proved by many Testimonies which are Positive that they had prescribed Prayers there long before And he may as well argue that we have no Common-Prayer-Book in England since it is not delivered either to any Bishop Priest or Deacon at their Ordination that is there is no more done here than was there and yet both we have and they had a Book of Offices for all that Optatus S. Augustin and others before cited do fully attest it Moreover these Books of Exorcisms were Forms of Prayer and of Catechising Collected out of Holy Scripture (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril praef ad Catech. for those who were newly Converted to Christianity And such Books had been long time used in the Church before this Council though this formal delivery of them is not mentioned till this Council Orders it Fourthly As to the Persecutors not enquiring for or finding or the Christians delivering no other Books to them but only Bibles I reply the matter of Fact is not True and therefore his Consequence viz. that they had no Prayer-Books then is false Indeed the Bible was the most Eminent of all the Christian Books and the Foundation of their Faith their Worship and their Manners And in those Ages the Bible was in all Christians Hands the People Read it at Home whereas the Liturgy was only in the Priests Hands and upon the Notion they had of the necessity of concealing Mysteries from Pagans was kept very close By which means no doubt Bibles were oftner found by the Persecutors and better known to them than the Book of Offices the Dyptics the Book of Exorcisms the Book of Anthems written and composed to the Honour of Christ Yet we are sure they had these Books then though they are rarely or never mentioned singlâ— only they come under the general Titles of Christian Writings Divine Sacred or Holy Books c. and no doubt sometimes the Persecutors found and Burned these as well as Bibles For we may observe that all Authors generally speak in the Plural Number The Divine and Holy Writings and the Writings The Books of the Church in Eusebius are said to be Burnt and Destroyed by the Persecutors (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 8. cap. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. cap. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. lib. 10. cap. 4. Why do our Writings deserve to be committed to the Flames saith Arnobius (n) Nâ—â—strâ— quidem Scripta cur ignibus merueruâ—t dari Arnob. l 4. They Demanded the Divine Books for the Fire Saith Augustin (o) Peterent divinos câ—dices exurendos Aâ—â— brevic Câ—l l. 3. So they ask the Holy Martyrs if they had any Writings in their keeping (p) Dicas aliquas Scripturas habeas â—ron An. 30◠§. 53. And the Canon of Arles is general against all that had delivered up the Holy Writings (q) De his qui Scripturas Sanctas tradidisse dicuntur Concil Arcl. can 13. An. 316. Now why should they so Constantly and Unanimously speak of more Books if there had been no Book but a Bible But further some of the Acts of the Martyrs mention Volumes of Parchment and other folded Books besides the Bible (r) Baron An. 303. §. 10. In the Acts under Zenophilus the Persecutors demanded If they had any Writings of their Law or any thing else in their Library (s) Ibid. §. 13. 14. Now they had removed the Books before they came conveying them to the Readers House where at last they found 24 great and small Volums and in another House 8 Books and 4 folded Tomes Now certainly these were not all Bibles no doubt some of them were Books of Prayers Hymns and Passions or Names at least of Martyrs Writ out as S. Cyprian had directed Another
in and secondly by a most odious Representation of that Age For the first he concludes That for Five hundred years after Christ if not more the ordinary way of Worshiping God in public Assemblies was not by prescribed Liturgies (e) Disc of Lit. pag. 181. The falshood of which Conclusion this whole Discourse hath sufficiently discovered And his not being able to produce one clear Proof That Extempore Prayer was the way of Worshiping God in public in all this Period gives me reason more justly to conclude That for Five hundred years and more after Christ that kind of Praying was not used in Christian Assemblies Because to use his own words if there had been such a Way of Praying used constantly in all Churches for so long a time together there would have been such clear Evidence of it in many of the Ancients that there might have been had as full proof thereof as of any one thing and especially when this Author and his party have been searching so narrowly in Antiquity for this and