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
Extempore Way there ought to have been an express abrogation of the Old Way and a positive institution of the New one left upon Record either in the Gospels or Epistles But it is so far from that that we can prove our Lord and his Apostles allowed made and used Forms of Prayer For according to the custom of the great Rabbies of that Age Jesus taught his Disciples a divine Form of Prayer to be added to their other Forms as the peculiar mark of their being his Scholars (n) Dr Lightf Vol. 2. p. 158. And it is observed by learned Men that Christ took every sentence of this Form out of the Jewish Prayers then in use (o) Idem Exp. in Math. vi 9. Grotii Com. in locum So far saith Grotius was the Lord of the Church from all affectation of unnecessary Innovation And we may note that when they desired he would teach them to pray that was a proper occasion to have reformed the old method of praying by Forms if Christ had intended such a thing but instead of any such intimation he gives them a new Form and copies the several Petitions out of the Jewish Liturgy shewing thereby his approbation of praying to God in a prescribed Form Which is also manifest from our Lords Hymn which he and his Apostles sang together after his last Supper p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Math. xxvi 30. and if this were not the Paschal Hymn as the best Authors think (q) Du-Plessis of the Mass lib. I. chap. I. pag. 4. yet it could not be an Extempore Psalm as Grotius fancies because the Apostles sang with him and so must know the words of it before (q) Vid. Bez. not in Matth. xxvi 30. Again His Prayer in the Garden which was offered up as S. Paul notes (r) Hebr. v. 7. with extraordinary Devotion was a Form because he thrice repeated the very same Words (s) Math. xxvi 44. and by the way this shews the folly of those who pretend None can pray devoutly unless they vary the phrase every time they pray To proceed It is very probable that our Saviour used a Form of Prayer on the Cross extracted out of the XXIIth Psalm which begins My God my God why hast thou forsaken me (t) Math. xxvii 46. yet he had the same Spirit in the highest Manner by which those Psalms were indited and therefore of pure choice used Forms even on extraordinary occasions The Apostles observed the Jewish hours of Prayer and worshiped God with them both in their Temple and their Synagogues but there is no account that they set up a New way of Praying or disliked the old and S. Augustine affirms that they used the Lords Prayer even after they had received the Spirit of God and repeated that Form every day even when they were in their greatest state of perfection (u) Aâ—g Hilar. Ep. 89. p. 82. G. And Beza whose Authority will sway much with our Adversaries tells us That S. Paul promised to come and settle Forms of Prayer at Corinth in the Church which he had planted there for when he expounds those words The rest will I set in order when I come he saith That is to settle those things which pertained to order as Place Time and FORMS OF PRAYER (w) Beza not minor in 1 Cor. xi 34. I only note he had this Exposition out of S. Augustine (x) Aug. Januar. Ep. 118. p. 116. c. who saith S. Paul intimates It was too long for an Epistle to set down that whole order of Celebration which the Vniversal Church observes so that he would leave that to be setled till he came And hence the Dutch Divines who writ to the Assembly at London in the Civil Wars say They dare not condemn all those godly Churches who from the Apostolical and Primitive times celebrated Gods public Worship by prescribed and certain Forms (y) Class Walach ap Falkn libert Eccles pag. 111. So that they also thought Forms were setled in some Churches even from the Apostles times which I could prove by many other Authorities but these may suffice § 3. There are some Objections against these Proofs from the New Testament dispersed up and down the discourse of Liturgies and other Writings of that party which I will here consider before I proceed First Our Adversary brings many Quotations to prove that the Ancients did not believe the Lords Prayer was intended for a Form but for a direction what things they should pray for (z) Discourse of Lit. p. 3 4. But all that heap of Authors which he cites affirm no more than that it was not only to be a Form but also a direction Which we freely grant for if it were intended at all to be used as a Form then Forms are agreeable to the Gospel way of Worship and the using it as a Form doth not hinder it from being a direction to draw up other Forms by for all Authentic Liturgies and ours especially are grounded on and drawn up by the Lord's Prayer The Collects for Grace being grounded on the three first Petitions The Prayers for all Earthly Blessings are grounded upon the Request for our daily Bread The Confessions and Litanies for pardon and deliverance from Sin and all other kinds of evil upon the three last Petitions and The Thanksgivings Hymns and Praises upon the Doxology So that I cannot but wonder at this Authors impertinent filling a whole Page with Quotations to prove it lawful to use other Words in Prayer while he is disputing against us who allow and use Liturgies which are other Words but such as are agreeable to it both as to the Form and Matter of them His business was to prove the Lord's Prayer was never intended by Christ nor used by the Church as a Form But almost every one of his Authors grant it was a Form even in the places he produces Saint Augustine and Saint Chrysostom do so in him and in an hundred places more as I shall shew when I come to them in Order Calvin in his Quotation calls it A Form dictated by Christ and elsewhere saith That holy Men daily repeat it by Christ's Command (a) Calv. Instit lib. 4. cap. 1. § 23. Maldonat only tells us We are not always bound to use these very Words Grotius owns it may profitably be repeated in those very Words Causabon in the place cited is not speaking of the Lord's Prayer (b) Causab exercit 14. num 14. p. 235. And it was hardily done to cite Mr. Mede for his Opinion who in the place which he cites doth not only prove the Lord's Prayer was a Form but also that the use of Forms under the Gospel is lawful and profitable (c) Mede Diatrib 1. on Math. vi 9. Jansenius doth not dislike the use of the Words of our Lord's Prayer as a Form but the minding only the Words and not the Sense he justly reproves I shall add
were used Morning and Evening for he tells us That the day began with Prayer and was closed up with Hymns (g) Idem in Psal 64. and blames those whose Lips murmured they knew not what and while their Thoughts roved and their Mind was busied about other things did not attend to the Office which they were reciting These and many other passages in him make it plain that the Gallican Church had Forms and a Liturgy in this Age. Yea it will appear That all Christian Churches had so if we consider the Method that Julian the Apostate Julian the Apostate An. Dom. 361. took to establish Paganism which was to accommodate it as much as possible to Christianity the Rites of which he saw were then very popular and taking And therefore he devised to make a Form of Prayers in parts for the Heathen Worship to set up Schools and Lectures of Philosophy and to enjoyn Penances to Offenders Which things saith Nazianzen are clearly agreeable to our good Order (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazian in Jul. Orat. 3 p. 102. And Sozomen relating the same thing saith That Julian designed to adorn his Gentile Temples with the Order of Christian-Worship and therefore among other things He appointed prescribed Prayers upon Set-days and Hours (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zoz hist lib. 5. cap. 15. From whence it is as clear as the Sun That in Julian's Time the Christians generally used a Form of Prayer in parts so that the People could make their Responses and that they had proper Forms appointed for certain Days yea for the several Hours of Prayer in every Day and this was so grateful to the People of that Age that this ingenious Apostate in one of his Epistles yet extant advises his Pagan Priests to Pray thrice a day if possible or however Morning and Evening both in private and public and to learn the Hymns of the Gods which were made in older and in later Times adding that there was a Liturgy for these Priests and a Law directing them what to do in their Temples from which they might not vary (k) Julian Fragment Epistol in oper pag 552. So that he had actually brought the Christian Orders into the Service of the Heathen Gods and because Christians had Responses in their Prayers and sung their Hymns alternately so did he appoint the Pagans to pray and sing by such like Forms § 9. The next place must be assigned to the Council of Laodicea The Council of Laodicea An. Dom. 365. which is one of the earliest Synods after the setling of Christianity and its Canons have always been received by the Catholic Church And here we have many convincing proofs that the Christians then had written and prescribed Forms of Prayer and Praise and used a Liturgy in the Service of God First we find an order that the Hereticks who returned to the Church should learn the Creeds (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Laod. Can. 7. Bever Tom. 1. pag. 455. probably the Apostles and the Nicene Creed However they must be Set Forms or otherwise how could Men learn them Secondly In this Council we meet with Canonical Singers who sang out of written Books and none but they are allowed to Sing in the Church (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Can. 15. p. 459. that is as Balsamon well Notes to begin the Hymns for the People were always allowed to follow them and Sing with and after them Now if they had Forms of Praise written in a Book why might they not have their Prayers written also in a Book T is certain they had no great esteem for Extempore composures nor for variety of Forms neither because they forbid the Reading of Psalms composed by private Men in the Church (n) Ibid. Can. â—â— p 480. And enjoyn the use of the same Office for the Evening Prayer at whatever hour of the Afternoon it was said which is the true meaning of that famous Canon about which our Adversary raiseth so much dust The Words of it are these That the very same Liturgy of Prayers ought to be used always both at three in the Afternoon and in the Evening (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 18. Bev. Tom. 1. p. 461. that is saith Balsamon they forbid Men to reject the Prayers which the Fathers had appointed for three in the Afternoon and to make new Prayers of their own on pretence they used them at the time of the Evening Hymns And Zonaras saith The Council rejects new Prayers and allows none but such as had been approved in a Synod nor would they permit Men to use Prayers of their own making in public but the same Prayers which had been delivered down to them were to be said in every Assembly (p) Balsam Zonar apud Beveâ—eg ibid. To which I will only add this That the whole day being divided by the hours of Prayer as it had formerly been among the Jews the Morning hour took in the time from Six till Nine The Noon-hour of Prayer was said any time between Nine and Three and The Evening-hour Prayer might be said between Three in the Afternoon and Six at Night soon after which was the time for Singing those Hymns at the first lighting of Candles and it seems some put these two last Offices together and having said the usual Forms for Evening Prayer at Three of the Clock when they were to Sing the Evening Hymns at Candles lighting Composed new Forms of Evening Prayer and used them in the Church which the Synod forbids and enjoyns the same Liturgy or Forms of Prayer which had been used in the Afternoon to be repeated over again with the Hymns in the Evening Now this Canon made in the Eastern Church where Liturgies were then commonly used must be expounded of a Set and prescribed Form and therefore divers of the Presbyterian persuasion have confessed that Liturgies have been used for at least 1300 years (q) See Falkner's Vindic. of Liturg. pag. 140. And Smectymnuus derives the use of them from this Canon and believes the sense of it to be that none should vary but always use the same Form (r) Smectym Answer to remonstr p. 7. But our Adversary resolves right or wrong that Liturgies shall not be grounded upon this Canon Wherefore first he Assigns a date to the Council later than he ought for he saith it was in the latter end of the fourth Century (s) Disc of Lituâ—g p. 61. whereas it was held soon after the middle of it Secondly He reserves this Canon to the latter end of his Book not daring to produce it till he had prepossessed his Reader with a false Notion That there were no Liturgies in this Age (t) Ibid. p. 155. Then he recites the Words of it wrong putting the Evening before the Ninth hour (u) Ibid p. 156. And in another place he brings in Caranzas false Translation of this Canon who leaves