are sensible how much their Cause is concerned in it and yet here is nothing produced that is positive or express (f) Disc of Lit. pag. 179 180. However let us for once suppose that Extempore or Arbitrary Praying was the Usage of the Church for Five hundred years together or more and that then Liturgies began to be imposed This was a remarkable and mighty change in the Public Service of God the restraining of a Liberty which we must suppose the Christian Priests and People had enjoyed down from the Time of the Apostles Now this could not have been done in an Age wherein there were so many eminent Writers and so many zealous Assertors of Apostolical Usages but it must have made a great noise in the World some would have complained of and written against this daring Innovation and as our Dissenters count it bold usurpation upon Mens Consciences and manifest quenching of the Spirit But my Adversary though very quick sighted can find nothing of this Matter he hath not one Quotation to this purpose There is an absolute Silence in all Authors of these Ages none claimed this pretended ancient Right none complained that it was taken from them nor did any so much as take notice of this eminent and public Alteration which undeniably proves there was no such Change then made and shews that prescribed Forms had been used in the foregoing Ages and continued in this Century as they were before My Adversary hath noted what Seditions hapned in divers Churches and what Noise was made over all the Christian World upon a small alteration in an ancient Form and is it likely all People would be so quiet and silent when the whole Manner of God's public Service was changed at once When we charge the Roman Church with the novelty of her Corruptions we prove that Accusation by shewing That such as lived before that Corruption came in believed or practised otherwise That such as lived when it was coming in opposed it and writ against it and many refused to submit to it after it was come in as in the case of Images But in this unjust Charge no such thing is made out wherefore we conclude That Liturgies are neither a Corruption nor an Innovation but the Pure and Primitive Way of the Christians public Worship But Secondly he is so confident that Liturgies were brought in and imposed about the Year 500 that he spends 17 Pages together which is all the rest of his Book in vilifying that Age and to this end he rakes together a mighty heap of Quotations to expose the Bishops and Clergy and indeed all the People of those Times the design of which is besides the gratifying his Ill-will to the Sacred Order of Episcopacy to shew That since the Governours of the Church and the whole Age was so extreamly bad and degenerate when Liturgies first were imposed therefore they are a Corruption and the Vse of them is by no means to be approved But he hath managed this odious Charge with so much Spite and so many Fallacies That though his gross misdating the Original of Liturgies makes all this to be nothing to our Question yet I cannot shut up this Discourse till I have shewed First the weakness of this Argument suppoposing the Premisses were true And Secondly the many Fallacies and Mistakes that appear in his managing of it and in the Instances which he brings to make it out First The Argument it self is trifling and the Reasoning very frivolous upon Two Accounts For First No wise Man will say that every thing must be Evil which is begun in an ill Age No Times were worse than those wherein our Lord began to Preach the Gospel no People wickeder than the Jews at that Time The Northern Nations were bloody and barbarous cruel and persidious to the highest Degree when the Scripture was first Translated into the Gothic Tongue And King Alfred's Age was extreamly Ignorant and notoriously Vitious yet then the Gospels and other excellent Books were translated into Saxon. The Reformation it self was begun in an Age when the generality of the Clergy and Laity both were as destitute of Learning as they were of Vertue But how ridiculous would he be that should disparage the Reformation the Translating of Holy Scripture and the Gospel it self by haranguing upon the Times when these things first appeared in the World There have been many Ill things brought in even in good Times and many Good things in bad Times so that there is no Arguing from this Topic with any solidity or certainty indeed if he had proved that these Evil Men brought in Liturgies and none but Evil Men used them and submitted to them that had been something to the purpose Now this we might do as to his Dear Way of Extempore Prayer For the Directory was first set up and enjoyned here in a Time of Rebellion and Sacriledge in a Time wherein there were more vile Hypocrites and profligate Wretches under the Mask of Religion than ever were known in this Nation in any Age before which is largely made out by very many Books then Writ which beyond contradiction declare the Matter of Fact to be true (g) See Edward's Gangrena in three Parts History of Independency Mercurius Rusticus c. Yea I could prove That divers who promoted this New Way of Praying and pretended to the Gift in a most extraordinary degree were tried and upon full proof convicted of the blackest Crimes that Men or Women could possibly commit such as Witchcraft Incest and other Sins not to be named and suffered Death for them (h) Mrs 〈◊〉 in the Counteâ—n me â—heâ—â— Mâ—â—â—r Weer in Raâ—â—â— realrivus which is more concluding against Directories and Extempore Praying than any thing he urges against Liturgies But I will not insist upon so odious and ungrateful a way of Arguing Secondly There never was any Age of which the Good Men then alive did not
Bishops at all But only that there were no precedence of one Bishop before another on the account of the Dignity of their Sees but that their Honour might be only according to their desert and vertue (z) Nazianz. Crat. â—8 And in his Rhetorical way of praising Athanasius he plays the Orator in seting out the Character of an evil Bishop and then shews how unlike Athanasius was to such (a) Nazianz. Crat. 21. in land Athan. But no man can think that a true description of all the Bishops of that Age is to be taken from such an occasional strain of Rhetorick Pag. 187. S. Jerom in his Cell held Correspondence with and paid Respect to all the eminent Bishops of the World and was far from thinking the whole Order was degenerated into Tyranny S Chrysostom doth not say He was afraid of all the Bishops or of the Bishops in general as he pretends but only of those who opposed him which were in number but 36 And at that very time he had far more Bishops for him but his Enemies oppressed him by the favour of the Court (b) Chrysost Ep 13. Tom. 7. pag 95. See his Life in Dr. Câ—ve p. 485 And Arcadius the Emperour was very angry by the Information which some banished Monks had given him when he saith those hard Words of Theophilus of Alexandria and his Party (c) Georg. Al. vit Chrysost c. â—9 Tom. 8. pag. 212. who had done many evil Things but this must not be applied as the Character of all Bishops in that Age And it is of those Bishops only that Isidore speaks which as appears by his very words here cited refer only to some of the Bishops of that Country For all under Theophilus his Jurisdiction did neither joyn with him nor follow his Exampâ—e (d) Isid Pel. lib 2. ep 125. and which was ciâ—ed â—e â—â—e lib. 5. ep 21. And how disingenuous is it to say no worse from his complaint of a Few to affirm That Episcopacy it self was become a tyrannical Licentiousness yâ—a and was turned into Tyranny Besides he cannot find one Complaint that imposing Liturgies was then called or accounted any part of Tyranny none accused any Bishops for that which is the only Point we now dispute about Pag 188. After a long description of evil Bishops and Clergy in general he comes in a Marginal Note to own that Isidore confesseth there were some Bishops in that Country and at that time who lived up to the Apostolical Character So that still he cannot conclude from hence the whole Church was degenerated And his next Quotation relates only to the Tyranny of Theophilus and his Party at Alexandria yet Isidore saith that then in that Church there were famous Doctors and approved Disciples (e) Isid Pel. lib. 5. ep 126. which my Adversary omits and here again quotes divers Epistles which he had cited before (f) Id lib. 3. â—p 223. lib. 5 ep 21 c. and at last quotes an Epistle wherein Isidore only reproves one single Clergy-man (g) Id. lib. 4. ep 229. yet all these his careless Reader is to believe are good Evidence to prove the whole Church was then depraved In the same Page Socrates blames no more but two Bishops and that too in his Partiality for the Novatians And the Canon of Ephesus is a very good Law made to prevent one Bishops usurping over another as is also that of Chalcedon (h) Concil Eph. Can. 8. Bever Tom. I. p. 104. Item Concil Chal. Can. 12. ibid. pag. 126. Now though this shew there were some Bishops then who aimed at evil Things as there ever was and ever will be yet the Major part of them in two General Councils who carried the Vote for these Canons disliked the thing and took care to prevent