of Charity that the Lapsed may obtain the Remedy of Repentance and lastly that the Catechumens being brought to the Sacrament of Regeneration may have the Gate of the Divine Mercy opened unto them (l) Obsecrationum quoque Sacerdotalium sacramenta respiciamus quae ab Apostolis tradita in toto mundo atque in omni Ecclesiâ Catholicâ uniformitèr celebrantur c. Celest Ep. pro Presp Hilar. inter opera Prosper p. 894. This is that famous Passage which our Adversary labours to misinterpret but in vain since nothing can more clearly prove the use of a prescribed Form than these Words For Celestine is here arguing against Hereticks and he confutes them by the Forms then used in the Church producing the very Words and affirming that the Apostles had delivered these Prayers to them at first and that there was an Uniformity in these Petitions between all the National Churches in the World that is all their Litanies had these Requests differing only in the Order and some few Phrases but the Roman Form was this which he here sets down bids the Hereticks look upon it and tells them this was the Rule for Prayer and therefore they ought to believe suitably to these Prayers which might be a Rule for their Faith as well as for their Devotion Now if these Prayers only agreed in the persons and things to be prayed for but were daily varied as every Minister pleased might not the Hereticks have asked him Where they could see Extempore and invisible Prayers or how he could make those Prayers fix a Rule for their Faith which were as various and uncertain as their Ministers Fancies They might except justly against any Argument taken from Prayers which were varied every day and differed so exceedingly in every â—everal Church But since they could be looked on transcribed and urged as an Argument and were so ancient in this Age that even Hereticks durst not â—xcept against the Authority of them we are sure they must be prescribed â—orms made long before this time I will not deny but that both Innocent and Celestine might stretch their Tradiâ—ion something too far when they â—scribed the Original of these Forms to â—he Apostles themselves but even that Assertion especially here in a dispute with Hereticks shews they were so ancient then that there was no Memorial of the first Composer left and â—t is usual among the Fathers to call that Apostolical which was generally observed and had so early a beginning that its first Author was not known As for my Adversaries pretence That this Testimony only affirms an Uniformity as to the order the persons and things to be prayed for I must observe that S. Augustine useth this very Argument against the same Hereticks and when he comes to cite the Words of the Prayer he repeats these very Words without altering any thing either in the Phrase or Order We have cited the place in the First part and if there be any verbal difference in the Translation from what is here set down out of Celestine I assure the Reader there is none in the Latin as will appear by comparing both places together (m) Celestin Ep. apud Prosp Et Aug. de Eccles dogmat cap. 30. See this History Part. l. Cent. 4. §. 21. pag. 231. Now when Celestine at Rome some years after quotes the same Form of Prayer verbatim which S. Augustine in Africa had cited before this shews that the Words as well as the Matter and Order were agreed on and it follows that both the Roman and African Church had a certain prescribed Form of Litany at this time and that the same Form was used in both Churches and was so Ancient and of so good Authority then as to be quoted for Evidence in a dispute with Hereticks And who can imagine there was no more but such an Uniformity as he speaks of that is that every Priest in every several Church in Rome used several Phrases every day which is more properly a Multiformity since we see the same Form of Words quoted for Evidence by two great Bishops the one in Italy the other in Africa and this also at two different times Or how can such a liberty and variety in Praying as he dreams of be called legem supplicandi a Rule of Praying How can such an uncertain thing which daily appears in a new and different shape fix the legem credendi the Rule of Believing We conclude therefore that the Words as well as the Method of this Litany was fixed at Rome long before the Time of this Pope § 6. Which will appear more plainly Prosper Aquitan An. D. 430 if we consult Prosper in whose behalf the Pope writ this Epistle For he being to Expound that place of S. Paul 1 Tim. II. 1. I exhort therefore that Prayers Supplications c. refers to the same Litany only supposing that the Form was well known he doth not quote the Words in their order but describes them so plainly that any one may discern it is the same Form which he S. Augustine and Pope Celestine do all appeal to His Words are these Which Law or Rule of Prayer the Devotion of all Priests and Faithful People so unanimously observe that there is no part of the World wherein the Christians do not celebrate such Prayers For the Church every where prays to God not only for the Saints and those already Regenerated in Christ but for all the Infidels and Enemies of his Cross For all Idolaters and all that persecute Christ in his Members for the Jews to whose blindness the Gospel gives no light for Hereticks and Schismaticks who are estranged from the Vnity of Faith and Charity And what doth it ask for these but that leaving their Errors they may be converted to God and receive the Faith embrace Charity and that being freed from the darkness of Ignorance they may come to the acknowledgment of the Truth (n) Prosper de Vocat Gent. lib. 1. cap. 12. pag. 798. We see he is discoursing gnerally of this Litany and breaks the Sentences first running over the persons prayed for and then the things asked for them yet even in this lax way of discourse it is easie to discern that he refers to Celestine's Form and with him affirms That this Prayer was a Rule unanimously observed by all Priests and People whereas if every Priest had daily varied the Words in every Assembly of the People there could be neither Certainty in the Rule nor Uniformity in the observing it I may add that Prosper did so highly reverence S. Augustine that we cannot doubt but he imitated him in the Approbation and use of public Forms and he explains one of those public Forms viz. the Preface of Sursum Corda in his Sentences taken out of S. Augustine's Works (o) Prosp sent ex Augustin sent 153. pag. 434. And in another place he mentions and commends that ancient Custom prescribed in the old Liturgies for the People
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
as soon as they had setled Christianity it self their very next care was to settle one Liturgy and probably other Provinces made the like Decree though this only for this Age be now extant in the Councils And if as he saith all things were so had here in this Country in the very beginning of their Conversion I would fain know when things were better there than when this Canon for an Uniform Liturgy was made and I desire it may be Noted that Gregory of Tours who lived within little more than â—n hundred Years of this Council assures us That many of these very Bishops had the Gift of Miracles Yet did not pretend to that Gift of Extempore Praying which our Dissenters boast of but bound themselves and all their Subordinate Clergy to one and the same Rule of holy Offices and a Man would hope this Country was not so very bad nor this Age so wicked where the Bishops were enabled to work Miracles and while many of them were Confessors and Martyrs Thus much for the Authority of this Council And as to the meaning of the Canon my Adversary leaves out one half of it and recites no further than una sit consuetudo So that his Reader may not see the unam Officiorum Regulam One Rule for holy Offices nor observe their resolution to have one Form for their Offices as well as they had for their Creed nor discern their fear of having any remarks made if there were the least variation in their Worship This was all to be clapt under Hatches Then he puts Sacrorum Ordo together whereas Ordo is joyned with Psallendi But that is no great matter if he had not also falsly expounded this Word Ordo and told us it signifies no more than the disposing the Responsals Prayers Hymns and Psalms each in its proper place which he would prove by the Council of Agatho held he saith not long after where Ordo Ecclesiae is used only for a Rubric or Directory and therefore he thinks it cannot be inferred from hence that the same Expressions were used by them that did Officiate (o) Disc of Lit. pag. 174. This is the sum of his Arguing against the plain and genuine meaning of this Canon But I shall easily shew it is all mistake For first all those Prayers which had Responsals in them must necessarily be in known Forms otherwise the People could not make certain Answers to them in their proper places and that the Hymns and Psalms were Forms also is most certain Well then according to him Ordo must be the disposal of all the Responsory Prayers and Praises together with the Hymns and Psalms in that very Form of Words in which they were prescribed into their proper places So that according to him Ordo will signifie not only a bare Rubric but a direction containing â—he Forms themselves as well as the Order of them He can except nothing but the Prayers and gives no shadow of a Reason why they should not be put into Forms as well as the Responsals Hymns and Psalms And this is certain that The Litany which was the â—ongest Prayer in all the Offices and was in use at the Time of this Council as I will shew in the next Section was a Responsory Form so that if this Ordo did dispose of that into its proper place no doubt it also contained the very Form it self and he must need Hellebore who can imagine that when the Litany and the Hymns and Psalms were all prescribed Forms other Prayers should be left arbitrary Again I hope this Canon may be allowed to expound it self and then this Order is enjoyned to be done in one manner and after one Custom there was to be no more variety in it than in their Creed which was one constant Form of Words yea it is called One Rule of holy Offices and so made that none might observe the least variety in any Church throughout the Province Therefore if we joyn Ordo to Sacrorum it can mean nothing but a Prescription both of the Order and Forms also to be used in â—â—cred Administrations And that this is generally the sense of Ordo when it is applied to Divine Offices appears in those very Councils of Agatho and â—amiers which he cites here but were not held till after the Sixth Century was begun In the former The Order of the Church equally to be observed by all is one Liturgy consisting of Antiphones and Collects with proper Hymns and Prayers for Morning and Evâ—â—ing (p) Concil Agatâ— Can. 30. Bâ—n Tom. II. par 1. pag. 555. In the latter of these Synods it signifies so also for there all the Clergy of the Province are commanded to use the same Liturgy or Order of Prayer which was used in their Mâ—tropolitan Church (q) Concil Epanu Can. 27. ibid. pag. 53. as I shall more at large demonstrate when I come to these Councils in order of Time In the mean season I will here observe that Causabâ—â— tells us the Latins call the Liturgy Ordinem agendi (r) Causab exercit 1â— ad Annal. Eccles pag. 384. and every Man knows that Ordo Romanus is the Roman Missal And it is the proper Latin Word for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we have seen used by Sozomen and others in this Age for a Liturgy (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 10. and this Order is that Liber Sacerdotalis which Vincentius Lirinensis speaks of (t) Vincent Lirin adv haeres cap. 7. pag. 12. it was called sometimes Ordinale and as Spolmâ—n defines it signified That Book wherein was appointed the manner of saying singing and celebrating the Divine Office after the manner of the Roman Church (u) Ordinale Liber quo Ordinatur modus dicendi decantandi celebrandique divinum Officium ex more Romanae Ecclesiae Spelm. Glossar pag. 440. yea after the manner of any other Church For the Missal of Sarum Composed by Osmund who was Bishop of that See is called The Ordinal of Salisbury (w) Hic quoque compâ—suit librum Ordinalem Ecclesiastici officii quem Consuetudinarium vocant Ranulf Polychron An. 1077. Item Knighton de event Angl. lib. 2. cap. 3. col 2351. and did not agree in all things with the Roman Missal Yet these Orders or Ordinals had prescribed Forms of Prayers and Hymns as well as Rubrics to shew when and where to use them I confess there are some ancient Breviaries of the old Liturgies where the first words only of the Hymns and Prayers are set down and the order in which they are to be used is directed but these are an undeniable Proof that the Forms themselves were by long use become known and familiar in those days But for any such Order as is a bare Rubric for Method and hath no Forms neither largely set down nor briefly hinted at in it no Man ever saw such a Book or any thing like it in all Antiquity only
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
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
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
still extant was made at least as early as the Age in which S. Martin lived (p) Bona rerum Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 12. in Append. And that in the Time of Sidonius Apollinaris the Clergy there generally used a Common-Prayer-Book in that same Fifth Century An. 475. We have proved That in the end of the Sixth Age Gregory the Great directed Augustin the Monk to read over the Gallican Liturgy as well as the Roman which shews it was then Written in a Book Yea my Adversaries own Author Mornay in the place cited by him which he must needs see affirms That before the Time of Gregory there was another manner of Service in France than there was at Rome and that Innocent and Gelasius who were Popes in the Fifth Century as well as Gregory had used their utmost endeavours to bring them to conform to the Roman Order (q) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap. 8. pag. 63. Which supposes plainly they had a Service of their own differing from the Roman in Innocents and in Gelasius his Time that is in the Fifth Century and that Epistle of Hildewinus to Lewes the Gentile An. 825. mentioned in Mornay implies the same thing For Hildewinus saith We have still divers very ancient Mass-Books almost consumed with extreme Age containing the Order of the Gallican Service which was used from the time that the Faith was first received in this part of the West until we admitted the Roman Order (r) Hildevinus Abb. praefat ad opera Dionys Areop Where we see He not only affirms they had a Form of Service from their first Conversion but that in the beginning of the Ninth Age some of the Copies of that Service were worn out with extreme Antiquity so that probably these Copies were writ in the Sixth Age And from hence we may discern the falshood of my Adversaries Pretence That there were no Service-Books in France before the 8th Century Secondly He affirms That these Books were used at the discretion of him that Officiated But this is as false as the former for we have proved by divers French Canons in the Fifth and Sixth Ages That all the Clergy in one Province were bound to use the same Form of Service which was used by their Metropolitan And in the Eighth Century Theodulphus Bishop of Orleance enjoyns his Clergy When they came to his Synod to bring their Common Prayer-Books with them and two or three Clerks who assisted them in the celebrating Divine Service that so it might appear hour exactly and diligently they had performed their Duties (s) Theodulph Aurel. Ep. ad Cler. cap. 4. ap Bon. rer Liturg. p. 349. which is a stricter course than is now taken in our Church But my Adversary pretends he hath Evidence for this Liberty out of an ancient Chronicle in Mornay (t) Mornay of the Mass Book I. chap 8. pag. 64. which saith That every one at his pleasure had depraved the Book of Offices by adding and diminishing To which I Reply That these Words are not in Mornay and if they be in the Chronicle of Engolism as the Margen recites them The meaning is plainly this That those who writ out these Forms had depraved them by leaving out some things and putting in others Not that those who used these Books altered or added at their pleasure for he who officiates cannot properly be said to have depraved a Book by not reading it aright it was the Scribes who writ the Copies falsly and variously that had depraved the Old Office so much that it gave a good Pretence to French Kings to bring in the Roman Service Herein therefore he hath no ground for his false Assertion That these Books were used at the discretion of him that did Officiate Thirdly He mistakes again in saying That Charlemaign in the beginning of the Ninth Age reformed them after the Roman guise For first his own Author Mornay affirms That King Pepin for reverence of Pope Steven received the whole Order of Rome and cites two Capitulars for this wherein Charles the Great declares That his Father Pepin first put down the Gallican and set up the Roman Service in France (u) Capit. lib. 1. cap. 80 lib. 5. cap. 219. in Mornay ut supr pag 64. Now Pope Steven died An. 755. which is near Fifty years before the Ninth Age began Moreover the Centuriators out of Sigebert and divers ancient Historians tell us That it is apparent there was a different way of Singing in the Roman and the Gallican Churches till Pepin upon his being made King of France by the Pope brought in the Roman Rites and way of Singing into the Gallican Church (w) Magdebur Cent. 8. cap. 6. pag. 342 343. Now this was in the year 751. that is in the midst of the Eighth Age. 'T is true Charles the Great did go on with the same work but then it was before the beginning of the Ninth Age which is the Period that my Adversary assigns to this Matter For finding still that some Churches kept up the Old way of Singing he sent two Clerks to Rome to learn there the Authentic way of Singing and they first taught the Church of Metz and then all France (x) Magdeb. ibid Sigeb Chron. An. 774. But this was in the year 774 Six and twenty years before the Ninth Age began Again He owns this Uniformity was brought in by his Father Pepin and enjoyns it once more (y) Capitul Franc. Tom. I. in Cap. An. 788. pag. 203. about the Year 788. The next Year in another Capitular Charles the Great obliges the Monks also to follow that Roman Order of Singing which his Father appointed when he put down the Old Gallican way (z) Capitul ibid. An. 789. cap. 78. p. 239. In the same year also was this Law made That the Clergy should have Orthodox Books very well Corrected lest those who desire to pray to God aright by Ill written Books should ask amiss and therefore none was to write out the Gospel the Psalter or Missal but a Man of mature Age (a) Capitul ibid. Tom. I. cap. 70. p. 237. And finally The last Persons sent from Rome about compleating this Uniformity were Adrian's two Chanters who came into France An. 790 (b) Magdeb. Cent. 8. cap. 6. pag. 343. Sigebert An. 790. Wherefore he is out in his Chronology as to this Matter because the Roman Order was brought into the Gallican Church by Pepin first and then universally setled there by Charles the Great before the Ninth Age began But to let that pass it is certain there was no more liberty allowed to any Ministers in the Gallican Church before the Roman Offices came in there than there was afterward because it is plain they had a Liturgy before imposed strictly by divers Canons of several Councils and while that Gallican Office was in Force the Clergy were as much bound to use those Forms as they were to use the
descended so low but since his Fancy for a bad Cause puts him upon these poor shifts I was not willing to leave any thing that might amuse a common Reader But now as to these later Ages the Point is clear certain and undeniable that Liturgies were every where imposed and no Church permitted its own Clergy to vary from their own way It is true many Corruptions and Superstitions in these Ages crept into the Liturgies of all Churches but they grafted still upon the old Stock kept the Primitive way of Praying Yea retained so many of the ancient and pure Forms as do frequently confute divers of these Corruptions and Innovations So that it is no difficult thing to disprove many of the Romish Modern Opinions by some parts of their ancient Missals but that is not my busisiness It is sufficient to my purpose that I have made it Evident there were prescribed Forms used in the public Service even from the beginning of Christianity and that the way of Serving God by Liturgies was the Practice of all Regular Churches and had the Approbation of all Eminent Fathers and of very many Councils all along in every Century since the time of the Apostles and from the beginning of setling Christianity CHAP. IV. Of the Arguments against the Antiquity of LITVRGIES THERE are some things relating to the Antiquity of Prescribed Forms and Liturgies which are dispersed up and down my Adversary's Book and would not easily be brought under the order of Time in the History and yet must be considered that no Scruple may remain concerning this great Truth And though some of these have been briefly examined before yet we will here put them together and give a fuller Answer to all that looks like an Objection § 1. First He thinks to disprove the ancient use of Prescribed Forms by affirming That of old they had no more but a certain Order wherein divers Churches agreed to administer the several Parts of Worship particularly the Severals in the Sacrament so as each had its known and fixed place This he finds in many Fathers and he saith the 19th Canon of Laodicea An. 365. was a Rule for this Order (f) Disc of Lit. pag. 4 5. which elsewhere he makes to be no more than a Rubric or a Directory (g) Ib. pag. 174. But this should have been proved not only by the word Ordo which we have shewed signifies a Liturgy containing not only the Method but the very Forms themselves He should have produced some such ancient Rubric or Directory which had nothing but the Method of the several Parts of Divine-Service without any Forms For we have produced Liturgies at least as ancient as that Canon of Laodicea viz. That of Jerusalem and that in the Apostolical Constitutions having all the Forms at large and if he cannot shew one of these Directories he only dreams of such a thing Now though it be hard to make out a Negative yet we may go far to prove there was no such thing distinct from a Liturgy For these Severals in the Sacrament were Prayers Intercessions Giving of Thanks Prefaces Hymns and the like Now these must be called by some distinguishing Names in this pretended Rubric and that they could not well be unless they were Forms Now if the Severals were all Forms as the Prefaces and Hymns certainly were then they might have proper Names for each of them and might easily describe them by some of the first words as Our Father Lord have mercy Lift up your Hearts c. and then if the Forms were known by those short Names that makes this Rubric become a shorter Liturgy Besides He tells us This Order was certain and agreed on by several Churches and made some kind of Vniformity among them in praying for the same things But it is hard to conceive how Extempore Prayers could be agreed on by distant Churches to be used in one certain Order or how this agreement could produce Uniformity if the Words of the Prayers every where differed and the Phrases in the same place daily varied No Canons of Councils not written Rule nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can suffice to make an Uniformity out of such diversity He finds but one Canon till the beginning of the Sixth Age to direct this Order viz. the 19th Canon of Laodicea and that is a very short one which only mentions Six Prayers as known by their proper Names therefore to be sure that Canon was not all the Rule the Church had for this Agreement and Uniformity And for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was that which the Deacon lifted up at the end of every