it So that these Laws shew the greatest part of the Bishops were free from these Faults and laboured to reform the rest and can this be a Proof of the Degeneracy of the whole Church Pag. 189. What he observes concerning the Popes who begun to aim at the Supremacy about the Year 400 or soon after is true in Fact but this only shews the corruption of one See and he knows the greatest part of the Christian World in that Age and in divers succeeding opposed these Attempts which shews the Church was not degenerated And besides this is nothing to the Point of Liturgies because the very Popes Two hundred years after this did not pretend to shew their Supremacy by imposing their Liturgy on distant Churches as we have seen in Pope Gregory's Epistle to Augustin the Monk and the Bishops of Lesser Sees who did not pretend to this Supremacy yet imposed their own Churches Liturgy on their own Members He adds to this a pious Sentence or two out of S. Chrysostom which are only general Complaints in popular Discourses But since this Supremacy began to be aimed at in the Time of Chrysostom I wonder why he should say That a Sentence of his levelled against it was forgot in his own Time since it was more likely that it was never known to those at Rome who were designing then to be Supream Pag. 190. Prosper whom he cites for the evil Practices of Inferiour Bishops declares he speaks only of some Bishops and the Words are the Complaint of a very Pious Bishop of that Age (i) Prosper de vâ—â—â—â—tempt cap 21. Which Complaint Prosper answers very well in the next Chapter (k) Ib. cap. 22. and a little alter he hath a lovely description of such as were good Bishops (l) Ib. câ—p 25. and finally he adds And even at this time there is no doubt but there are many among us full of all those good Episcopal Qualities which you have truly described (m) Prosâ— ibid 〈◊〉 2. cap 2. 3 Now is it not a vile Artifice of my Adversary to cite the Complaint only as a general Character of all the Clergy of that Age and not to mention those many Commendations of the better sort of them though the same Author in the same place mentions both as also to talk of the suitableness of Liturgies to such Pastors Since according to him that way of Worship did not come in till almost 60 Years after when all these Pastors were dead and by his Computation these Men all prayed Arbitrarily or Extempore Pag. 191 192. He next goes about to set out the lamentable Insufficiency of those who ministred by Liturgies as he reckons in the Year 500 by the Testimonies of S. Basil S. Ambrose and Nazianzen who all died above an Hundred years before that time And S Ambrose only speaks of some few Simoniacks who in his Time were a disgrace to their Order (n) Ambr. de Sacerd. dig c. 5. Nazianzen is only giving a Rhetorical Character of a Bad Bishop to set off the glory of Athanasius as we noted but now (o) Naz. Orat. 24. p. 378. And in the next
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
Christians only sang praises without any Prayers in their Assemblies Or we must grant he speaks of Hymns by a Synechdoche putting them for the whole Christian Service of which the Hymns were the greater and more Eminent part and so mingled with the Prayers that the one could not be separated from the other For the Christians imitated Paul and Silas who Praying sang Hymns to God in the Prison (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. xvi 25. They therefore mixed Hymns and Prayers and the Hymns were so great a part of the Service that to be present at the Morning Hymns (z) Synod Vinet can 14. An. 453. signifies to be at the Morning Prayer And to be forbid to Sing in the Church (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isidor Peleus lib. 1. ep 90. imports Excommunication from the whole Service Wherefore if the Hymns were certainly in Forms prescribed it is more than probable the Prayers were so also because it would have been very odd and preposterous to break off from Forms of praise and run out into Extempore Prayers in the ordinary Public Worship one part of which at this rate must have had no kind of Congruity to the other Wherefore this Testimony proves that the greatest part of the Christians public Service was performed by prescribed Forms in the first Century and shews it is very probable that their Prayers also were set Forms even in that early Age. § 3. We have no Writer remaining in this Century but Ignatius Ignatius Antioch An. Dom. 99. who lived also in some part of the next And from him it seems very probable that the Bishop did appoint one Form of Prayer and Supplication for the