Collect when the Bishop or Priest came to say Through Jesus Christ our Lord to give Notice to the People to say Amen or to make some Response And sometimes to call them off from their Knees to joyn in Hymns or the like which supposes known Forms when so slight a Signal served a great Congregation to make them ready for all Parts of the Service in which they had any share Therefore there must be more to make this Uniformity in distant Churches and in very large Congregations and that was Prescribed Liturgies which we have made out to be much elder than his imaginary Rubric or Directory But for once let us suppose That they had in those Early Ages no more than some Canons or Written Rubric prescribing and enjoyning the certain Order of the several Parts of Worship and this so exact as to make divers Churches agree to pray for the same things and in the same Method Would not this be as much an abridgment of the Liberty which is claimed and a stinting of the Spirit as if the Words were prescribed If Ministers then had the Gift of Prayer could not that one Spirit which inspired them teach them the Order and Method as well as the Words and Phrases Would not this Gift have made them as Uniform as Written Canons or Rubrics and rendred a Directory as needless as a Liturgy It must be so unless my Adversary will say the only use of the Spirit is to furnish Men with Phrases and Expressions in Prayer but that he cannot say without contradicting himself and blaspheming the Spirit because he saith God minds not so much the Expressions as the inward Affections (h) Disc of Lit. pag. 132. and proves this by a Set of Golden-Sayings out of the Fathers (i) Ibid. pag. 50. Wherefore at this rate the Gift of Prayer would only enable Men for that part of our Prayer which God doth not much mind So that this imaginary Order of his devised to protect the Gift of Praying Extempore overthrows it as much as a Common-Prayer-Book And if he could make it out Wise Men could not but see That so soon as there was need to agree upon his sort of Order and to write down the Method and the Things to be prayed for so soon the Gif of Prayer was ceased and so soon
Gift of Prayer was so far from making Liturgies to be useless that it really was the first ground and Original of them being Forms first endited by the Spiritual and Inspired Men in the Apostolical Age and Transmitted down to us by their Successors For which reason we ought to Reverence Ancient and Primitive Forms many of which as will be proved are yet in our Liturgy far before those Extempore Prayers made by a pretended Gift which hath been ceased above 1300 years And if we compare the proper Phrases acurate Method and judicious well-weighed Composure of our Forms with the impertinence Tautologies Hesitation and Confusion so visible in their Extempore Prayers we shall be convinced that the latter cannot proceed from the Spirit of God nor ought to come in Competition with our excellent Forms And this may suffice for the Scripture Period which gives great Reputation to Liturgies and no Countenance to such as now pretend to Extempore Prayers CHAP. I. Of Liturgies in the first Century § 1. This first Period is very obscure because the Bishops and Pastors being almost wholly employed in converting the Nations did write very little and scarce any thing of that which they did write is come to our Hands So that we cannot expect much evidene for Liturgies in this Century wherein however this Author could find nothing that made against them and so hath past it over in silence but we shall observe â—â—â—lo judaens Ann. Dom. 60. First That Philo and Josephus do both so describe the Essenes that not only Eusebius of Old but divers learned Men of these Ages believe them to have been Christians or however that the first Christians exactly imitated their Rites (o) Philo de vit Contemplat Joseph bell jud lib. 2. cap. â— Euseb hist lib. 2. cap. 16. Among which was this to rise before the arising of the Sun and to Worship God by certain Prayers received from their Fore-fathers as Josephus tells us Now these Prayers could be no other than Forms because they were delivered down to them from their Fathers Philo also relates that they had a Choir of two sides singing alternately so that when one had begun to Sing the rest answered him by repeating the ends of the Verses in imitation of those at the Red Sea Now this way of alternate Singing must be by some prescribed and known Forms or else the Choir could never answer one another Yet these kind of Prescribed Hymns sung in this manner Eusebius here calls The Hymns used among us Christians (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb And that excellent Historian labours to prove these Essenes were Christians by this Argument among some others because they Prayed and Sung Hymns in set Forms early in the Morning as the Christians use to do Wherefore Eusebius who knew the first Age better than we did believe this at least that the Christians then had Forms of Prayer and Praise which are the main parts of a Liturgy Secondly Clemens Romanus Clemens Romanus An. Dom. 90. in his Genuine Epistle to the Corinthians for we need not cite any spurious Tracts intimates they then had a Liturgy for he saith We ought to do all those things in order which our Lord hath Commanded us to perform viz. To Celebrate our Oblations and Liturgies at certain times and a little after Let every one of you in his Order offer his Eucharist to God keeping a good Conscience with all Gravity and not Swerving from the Determined Rule of his Ministration (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epist ad Corinth edit Oxon. 1669. pag. 92. which Golden Remain of true primitive Antiquity shews that the public Service was then performed in order by our Lords own Command and that there was a determined Rule for the Administrations from which no Man might swerve which Rule being mentioned by this Writer who was a Companion to the Apostles could be setled by none but by our Lord himself or at least by the Apostles And if our Adversaries say this was only a Method not a prescribed Liturgy I râ—ply they cannot prove this and yet if they could supposing they needed an order even while the Gifts of Prayer and Inspiration remained when these are ceased the Church may well be supposed to stand in as much need of prescribed Forms now as they did of a determined Order then Pâ—â—nâ—â—â—uaâ—â—r An. Dom. â—3 § 2. Soon after this we have an account of the Christian Worship from the Pen of Pliny who Writ to the Emperor Trajan what he had extorted by Methods of Severity from some of that profession viz. That the Christians used to meet on a certain day before it was Light and alternately sang an Hymn to Christ as God bâ—â—ding themâ—elves by a Sacrament not to any wicked thing but that they would not Steal nor Rob nor commit Adultery nor break their Faith nor with-hold the Pledge (r) Carmenque Christo quasi Deo dicere secum in vicem Plin. lib. 10. ep Now if we remember Pliny was a Roman and a Heathen we must suppose him to speak in their Phrases and among them Carmen dicere was to repeat a Prayer in a set form of Words Vossius saith it was called Carmen though it were not Sung for the Romans called every thing Carmen which was in a set form of Words (s) Vossius comment in dictam Epist Plin. pag. 47. Brissonius also informs us That they Prayed to the Gods Solenni Carmine with a set Form of Words (t) Brisson de formul p. 97. and that the Prayer for the Comitia was called Solenne Carmen The solemn Prayer though it were not composed by any Poetick measures (u) Id. ibid. pag. 137. And Livy speaks of the Solemn Form of Prayer in the same Phrase (w) Solenne Carmen precationis Liv. lib. 39. cap. 15. Wherefore since Pliny uses the Word Dicere and not Canere he may well be thought to have meant They said a Prayer to Christ as God in a set Form of Words Yet because Tertullian when he cites this passage Paraphrases it by Singing to Christ and to God (x) Ad canendum Chr sto Deo Tertul. Ap. cap. 2. We will allow it to be Expounded of an Hymn but even so since it was sung alternately it is certain it must be a prescribed Form and since Christians were to Sing as well as to Pray by the Spirit we may be sure Forms are no hindrance to the Spirit because if they were it would be as unlawful to Sing as they pretend it is to Pray by a Form We also add that this account exactly agrees with that of the Essenes both in their beginning before Sunrising and their Singing by Turns Wherefore since those Essenes had Forms of Prayer as well as praise we must conclude the Christians had so also And we must either suppose that Pliny gave a very imperfect account of the Christian worship and absurdly imagine that
one thing in this Canon which makes it more than probable that the Prayers for the Faithful were Forms and that is the Reason why as this Canon speaks they dismissed the Catechumens which seems to be for fear by daily hearing these Forms they should remember the Phrases of these Mysteries and discover them to profane and common Ears For if these Prayers had been Extempore and the Phrases varied every day as my Adversary pretends the Catechumens might safely have stayed there it being impossible they should so learn or remember those various Expressions as to relate them to any body after they were gone home Finally Why should we not believe this Order was the Method of the public Forms of Prayer there being the same Order exactly observed in all those Ancient Forms which are extant at this day and not one word that intimates any such thing as an Extempore Prayer or frequent variation of the Forms either in this Council or in any Father or Council about this time And this may suffice for these Canons which after all his shuffling Objections are good Evidence for a stated Liturgy in this Age. Optatus Milev An. Dom. 368. § 10. Optatus Milevitanus though he writ on a different Subject yet he hath divers Expressions which suppose and imply that there was in his time a Liturgy used in Africa For he mentions the Peoples joyning with the Priest in the Divine Service and blames the Donatists for shutting the mouths of all Christian Nations and forcing all the People to be silent (u) Optat. Milev lib. 2. pag. 47. which shews they used alternate Singing and Responses among the Orthodox and that Method cannot be but by Form Yea he declares there were some certain Words so established and enjoyned by Law in the celebration of the Sacrament that the Donatists themselves could not pass them by (w) Illud legitimum in Sacramentorum mysterio praeterire non posse Id. ibid. pag. 53. and from their using these Words he draws an Argument against their Schism which he could not have done if they had not been fixed and a Set Form My Adversary mistakes this passage and fancies that Optatus refers to the Prayer of Consecration which could never be omitted (x) Discourse of Liturgy p. 61. but the holy Father explains himself in the same Page and shews us that he means the Prayer For the Holy Catholic Church You say saith Optatus that you offer for that One Church which is diffused over the whole World (y) Offerre vos dicitis pro una Ecclesia quae sit in toto terrarum orbe diffusa Optat. ibid. Thus he saith the Orthodox prayed and this was so established that the Donatists in this exceeding our Dissenters that they had not thrown off the Churches Forms could not omit it And thus the Learned Fr. Baldwin expounds it He means saith he that Solemn Form of the Canonical Prayer in which it is said We offer unto thee this Sacrifice for that One Church which is diffused over all the World (z) Fr. Bald. notis in Optat. pag. 185. Which Words also are in the Mystical Prayer set down by the Author of the Apostostolical Constitutions (a) Constit Apostol lib. 8. cap. 13. cap 18. and are found with little variation in that very Prayer in all the ancient Liturgies Now by Legitimum Optatus cannot mean that these Words were enjoyned by the Law of Christ because this Form being not enjoyned by any Scripture therefore it must signifie a Form enjoyned by the Laws of the Church which in that Age did so strictly enjoyn this very Prayer that it seems None might omit or pass it by And there is another Form of Ecclesiastical Appointment in the same Author brought in with the same Preface You cannot omit saith he again to the Donatists that which is established by Law for certainly you say Peace be with you (b) Et non potuistis praetermittere quod legittimum est utique dixistis Pax vabiscum ic lib. 3. pag. 73. Now this was the Form of Episcopal Benediction we have it in all old Liturgies and it is plain by Optatus his raising an Argument from these Words That the African Church had them in their Liturgy which was so firmly established that none could omit any part of it No not so much as alter the order For Optatus again saith After you have absolved the Penitents presently you turn to the Altar and cannot omit the Lords Prayer (c) Mox ad altare conversi Dominicam Orationem praetermittere non potestis Idem lib. 2. pag. 57. So that the very order of repeating the Lord's Prayer at the Altar in the beginning of the Prayers for the Faithful which was but of Ecclesiastical Institution could not be changed Moreover we find in Optatus That there was a Rumor spread upon the coming of some from the Emperour that Alterations would be made in the Communion Service which startled the People but they were quieted again when they saw The Solemn Custom and wonted Rite observed and discerned that nothing was changed added or diminished in the Divine Sacrifice (d) Cum viderent in divinis Sacrificiis nec mutatum quicquam nec additum nec ablasum Id. lib. 3. pag. 75. From whence it appears there was a known Form for the Communion an Office so well understood by the People that they could perceive when it was altered in any particular So that doubtless those Christians were not used to variety of Phrases nor accustomed to the Extempore Man's Fancy to celebrate in a longer or shorter Form as he pleased Again he repeats the very Form of Exorcising those who came to be Baptized (e) Maledicte exi foras Optat. lib. 4. pag. 79. and the Form of the Responses when they renounced the Devil and repeated their Creed at Baptism (f) Id. lib. 5. pag 86 89. And when we put all this together concerning known Forms of Words which could not be altered nor omitted and were enjoyned by Law we may conclude they had a written Liturgy in Africa in his time And it is very probable that this Book of Prayers was one of those Books in the Plural Number which the Donatists as he complains took away from the Holy Altar from whence the Peoples Prayers were wont to be sent up to God (g) Idem lib. 7. pag. 98. And since they had a written Form as the Fore-cited passages shew it is probable that the Liturgy as well as the Bible was then lying upon the Altar Epiphanius An. Dom 369. § 11. We can expect no great account of the Sacred Forms in Epiphanius since he is so very nice in speaking of Mysteries that he will not repeat the Words of our Saviour's Institution but thus expresses them He took these things and giving Thanks said This is that of mine c. (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eâ—â—phan in Anâ—orat p. 432. And he reckons it
a ridiculous thing in the Marcionites to celebrate their Mysteries before the Catechumens (i) Epipâ—au Panar contr Marcion p 136. For his own part he will say no more when he comes to describe the celebration of the Sacraments but this The other Mysteries of the Laver i. e. Baptism and the internal Mysteries i. e. the Eucharist are performed according to the Tradition of the Gospel and of the Apostles only he saith There were in the Church constantly Morning Hymns and Morning Prayers as also Prayers and Psalms at Evening or Candle lighting (k) Id. ibid. prope finem Labri But though he do not tell us what the several Forms were yet we may be assured they used Forms then in the Churches of Cyprus First because they did so in all the other Churches wherewith Epiphanius held Communion Secondly Because he doth so highly commend the Apostolical Constitutions as containing all regular Order and being agreeable to the true and Orthodox way of Worship (l) Epiphan Panar lib. 3. Tom. 1. haer 70. and yet we have seen there is a prescribed Liturgy and complete Forms of Prayer for all occasions set down in those Constitutions Thirdly Because he derides Montanus and other Hereticks for pretending to inspiration and such extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit as were then ceased Now though this being added to other testimonies of this Age be proof sufficient to those that are unprejudiced that Epiphanius allowed and used Set Forms of Hymns and Prayers yet our Adversary hath picked up a passage out of an Epistle of his Recorded by S. Hierom and extant only in Latin to prove that the Prayer for all Estates of Men in the Communion Office was not a prescribed Form because when Epiphanius was accused for Praying in that part of the Office for John Bishop of Jerusalem thus O Lord grant that John may believe aright he is not very sure what Words he used nor doth appeal to any certain Form and thence he concludes there was no Set Form for this Prayer in the time of Epiphanus (m) â—isc of Lating pag. â—2 63 c. And this Argument he triumphs in extremely To which I shall now reply That if all he supposes were true the act of one single Bishop upon an extraordinary occasion would not weigh down all the Evidence we have produced to the contrary and if so Eminent a Bishop as Epiphanius upon so great an occasion as a Metropolitan 's falling into Heresy had altered two or three Words of the usual Form this will not prove that the inferior Clergy were always left at liberty to Pray Extempore yet that is the liberty this Author pleads for But Secondly The very accusation which John of Jerusalem brings against Epiphanius strongly supposes there was a known Form by which they prayed for the great Bishops and that made his varying from it to be easily discerned and ill taken And Thirdly The answer of Epiphanius clears the matter For he first denies that he used those Words which were charged on him saying it would have been a rude thing to use such an expression of that Bishop in public though he owns he always prayed so for him in his Heart And Secondly He doth appeal to the public Forms and so tells him what Words he did use for he saith when we make that Prayer according to the Communion Office we say for all Bishops and for you also Keep him who Preacheth the Truth Or certainly thus Hear us Lord and keep him that he may Preach the Word of Truth as the occasion required and as the Office for Prayer directed (n) Quando autem complemus orationem secundum ritum Mysteriorum pro omnibus pro te quoque dâ—cimut custodi illum qui pradicat veritatem Vel certè ita Tu praesta Domine custodi ut ille verbum pradicit veritatis sicut occasio Sermonis se tulerit habuerit Oratio consequentiam Epist Epiphan ad Johan Hieros ap D. Hieron The right understanding of which Answer depends upon observing three things First That he affirms he performed this Prayer secundum ritum mysteriorum according to the usual Office for the Sacrament had the Greek been extant probably there it would have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secondly That he saith it was one of the two ways mentioned as occasion required habuerit oratio consequentiam now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is literally translated here Consequentiam signifies an Order prescribed So that we must observe that there are two Prayers in Epiphanius his friend the Author of the Constitutions which are Forms by which they there pray for the Bishops at the time of the Sacrament (o) Constit Apostol lib. 8. cap. 13. cap. 18. Item in Liturg. D. Jacobi semel In Liturg. D. Basil â—is orant pâ—o Episcopis ut recte tractent verbum veritatis the Sense of both Forms being much of the same with what Epiphanius saith he prayed but the Words are somewhat different And very likely the Forms for Hierusalem and Cyprus were also two and had both these ways prescribed Custodi illum c. and Tu praesta Domine So that Epiphanius who strictly kept to the Words of his Form to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Liturgy is confident he never prayed for John of Jerusalem but one of these ways either the former way in the beginning or the latter way in the midst of the Communion Service For Thirdly Had he taken that liberty which my Adversary pleads for and prayed Extempore or varied the Phrase dayly he could not be so confident that he never had used those Words which John of Jerusalem here charges him with Nor could he have been certain as we see he is that he did use one of these two Phrases each being part of a distinct Form in that Office So that this passage doth not disprove but confirm the use of a Liturgy by Epiphanius § 12. Greg. Nazianzen An. Dom. 370. We have very little in Gregory Nazianzen concerning Liturgy for he was very strict in requiring that none of the Christian Mysteries should be divulged to strangers and the most considerable of his works are Sermons made in the Church before the Catechumens went out so that there he is very cautious of publishing the Forms of Divine worship (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazianz. Orat. 40 p. 672 Item Orat. 42. pag. 687. c. Yet that passage concerning the Apostate Julians designing to imitate the Christians in their way of serving God and so making a Form of Prayers in part for his Pagan Temples which is related by Nazianzen (q) See before §. 8. An. 361. shews that in his time the Christian worship was performed by Forms of Prayer which had Responses and of which the People bore a part And we may be assured of two things First That this way of worship was more ancient than Julians time for he would not have
mentions that so famous Form of Holy Holy Holy which the Greek call Trisagion (u) Id libr. de XLII Mansionibus And he speaks of the Morning and Evening Hymns wherewith God was delighted (w) Id. Com. in Psal 64. Tom. 7. pag. 158. Now it is certain all these were Forms of Praise and yet if these Christians had not sung them with the Spirit God would not have been delighted with them and therefore we may praise God devoutly acceptably and with the Spirit in and by Forms as S. Hirom and the holy Men and Women in his time did Nor have we less Evidence that they prayed by Forms For he occasionally mentions two Passages of their Litany The Church saith From thy remembring the Sins of our Forefathers (x) Hieron Com. in Psal 38. where Good Lord deliver us or the like must be added to make up the Sentence So again he tells us It is the Voice of the Church and he wishes God would hear her when she cries O Lord grant us thy Peace (y) Id ad Rustic ep 4 pag. 49. which very Phrase we know is used in all the ancient Litanies therefore he must refer to those public Forms when he cites those Words as the Voice of the Church As to the Communion Service no Man can doubt but that the People used there daily to repeat the Words of the Lords Prayer as a Form who considers that he saith Our Saviour taught his Apostles to appoint the Faithful every day in the Sacrifice of his Body to say Our Father c. (z) Idem adv Pelag. lib 3. pag. 469. He also calls the Prayer of Consecration The Solemn Prayer (a) Id Com. in Zeph. cap. 3. Tom. 5. p. 489. Now we shewed before that PRECES SOLENNES were always in a Set Form of Words He also mentions that Universal Form of receiving the Holy Sacrament and immediately saying Amen (b) Id. ad Theophil ep 62. Tom. 2. p. 270. which being used in the Eastern Churches in Africa and at Milan and prescribed by the ancient Offices of those several Churches those who followed them in this Rite probably did so in the rest of that Office Again It is evident from him that those who were Baptized were asked the very Words of the Apostles Creed (c) Idem adv Lucif Tom. 2. pag. 189. and he frequently refers to the Form of Renunciation there used Now considering S. Hierom did not write purposely of Liturgy these occasional Passages may suffice to shew us there was a Public Form used in his time and as we noted He commends S. Hilary for making a Liturgy and Book of Hymns (d) Hieron Catal. script in Hilario p. 378. and therefore could not dislike prescribed Forms yea Durandus doth not only say That he made an Order for reading the Scripture as our Adversary would have it (e) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 7â— but his Words are He appointed what Psalms Lessons Epistles and Gospels should be read every day cantum ordinavit magna ex parte that is He ordered many of the Forms of Prayer and Praise both which were chanted or sung in Durandus his time (f) Durand â—ational lib. â— cap. 1. sol 89. And he means no more but this