public Worship especially for the Administration of the Sacraments for he charges all those to whom he Writes to do nothing without the Bishop and orders them of Magnesia to do nothing without the Bishop and the Presbyters nor to make tryal of things which seemed agreeable to their private Fancies but when they met together he tells them they must have one Prayer and one Supplication (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ep ad Magnes p. 34. declaring to those at Smirna that the only Authentic Celebration of the Eucharist and of Baptism was that which the Bishop either performed or allowed (c) Ignat. Epist ad Smirn. pag. 6. Now if their Prayers were varied every day they could not properly be called one Prayer And if every private Minister might order the Form of Baptism and the Lords Supper as he pleased as our Extempore Men take on them to do how could Ignatius say none was Authentic unless the Bishop allowed it Therefore it is likely they then had approved and uniform composures both for Prayers and Sacraments And as for their Praises Socrates saith Ignatius first brought the usage of Singing by way of Antiphone into the Church of Antioch (d) Socrat. histor lib. 6. cap. 8. and the same is attested by Photius (e) In Dr. Ham. view of the Directory pag. 145. Now if we consider that this was the Method of Singing Hymns among the Jews and Essenes and also among the Christians in this Age in other places it can be no ways improbable that Ignatius did set up this custom of Singing alternately at Antioch I know some take exceptions at the Vision of Angels from whom he is said to learn this Method but let it be Noted that this was an Age of Miracles and that the Holy Scripture represents the glorious Seraphins Singing in this Alternate manner (f) Isai vi 3. So that it is not unlikely that so great a Saint and Martyr might have such a Vision and Theodorets silence of this which is all this Author pretends against it (g) Disc of Liturg. p. 167. may proceed from his taking it for granted and supposing it was generally owned and known So that this will prove Forms of Prayer approved by the Bishop and Alternate Singing which must be in prescribed Forms was used in this Age Wherein it seems there were Psalms and Hymns written and composed by the Faithful to glorify Christ the Word of God As that Primitive Author cited by Eusebius testifies who Writ against the Heresy of Artemon and among other Mediums confutes it by citing these very Hymns which had been made almost from the beginning of Christianity and were of so great Authority that in the Reign of Pertinax * Circ An. 193. they were quoted as good Evidence in a matter of Faith (h) Euseb Hist lib. 5. cap. 28. pag. 145. Now an Extempore Hymn could not be cited nor be produced as a Testimony and therefore we conclude there were Written Hymns or Forms of Praise composed and allowed as Evidence in points of Faith from the very beginning of Christianity And therefore we have reason to suppose there was a Liturgy and Forms of Prayer also and this may be sufficient for this dark Century CHAP. II. Of Liturgies in the Second Century § 1. WE have not many Writings of this Age and none that had occasion to write particularly of the Church Service which they cared not to publish lest the Pagans under whom they lived should deride or blaspheme their sacred Mysteries and for this reason we must not look for any clear Evidence of Liturgies as yet though considering the Gospel was in planting and Churches were but begun to be setled there is as plain indication of the use of Forms as can be expected First Lucian the Jeering Pagan Lucian An. Dom. 112. who certainly had some knowledge of the Christian Rites describes his coming into a Religious Assembly which by all the Circumstances must be a Christian Church and he saith he there heard That Prayer which began with the Father and ended with the Hymn of many Names (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lucian Philopat p. 1128. Where we see the Christians had a certain Prayer known by its beginning which therefore must be an usual Form We may also perceive there was an Hymn at the end of this Prayer commonly called the Hymn of many Names which therefore probably was a Form also or else this was no proper or certain description of it I need not determine whether he means this of the Lords Prayer and the Doxology only though it is not likely so short a Form of Praise in which are only the Attributes not the Names of God should be called the Hymn of Many Names I rather think it might be meant of the Communion Office which probably began with Our Father c. and after some other less remarkable Prayers they added the Tricagion Holy holy holy Lord God of Hosts But whatever the particular Forms were this is certain they were Forms of Prayer and Praise known by their proper Titles and that suffices to prove That Forms were then used in the Christian Worship § 2. Justin Martyr doth often speak of the Christian Assemblies Justin Matyr An. Dom. 140. and of