which S. Gregory had Recorded before That the Missal of the Roman Church was corrected and set in order by S. Hierom in Pope Damasus his Time From whence we infer that S. Hierom was not like our Adversary for rejecting Liturgies but correcting them and sending them to such Bishops as had Authority to impose them Our Adversary though he pretends to have searched Antiquity very diligently could find nothing in S. Hierom which shewed the use of Forms and it seems he could discover but one Passage in him to urge against the use of them and it is a very slight one viz. That S. Hierom censures and reproves the Deacons because in the Offertory at the Communion they recited publicly the Names of such as offered and the Sums which they either gave or promised Now this Custom he thinks was not prescribed and therefore he infers that those who officiated were left to their Liberty to use what Expressions they thought sit (g) Disc of Liturg. p 65 66. ex Hieron Com. in Ezek xviii in Jer. xi To which I Reply That it hath been proved before there was a prescribed Form to pray for all Estates of Men and in this Collect they commemorated such Eminent Persons as died in the True Faith whose Names were read out of the Dypticks and this was a certain written Form which no Priest might alter Here also they mentioned the Names of such as had Offered at the Communion even from S. Cyprian's time who orders the Writing down and commemorating the Names of such as had contributed to redeem Captives (h) Cypr. Ep. 60. Epist 66. But the Names of these living Offerers varied every day and the Church could no more prescribe these Names than ours can prescribe what Sick shall be prayed for or what Christian Names shall be used in the Matrimonial Office And this miserable Logician may as well prove our Ministers are left to their liberty to use what Expressions they please in the general Prayer for the Sick because in some Churches they name twenty new Names there in one day Or in the Office of Matrimony because they put in William and Mary or John and Elizabeth as to pretend that the General Collect in the Primitive Church was not a prescribed Form from the Priests varying the Names of the Offerers As for their mentioning the Sums offered that was a Corruption no doubt but we see it came in at that part of the Office where the Church was forced to leave the Minister at liberty so that he hath spoiled his own Cause by this Instance which affords us a good Argument against Extempore Prayers and leaving Men at liberty in Divine Offices as being a dangerous Gap to let in Corruptions S. Chrysostom An. 397. § 19. The deservedly Famous S. Chrysostom hath left us so many rare memorials of his Piety and Learning and so many clear Evidences of his affection for Liturgies that he alone might be a sufficient Witness if our Adversary were not pertinacious And this Author is so dazeled with the brightness of his Testimonies that he grants enough to shew that Public Forms were used in his Time and approved by him though still according to the custom of his Party he denies they were used in this or the next Age holding the Conclusion when he is forced to quit the Promisses For he grants First That the Lord's Prayer is called by S. Chrysostom That Prayer which was established by Law and brought in by Christ (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys hom 2. in 2 Cor. And that the very Words of it were taught to the Baptized and the Form it self repeated in the Daily Service of the
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
them repeated Again he cites this Father to prove that those who were Baptized were taught the Words of the Lords Prayer (u) Isid lib 4. ep 24. Disc of Lit. pag. 2. Which shews that Forms were not held unlawful in that Age. But if my Adversary had not been obliged to keep back all that makes for Liturgies it is not easy to be imagined why he should never mention that Famous Epistle which Isidore Writ on purpose to expound that old piece of Liturgy Pronounced by the Bishop in the public Forms as we saw in the Constitutions S. Chrysostom and others that is Peace be with you unto which as Isidore tells us the people answered and with thy Spirit (w) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isid lib. 1. ep 122. This Form so well explained by this Father gives us reason to believe that the rest of those Liturgies wherein this known Form is found were used in his time and that when he advises a Clergy-Man not to abuse the Holy Liturgy (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. lib. 1. ep 313. he means that he ought not to profane and desecrate the sacred Forms by a most unholy Life and Conversation especially since he was not only a Scholar of S. Chrysostoms who made a Liturgy but also tells us (y) Id. lib. 1. ep 90. that the Women in his time Sung their part of the Church Service and when they were deservedly Excommunicate they were not all wed this great Priviledge which sufficiently shews there were Forms prescribed in his days wherein all the People had their share § 4. His Contemporary was the Learned Synesius Synesius An. Dom. 412. who lived also in the same Country he was bred among the Gentile Philosophers and not Converted till he was come to be of a good Age So that he had learned before he became a Christian what silence and secrecy was due to Mysteries and therefore he furnishes my Adversary with divers Passages concerning the Heathens care to conceal them (z) Disc of Lit. pag. 34. but since he hath owned the Pagans writ their Mysteries down He must not conclude that the Christians had no written Prayers in this Age wherein they called them Mysteries for though they were concealed from the Infidels and Uninitiated they were daily used among the Faithful And that they were Forms prescribed hath been fully proved However though we cannot expect that Synesius should write down the Sacred Words in his Books or Epistles which might fall into common or profane Hands yet there are intimations in him that there were Forms of Prayer in his time and long before For when he speaks of the Worship of God he saith The Sacred Prayers of our Fore-fathers in the holy Mysteries do cry unto that God who is above all not so much setting forth his Power as reverencing his Providence (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Synes de Regno pag. 9. Now these Sacred Prayers could not be Extempore since they were delivered down to them by their Fore-fathers therefore they must be ancient Forms Extempore Devotions are properly our own Prayers but the Prayers of our Fathers are Forms received from the Ages before us Besides we may note that he describes the Service in which these Prayers were used by this Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and elsewhere he styles it The hidden Mysteries (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes Ep. 57. pag. 194. And Nicephorus his Scholiast explains 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be such things as are mystically delivered both as to the words and actions (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nâ—ceph Scholia id Synes p. 401. That is in a Form of Words and an order of Ceremonies which are the two essential parts of a Liturgy Which Name also we have in Synesius where he is reciting the Injuries done to him by Andronicus for he saith The Devil endeavoured by this Mans means to make him fly from the Liturgy of the Altar (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. 67. p. 193. that is as he explains himself afterwards to make him omit the celebration of the Sacrament and give over reciting the public Offices which were then performed by a Liturgy in all regular Churches And though he be very nice of writing down any of the Forms in his common Writings yet he gives us either the Substance or the Words of one of his Prayers which he used not only in private but in the public Offices viz. That Justice might overcome Injustice and that the City might he purged from all Wickedness (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. Ep. 121. p. 258. Which Passage probably was a part of the Liturgy then used in his Country there being something very like it in other ancient Liturgies which were used elsewhere in that Age. However our Adversary who cites Synesius so often and to no purpose about Mysteries could not or would not see any of these places which shew there were ancient and prescribed Forms in his days Celestinus Ep. Rom. A.D. 423. § 5. Pope Celestine as is affirmed by many Authors ordered the Psalms to be sung in the Communion Office by the whole Congregation in the way of Antiphone (f) Vita Celest ap Bin. Tom. 1. par 1. pag 732. Bena. rerum Liturg. lib. 2. cap. 3. p 502. That is as Isidore expounds it with reciprocal Voices each side of the Choir alternately answering the other (g) Isâ—â—â—r Orig. lib. 6. cap. 19. And Platina adds That he put some particulars into the Offices then in use (h) Platin vita Celest pag. 61. Which shews That the Roman Church was accustomed to Forms in his days Yet my contentious Adversary twice produces this Popes Testimony to shew that in his Time at Rome there was no more than an Order and Uniformity as to the persons and things prayed for but that they did not pray for them in the same Words (i) Disc of Lit. pag 6. p 29. and he cites the same place again to prove that Forms cannot be justified from that Passage (k) Ibid. p. 138. But to manifest his Mistake I will first transcribe and then explain these Words of Celestine from whence he makes this false Conclusion The Words are these Let us look upon the Mysteries of the Priests Prayers which being delivered by the Apostles are uniformly celebrated in all the World and in every Orthodox Church That so the Rule for Praying may fix the Rule of Believing For when the Bishops of the Faithful perform their enjoyned Embassy they plead with the Divine Mercy for all Mankind the whole Church Praying with them They intreat and pray That Faith may be granted to Vnbelievers that Idolaters may be delivered from their impious Errors that the light of Truth may appear to the Jews by the removing of the Veil from their Hearts that Hereticks may repent and receive the Catholic Faith that Schismatics may be revived by the Spirit
to say AMEN when they received the holy Eucharist (p) Prosp de promiss praed par 1. cap. 6. pag. 7. So that my Adversary had no reason to cite him as an Evidence That there was no more but a meer Order of things in his time (q) Disc of Lit. pag. 6. since it is impossible that such an Order could have been uniformly and unanimously observed by all For this liberty of varying Expressions would soon have blundered that Order and made strange differences in the subject Matter as well as the Method of these Prayers Johan Cassianus eod Anno viz. 430. § 7. The Contemporary and Antagonist of Prosper was John Cassian who had been Educated under S. Chrysostom the Author of a Liturgy and was come to live in one of the Gallican Monasteries where he recommended divers of the Eastern Opinions and Practices His Writings indeed are about the private Devotions of Monks in their Cells and Oratories and therefore he hath no occasion to describe the Forms then used in Cathedral or other Churches supplied by the Secular Clergy yet he plainly implies that the public Worship was performed by prescribed Forms and expresly affirms that the Monks used such in their Oratories Hence he calls Our Father The Form of the Lords Prayer (r) Jo. Cassian collat 9. cap. 18. and that Model and Form which was made by the Judge whom we are to intreat (s) Ibid. cap. 24. He also from those words Our daily Bread notes That we ought to use this Prayer every day (t) Ibid. cap. 21. yea he assures us that the Words of it were daily sung in the Church by all the People at which time some Persons who were not in Charity wickedly left out that part of it As we forgive them that trespass against us (u) Nonnulli cum in Ecclest hâ—c Oratio ab universà plebo concinitur hunc locum tacui praetermittunt Ibid. cap. 22. He mentions also that Litany for the Catechumens which was wont to be said by a Deacon the Form of which we have set down before out of his Master S. Chrysostom (w) Id de Spirit Cenod lib. XI cap. 15. He saith That the People sung the Gloria Patri aloud in France after the Psalms and in the East after the Antiphon (x) Id. lib. 2. de Canon noc modo cap. 9. and describes one of his Monks in a Journey going into a Country Church and celebrating the Evening-Office with the accustomed Psalms (y) Id. Collat. 