this Extraordinary occason All which can be gathered from hence is that they had no Form of Prayer in Africa then for casting the Devil out of an House But that is no Argument to shew they had no Forms for public Worship on ordinary occasions since we have no Form for this extraordinary contigency but none must Argue from thence That we have no Common Prayer Yet Thirdly I see no Reason to grant that Quantum potuit signifies any more than that this Presbyter Prayed with as Vigorous a Devotion as he was able or with all the powers of his Soul because it is not a long-winded Prayer nor variety of new invented Phrases that the Devil fears but an earnest and fervent Prayer And we could give many Instances where this Phrase is used only to denote doing a thing earnestly and devoutly one Example shall suffice at present where the Jews who always in that Age praised God by Forms are commanded when they praise God to exalt him as much as they can (z) Benedicentes Dominum exaltate illum quantum potestis Ecclesiastic 43. in sine by which the Son of Syrach did not intend to oblige every ordinary Man to make an Extempore Form of Praise in the highest strains of Rhetoric but only enjoyned them when they used the Forms of Blessing to say them with all the joy gratitude and devotion imaginable And if we explain the Phrase thus then this Passage will not suffice to prove so much as that they had not a Form for dispossessing Houses or Persons infested with Evil Spirits Lastly He saith Augustin did not take any offence at the Varieties used in the Sacrament though they were more than could be known (a) Discourse of Liturg. pag 82. and for this he cites the Retractations which mention his Epistles to Januarius and a Passage out of his Epistle to Jubaianus intimating that every Bishop in these Cases might do as he pleased But all this is manifest Sophistry For whereas he applies this to the Eucharistical Prayers S. Augustin is not treating of any Variety in them Yea he himself cites S. Augustin in one of these Epistles affirming That there were many things in the Sacrament universally observed without any variation and these were Instituted by the Apostles (b) Disâ—ourse of â—â—turg p. 173 Marg ex Aug. ad â—anuar Ep. 118. that is the Prefaces Prayer of Consecration c. as we noted before these were Forms and not to be varied from But the Variety which S. Augustin speaks of is a Variety in Rites and Ceremonies in the Churches of divers Provinces and Countries these he Instances in and affirms there was great Variety in these and that every Bishop in these Matters had power to appoint such Rites as he thought to edification S. Augustin being only a Bishop no Primate or Metropolitan would not impose the Rites used in his own Church upon any But as to the main parts of this Service he often observes all Churches did and ought to agree in them Wherefore it shews a want of better Arguments when he is forced to urge the Variety of Rites in divers Provinces to prove that they varied the Prayers themselves every day which false Notion neither he nor any of his Friends have or can make out And this may suffice for S. Augustin's Judgment and Practice both which are clearly on our side § 23. The Third Council of Carthage An. Dom. 398. We should here have concluded this Century but only our Adversary produces some African Canons and pretends they shew there was no prescribed Form at this Time in that Church First He cites the 23d Canon of the Third Council at Carthage (c) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 44. in these Words That no Man in Prayers shall name either the Father for the Son or the Son for the Father And when they are at the Altar the Prayer shall always be directed to the Father And what Prayers-soever any shall Copy out for himself he shall not use them unless he first debate them with his Discreeter Brethren (d) Concil Carthag 3. Can 23. Bin. Tom. 1. par 1 pag. 575. This Canon evidently consists of Three parts The first to correct the irregularity of naming the Father for the Son or the Son for the Father and hence my Adversary infers That those who were guilty of this Fault did not use prescribed Forms and supposes the Church left them at liberty for the future to use what they thought sit only imposing this on them Not to name the Father for the Son (e) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 45. I Answer This first Clause for any thing appears in the Canon is meant of private Prayers and so is nothing to our Question it was a Fault committed by private Christians who had the misfortune to Copy out Heretical Forms But suppose the Council refers to those Ignorant Bishops lately mentioned in S. Augustin who for the use of their own Diocesses writ out Heretical Forms not knowing them to be such wherein those who held Heterodox Opinions about the Trinity had altered these Names in favour of Sabellianism or Arianism These were Forms and no doubt prescribed by these Bishops to their own Clergy but the Council rejects all these new Forms and reduceth them to the old Liturgy which they were sure was Orthodox and wherein we see the Prayers began with an Address to the Father and concluded through the Son so that they order None shall begin with the Sons Name or end with the Fathers However it cannot well be understood how this Council could prevent such Ignorant persons from making this Mistake but by obliging them to use the Churches Forms where they take it for granted these Names were always right placed So that in effect this prohibits all new Forms of Prayer and binds them to the Old ones wherein such Instances could not be made And our Adversary supposes this Council to be extreme Silly in saying they left such Men as he grants (f) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 46. were fit to be confined to prescribed Forms because they could neither make nor judge of Prayers to their liberty to do as they thought fit this makes the Canon Non-sense for how should these Men know when they ought to name the Father and when the Son and exposes the whole Council who could no way prevent this Mistake but by casting away all such new Forms and confining all Men to the Old ones and without supposing such we cannot make Sense of the Canon which Supposition is not made at random because we have abundantly proved out of Tertullian S. Cyprian Optatus and S. Augustin who was one of this Council that there were Forms used of Ancient time in the African Church The second Clause of the Canon refers to the public Prayers all which and not only those peculiar to the Eucharist were then made at the Altar And these Prayers were then in the public Forms as
could not be satisfied unless the Bishops would put in the Names of the four General Councils into the Dyptics to be Read at the Altar And when these Names were put in as they desired the whole Multitude came together to observe and hear this new and grateful Addition And dividing themselves into two parts they Sang for a long time the Benedictus Blessed be the Lord God of Israel until the Choir began the Trisagion to which they all listned and after the Reading of the holy Gospel the Liturgy was performed according to the Custom that is the Office for Catechumens Then the Doors being shut and the holy accustomed Lessons read At the time for Reading the Dyptics all the People with silence drew neer to the Altar and upon hearing the Deacon recite those Names they all Cried with a Loud Voice Glory be to thee O Lord and then through Gods help the rest of the Liturgy was finished with all Decency (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Constant sub Men. Act. 5. Bin. Tom. 2. par 1. pag. 733. Now here we have not only the Name of Liturgy used in the sense we now take it but the several parts of it are set down and particular notice of divers Forms therein contained viz. The Benedictus The Trisagion and the Gloria tibi Domine The Prayers for the Catechumens the Dyptics c. And the Prayers themselves are called the accustomed Liturgy and said to be performed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with all good Order that is according to that excellent Order appointed by the ancient Liturgies § 7. Pope Vigilius lived in the time of this Emperor Vigilius Ep. Rom. An. Dom. 540. and writes an Epistle to him wherein he blesseth God for that Princes Religious care of the Church which requited him by her daily Prayers for him And Vigilius notes that Justinians affection to the Church was a sign that their usual Prayer for it was heard and Answered And when he comes to describe that Prayer he doth it in these Words All Bishops by an ancient Traditiâ—n in the Communion Office desire and Pray that the Lord would please to Vnite Govern and Preserve the Catholic Faith throughout the whole World (n) Omnes