8. cap. 16. As for the Monks Devotions in their Monasteries it is very plain from him that they had prescribed Forms for every hour of the Day and Night in which they met to pray which Forms Cassian calls The Offices of the Canonical Prayer (z) Id. de Candiurn Oration lib. 2. cap. 12. and The Canonical Mass (a) Ibid. lib. 3. cap. 3. Which word Missa doth not signifie in him as it doth now at Rome The Communion-Office but any prescribed Service consisting of a certain number of Psalms with Prayers intermixed after the recital of which they were dismissed Thus he relates how the Egyptian Monks by ancient Tradition repeated at their Hours of Prayer Twelve Psalms distinguished by a Collect placed and used between each Psalm (b) Id. de Candiurn Orat. lib. 2. cap. 5. And for the Psalms they sung them by way of Antiphon putting a melodious Tune to them (c) Id. ib. cap. 2. like our Cathedral-way In France they only sang three Psalms at the Morning-hour for Prayer (d) Id. ib. lib. 3. cap. 4. and answered Hallelujah at no other Psalms but those which began with Hallelujah (e) Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 11. But so little did they affect Variety that they sung the same Psalms at the same Hours of Prayer viz. O God thou art my God early will I seek thee with some others (f) Ibid. lib. 3. cap. 3. And there were not only certain Psalms appointed for the several Hours in all Churches (g) Ibid. lib. 3. cap. 6. But the Forms of Prayer both for Morning and Night were the very same (h) Sed eodem ordine missam quo prius in nocturnis conventibus celebratam Id. ibid. excepting only some which were appropriate to the Season But neither in them nor any other of these Monastick Prayers did these holy Monks pretend to exercise any Gift of Prayer to shew how long they could hold out in one long-winded Address to God No he saith They utterly disliked such long Prayers and thought the short Prayers which they frequently intermixed with their Psalms were far more profitable (i) Utiliùs censent breves quidem Orationes creberrimas fieri Id. ibid. lib. 2. cap. 10. Which were not only like the short Collects in our Liturgy but in Cassian's Time bore that Name because in them the Minister collected that which was sit for the Congregation to desire into one of these brief Forms which they all said together with him and none were allowed then to be putting up any private Prayers (k) Id ib. lib. 2. cap. 8. Finally The ancient Fathers whom he so much admires were such lovers of holy Forms that when they directed a Monk how to pray always they ordered him to use this Form O God make speed to save us O Lord make haste to help us (l) Id. Collat. 10 cap. 10. p. 848. which was then and is still the Preface to the Western Office for public Assemblies It would be too tedious to remark upon all these Instances which are so plain Proofs of the use of Forms of Prayer and Praise in the Service of God both in and long before Cassian's Time that my Adversary in his very diligent search of Antiquity foreseeing he could no way evade them thought it his safest way to overlook them and therefore he scarce ever cites this Author Concil 3. Oec Ephesinum An. Dom. 431. § 8. In the Acts of the Third General Council at Ephesus we have also many Evidences of Liturgick Forms both of Praise and Prayer For in them we read That when the Messenger from the Orthodox Fathers there arrived at Constantinople with their Letter to the Emperour the Monks went with him in a Body to the Palace Singing of Antiphones (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in â—â—sâ—râ— Constaâ— Bin. Tom. l. par 2. pag. 289. which those who stayed at the Gate continued to Sing till the rest came out with the Emperours Answer and then all went in Procession to the Church of S. Mochus and sang the Last Psalm (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. pag. 290. By which we see they were so constantly used to praise God by Forms of Antiphones and Psalms that even in the Streets they could perform this Office and the very People by long Custom could also sing their part with them In the same place it is Recorded of one eminent Monk named Dalmatius
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
when the New-fashion Directory ha◠got possession of a Mans fancy he may dream that an Order or an Ordinal mus◠needs signifie some such thing Voconius Episc Musaeus Presb. Marscil An. Dom. 458. § 12. It was in the same Country and much about the Time of this Council that Voconius a Bishop and Musaeus a Priest of Marseilles did Compose very famous Volumes of Sacraments and Offices as Gennadius who lived also at Marseilles and flourished not above 30 years after this doth testifie (x) Gennad lib. de Script Eccl. in Musaeo Which still confirms my Observation That upon this Second Conversion of France after the Northern Pagans had overspread it the most Learned and Eminent of the Clergy began to reduce the several Provinces to one Form of Divine Service For it was not long after that the eloquent Bishop of Auvergne Sidonius Apollin Ep. Avern An. Dom. 472. Sidonius Composed a Book of Masses that is as the Phrase then signified a Book of Forms of Prayer c. (y) Vid. vit Sidonii praefix oper and Gregory of Tours who writ his History in the next Century tells us That he had written a Preface to this Liturgy and published it as Sidonius had reform'd it (z) Greg. Turon lib. 2. cap. 22. And not long before this viz. about the Year 458 Mamercus Bishop of Viennè had set up the use of Litanies after the manner of the Eastern Church ordering all the People with Fasting and great Devotion to use them in a public Procession when they were pressed with heavy Calamities (a) Greg. Turon lib. 2. cap. 34. Sidon Epist lib. 7. ep 1. And Sidonius tells us That there were Litanies used in the Gallican Church before but they were not said with that fervency vigour and frequency no nor with such strict Fasting as Mamercus had appointed (b) Sidon lib. 5. ep 14. And therefore as the Diocess of Viennè had been delivered by this devout use of the Litany so he thought fit to appoint it should be repeated in the same manner in his City when the Goths broke into that Province From which Relation we learn That Litanies were used in France before this Age though not with so much devotion and success and therefore we must by no means think Mamercus was the first Author of these Prescribed Forms of public Supplication There is another memorable Passage in the Life of Sidonius which confirms the general use of Written Forms in his Time which is That being to celebrate a Festival in his Church some wicke◠persons had stollen away the Book by which he was wont to Officiate but h◠was so ready a Man that even without Book he went through the whole Office for the Feast to the wonder of all the Congregation who thought he spake rather like an Angel than a Man (c) Vit. Sidonii Praef. oper Greg. Turon lib. 2. cap. 22. Now here we have express Testimony of a Common-Prayer which this excellent Bishop was wont to use and it seems it was a Wonder in this Age to see any Clergy-man perform the public Office without a Book which could not have been strange if my Adversaries way of Extempore Prayer had been usual For if every Bishop and Priest as he pretends had daily prayed without Book it had been ridiculous to have written this as a singular Excellency in Sidonius to be able to repeat the Office by the strength of his Memory without that Book which used to guide him therein And if it be Objected That this Relation seems rather to suppose he made a new Office Extempore I Reply That still makes out my Assertion Since it could not be the common way to pray on the sudden because it was thought almost a Miracle in Sidonius to do so therefore other Clergy-men generally used written Forms and made use of Common-Prayer-Books as we do now The same Sidonius tells us in one of his Epistles That the Monks and the Clergy celebrated the Vigils together with the Chanters of Psalms in Tunes which they sang alternately (d) Sidon lib. 5. ep 17. And it was in his Time as that Historian remarks they used to sing the Antiphons in the Church of S. Martin at Tours (e) Greg. Turon histor pag. 83. Now these were Forms of public Worship and as we have often noted must be either written or however certainly known before to those who make use of them and therefore prescribed Forms were the way by which God was worshiped in this Age Not only in France but also in Africa where Victor relates That it was the Custom at Carthage to bring up Boys in the skill of Music for the public Service of the Church Twelve of which Boys fell into the hands of Hunnericus the Vandal King (f) Victor histor persec Vandal lib. 5. Ad. Dom. 478. Now these Singing-Boys were not capable of bearing a part in the public Service if it had not been in Prescribed Forms Petrus Cnapheus Eplsc An ioc◠An. Dom. 483. § 13. And the same way was continued in the East for Petrus Cnapheus about this Time ordered the Creed to be daily repeated in the public Office at Antioch as my Adversary doth confess (g) Disc of Lit. pag. 102. and other Authors testifie (h) Theod. Lect. lib 2. pag. 189. Bona de rebus Liturg. p 537. And no opposition was made to this it being a known Form as well as the rest of the Service But when the same Bishop being infected with Heresie did attempt to make an addition to the ancient Hymn called the Trisagion and would have put in these Words Which was Crucified for us the People who had been long accustomed to that Orthodox Form delivered down to them from their Fore fathers would not endure it (i) Baron Annal. An 483. p. 381. and when others at Constantinople added this Sentence to the Response as the Chanter was singing the Hymn in the accustomed way there was a very great Tumult made upon that occasion (k) Theodor. Lect. Synops pag 187. Disc of Lit. pag. 2◠compar'd with pag. 25. And here I cannot but wonder at my Adversaries rare dexterity who when he had undertaken to prove that there could be no Liturgies in these Ages because we never read of any change or alterations made in them pag. 25. within two Pages relates The great tumult at Constantinople and the wise which was made through the World by attempting to alter this ancient Hymn Which was an eminent part of the Communion-Service to which the People had been so long used that they soon perceived and highly resented this Alteration of their Sacred Forms Which strongly proves not only that they used prescribed Forms now but had done so long before And as to this very Trisagian he mistakes in saying it was first used in the Time of Theodosius the Younger (l) Disc of Lit. pag. 177. For we have proved by divers Testimonies that
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
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