Pontifices antiâ—uâ in offerendo sâ—cripcio Traditione aepeâ—â—mus excrantes ut Catholicam fidem adunaâ—e regere Donamus custodire toto orâ—e dignetuâ— Vigil ep 4. ad Justin Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 5. Which Words are certainly the Roman Form as it was in the days of Vigilius being according to the Book of Gelasius his Correcting not much altered from the Liturgy ascribed to S. Clement or the old Roman Form before Gelasius (o) Pro Sanctà tuà Catâ—olicà Apostolicâ Ecâ—lesiâ ut pacificare custodire gubernare digneris omnes fines terrae Liturg. S. Clem. Bib. Patr. Tom. 2. edit Paris p. 119. And when Gregory the Great in the next Century corrected the Gelasian Office he evidently made his Form out of both those elder Liturgies (p) Pro Eccles â tuâ Sancta Catholicâ quam pacificare custodire adunare regâ—râ—â—igneris toto terrarum erbe Offâ—c Gregorian ibid. pag. 128. As the Reader will see by comparing the several ways of expressing this in these several Offices in divers Ages used in the Roman Church Which shews not only that there was a Form of Prayer for the Church professing the Catholic Faith in the time of Vigilius but that the Form was then believed to be from ancient Tradition and was made almost in the very Words which had been used for many hundred Years before Had Liturgies been newly set up as my Adversary pretends nothing had been more false nor more Ridiculous than to alledge an ancient Tradition for this Form and had all Ministers before this had the liberty to Pray in what Expressions they pleased nothing had been more imposible than this Harmony between these Offices which only differ in divers Ages by reason of the several Corrections of the Forms but were always in every Age done by a prescribed Form Which will be still more plain by the same Vigilius his Answer to the Consultations of Etherius whom he first informs concerning the certain Time on which Easter was to be kept for that year And because this Bishop was placed in a Country newly converted to the Catholic Faith and not yet well instructed in the regular way of performing Divine Offices he had it seems desired to know how they celebrated the Service at Rome on the greater Festivals To which Vigilius gives this Answer We also acquaint you that as to the Order of Prayer in celebrating the Communion it is not different at any time nor upon any Festival but we always consecrate the Gifts offered to God after the same Manner Then he goes on to tell him That they had indeed proper Prefaces for commemorating the Mercy peculiarly to be remembred in each of the greater Festivals And then adds these Words But the rest of the Service we perform according to the accustomed Order And therefore we have herewith sent you the Text it self of that Canonical Prayer which by Gods Mercy we have received from Apostolical Tradition And that you may know in what place to add proper things for each Festival we have also added the Prayers for Easter-day (q) Oâ—dinem quâ—que precum in celebritate M ssarar nullo nâ—s tâ—mpore nuâ—â—â 〈◊〉 sign â—uacaâ—â— habere aâ—vâ—â— sed semper â—â—aem tenore oblata Deo munera consecrare pp. Caetera vero Ordine consueto prosequimur Qua prepter ipsius Canonicae precis textum direximus subter adâ—â—ectâ—â— quaâ—â—â— Deo propitio ex Apostolicâ traditione suscepimus c. Vâ—gâ—l Ep. 2. ad Etherâ—um Bin. Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 4. Here we see the Communion-Service and especially the Prayer of Consecration was an ancient Form derived from Apostolical Tradition and the whole Office was written down in a Book and sent into that Country where Etherius was Bishop which some suppose to have been some parts of Spain lately Converted from Heresie (r) Baron Annal An. 538. pag. 278 279. And if so probably this was the foundation of that Office which is called the Mosarabick and was Composed by S. Leander about Fifty year after out of the old Gothic and African Forms compared with this Roman Office However it appears that though in some places where the Faith was newly planted they needed help to settle and correct their Offices yet both the New and Ancient Churches did all agree in the use of Forms And when a new Liturgy was to be made for a Newly Converted Nation the Bishops consulted the most Ancient Forms they could find in other Churches choosing out of them what they thought proper for their own Country and that Form they enjoyned upon all that were under their Jurisdiction We must also observe further That the Roman Office which was writ down and the very Words
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