one Order without the least Variation and that one Order was as we see plainly the Old Spanish Liturgy the very Words of which are yet extant (p) Vid Biâ— Pati Tom. xv ut supr Item Bona de reb Liturg. lib. 1. cap. 11. p. 365. which was that Office whereby all the little Varieties occasioned by diversity of Religion mixture of People and division of Kingdoms were happily taken away for many Ages and this is the true state of this Matter But my Adversary generously undertakes from this very Council and these Canons to prove First That the Spanish Churches at this time were not subject to Imposed Orders for one Form of Worship no not in the Sacraments which were celebrated there not only variously but unduly (q) Disc of Lit. pag. 133. And this he proves by the Preface to this Council which in a detached Sentence saith The Divine Sacraments in the Churches of Spain are celebrated in a different and unlawful manner (r) In Sâ—cramentis â— vâ—nis quâ—â—â—â— verso 〈…〉 medo in Hispaniaâ—um â—â—â—â—sas celebrantur Baâ— Tom. 2. par 2. pag. 345. And this he pretends shews some remaining Ruins of the ancient Liberty even after the Imposing Spirit was rouzed and active But alas the History and Occasion of this diversity shews it was a modern Corruption no ancient Liberty and this very place which he cites calls this diversity Vnlawful as being contrary to the ancient Canons For one Liturgy in one Country was the Old Rule and Original Practice the Variety which yet was no liberty of Praying without Forms was the Innovation yea the same Preface there calls it An Vsurpation assuming licence to it self from Mens negligence contrary to the Ecclesiastical Vsage (s) Quae dum per negligentiam in usum venerunt contra Ecclesiasticos meres â—â—â—â—tiam libi de usur atione 〈…〉 Praelat ibid. 'T is plain they had divers Kings different Creeds and all had been confused for some time past but now they had broke through those unhappy Circumstances they resolve to cast out this seemingly Schismatical and really Scandalous Diversity and reduce all to the ancient Uniformity Secondly he saith One of the first Books for public Service that he meets with is the Libellus Officialis in the 25th Canon of this Council which seems rather a short Directory than a compleat Liturgy given to every Presbyter at his Ordination to instruct him how to Administer the Sacraments lest through ignorance of his Duty herein he should offend (t) Disc of Lit. pag. 15. And to make this out he quotes as usually only half that 25th Canon But the whole Canon is this When Priests are Ordained for Parishes let them receive a Book of Offices from their Bishop that they may succeed in their Cures duly instructed lest by Ignorance in the Divine Mysteries they offend Christ (u) Quando Presbyteri in Parochiis ordinantur libellum Officialem à Sacerdete suo accipiant ut ad Ecclesias sibi deputatas instructi succedant ne per ignorantiam etiam in ipsis divinis Sacramentis Christum offendant ita ut quod Quando ad Litanias vel ad Concilium venâ—rint rationem Episcopo suo reddant qualitâ—r susceptum Officium celebrant vel baptizant Bin. ibid. Can. 25. pag. 351. Here he breaks off but the Canon goes on So that when they come to Litanies or to a Council they may give an account to their Bishop how they have performed the Offices they have undertaken and how they have Baptized This is the Canon entire And to his Objections I Reply First That he did meet with the Codex Gelasianus almost 150 years before this and with Gregory's Ordo Romanus which was made made Thirty year before (w) Disc of Lit. pag. 83. yea he had met with Written Prayers in the Third Council of Carthage An. 398. (x) Ibid pag. 44. And he might have met with a Common-Prayer-Book in Sidonius Apollinaris with Sacerdotalem librum in Vincentius Lirinensis cited before with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Sozomen with a whole Liturgy in the Apostical Constitutions with the Books of enjoyned Prayers in Constantine's Time These and many more Books for public Service he might have met with but that none is so blind as he that will not see He affirms Secondly That the Book of Offices mentioned in this Council was rather a short Directory than a compleat Liturgy But this is to outface the Sun when it is certainly meant of the Mozarabic Office wherein all the Hymns and Prayers are writ out at large And it argues a Mind strangely possessed with the Notion of a Directory to tell us That all those Canons which we cited before viz. Can. 2 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16th and 17th had been needless if those Churches had been furnished with such a Liturgy as provided sufficiently for the Severals there mentioned (y) Disc of laÌ„t pag. 16. For those Canons do all suppose there had been divers Liturgies appointing a various use of those Forms but since now one Liturgy was established as the Second Canon shews they add the Authority of a National Council to that One Order agreed on and forbid all former ways which did in the least vary from it and considering how apt Men are to be tenacious of their own Way which they have long used all these Canons were little enough to secure and restore the ancient Uniformity yea the very Reason given in this 25th Canon why the Bishop delivered this Book of Offices to every Parish-Minister at his Ordination is that they might Officiate by none of the Old Liturgies but by this alone and when these Country-Ministers came to their Bishop either upon occasion of the Grand Procession used when the Litany was publickly said by the whole Clergy of the Diocess or at those Synods which were then held at least once a year Then he might bring this Book along with him to certifie the Bishop that he had used no other Forms but these established in any Offices of his Ministration Now had this been only a Directory according to my Adversaries extravagant Fancy some might offend Christ out of Ignorance by not choosing or making proper Forms and it had been impossible they should all have agreed so exactly in every Office as the Second Canon requires that the People could not observe the least difference To conclude The Fathers of this Council tell us in the 13th Canon That divers Hymns used in the Church were composed by the Ecclesiastical Doctors and if any for that Reason would not use them they must also reject the Forms of Prayer For say they these Hymns are composed as Masses or Supplications or Prayers or Commendations that is Intercessions for all Estates of Men or Impositions of Hands are Composed Which if they might not be said in the Church all Ecclesiastical Offices must cease And therefore they conclude That as none of them did refuse
Concil Emeritan Can. 7. vid. Notas Bin. ut supr pag. 540. And upon the creeping in of some variety about ten Years after that into some lesser Churches The Eleventh Council of Toledo renews the old Canon That all shall Celebrate the public Offices that is Vespers Mattins and Mass as was done in the Mother Church (k) Concil Tol. xi Can. 3. An. 675. Bin. ut supr p. 549. So great was their care to preserve that Uniformity in their Worship which they had restored and Established § 3. Now that other parts of the World kept to their ancient way of serving God as well as Spain Concil Constant in Trullo An. Dom. 680. appears by a Famous Council held at Constantinople in this Century where the Liturgies of S. James and S. Basil are cited for very good Authority against such as were then accounted Heterodox if not Heretical even the Armenians who did not mix Water with their Wine in the Sacrament For when they haved cited Scripture and cleered S. Chrysostom from the aspersion of holding that Opinion They add That both James the Brother of our Lord according to the Flesh who was first placed in the See of Jerusalem and S. Basil the Arch-Bishop of Caesarea whose praise is spread over all the World Delivering to us in writing the way of Mystical Consecration have appointed us in the holy Liturgy to consecrate the sacred Chalice both with Water and Wine (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Constant in Trull Can. 32. Bever Tom. 1. p. 192. Here then we see a great Council accounted the Sixth of the General Councils Twenty years before the year of Christ 700 expresly owning the Liturgies of S. James and S. Basil to have been delivered to them in writing the one by an Apostle the other by an Eminent Bishop who lived above 300 year before this Council And quoting them in dispute with those they accounted very Erroneous which assures us that they not only owned and used these Liturgies themselves but that they had been so long received among them as to gain an Authority in matters of Controversy next to the Holy Scriptures And withal it must be supposed that the Armenians also owned these Liturgies to be ancient genuine and Authentic for if they had thought them to be impostures or inventions of later Ages it had been ridiculous in this Council to press them with Evidence â—aken from Thence Which makes me admire at my Adversaries Confidence who pretends to have searched all Antiquity and yet asks What Greeks they are which own the Liturgy of S. James and tells us he can find no Greek ownning it till 700 years after Christ (m) Disc of Lit. pag. 149. And a litte after These Liturgies were not known nor used before the seventh or eigth Century if they had some Fathers or Councils would have mentioned them (n) Disc of Lit. pag. 150. 151. We see if he had pleased he might have found a whole Council of Greek Bishops and a whole Country of Eastern Christians owning these Liturgies before the year 700. But further we have before shewed that divers Fathers do mention them before this Age And we must here add that a general Council cannot be supposed to cite these Liturgies for Evidence in dispute in the very same Age wherein they were first known and used We must suppose them extremely impudent and their Adversaries strangely soft and easy to fancy such a thing Wherefore this Testimony though produced only in this Age undeniably proves that these Liturgies had been used and owned for many Ages past and that no body in this time doubted of their Authority or Antiquity Ecclesiae Britannieâ—e Saxon. ab An. Dom. 450. § 4. We will now return into the West and as we have given an account of the original of the famous Spanish Liturgy in one intire History So we will now treat of the Liturgies used in Britain France and Germany not tying our selves strictly to the Order of Time that we may put together the scattered Memoirs relating to each of these Countries We shall begin with the British and their imitators the Irish and Scots of whom my Adversary boldly pronounces thus In Ireland with whom the Britons and Scots symbolized we shewed before out of the great Usher that till the Twelfth Century no one general Form of Service was retained but divers Rites and manners of Celebration were observed till the Roman was brought in by the Popes Legates (o) Disc of Lit. p. 134. 135. In which words he refers to a former Quotation which he made out of Bishop Vsher in these words It is sure saith he i. e. B. Usher that in the succeeding Ages no one general Form of Divine Service was retained but divers Rites and manners of Celebration in divers parts of this Kingdom until the Roman use was brought in at last by Gillebertus Malachias and Christianus who were the Popes Legates here about 500 years ago (p) Disc of Lit. p. 88. Usher Relig. of anc Irish Chap. 4. mihi pag. 24. Now hence he infers that the Irish for above 1100 years and the Britains and Scots if not so long yet long after Austin retained such liberty herein as the Church anciently injoyed in all corners of the World In which account he equally wrongs that learned Primate and the Truth it self For Bishop Vsher in the place cited saith concerning Ireland As for the Form of Liturgy and public Service of God which S. Patrick brought into this Country it is said that he received it from Germanus and Lupus and that it originally descended from S. Mark the Evangelist For which he quotes an old Manuscript written neer 900 years ago extant in Sir Robert Cottens Library (q) Usâ—er Relig. oâ— anc Ir sh Chap. 4. p. 24. Which Manuscript is since Printed but very imperfectly in Spelmans Councils and therein it is said That their Form of Liturgy was the same with that which was received by theâ—r Neighbors the Gauls (r) Spâ—â—m Concil Tom. I. An. 80. p. 177 178. and it is there said to have been delivered from Germanus and Lupus and supposed to have come at first from S. Mark Now of this last Point viz. that S. Mark was the Author of the Gallican Liturgy Bishop Vsher seems doubtful and then goes on thus But whatsoever Liturgy was used here at the first this is sure that in succeding Ages no one general Form of Divine Service was retained c. and so goes on in the words cited by my Adversary Who according to his wonted Fraud conceals all that the Primate saith of the ancient Liturgy which he affirms was but one and was brought in by S. Patric both among the Irish and Britons for in the next Page he saith of the Britons That their Form of Liturgy was the same with that which was received by their Neighbors the Gauls is intimated by the Author of that ancient Fragment alledged
Antiq Brit. Eccles pag. 370. An. Dom. 560. Moreover Baleus further tells us That S. Asaph the Scholar and Successor of Kentigern writ a Book Of the Ordinations of his Church (g) Balaeus de script Brit. fol. 34. An. Dom. 590. which seems to be the Forms used there in Ordaining Presbyters and Deacons and perhaps in Admitting of Monks This may suffice to shew us the Britons had written and prescribed Forms before my Adversary will allow them to have been used any where and if any require further satisfaction he may consult the Learned B. Vsher's Antiquity of the British Churches where there are divers Evidences of this Truth We proceed therefore to the Saxons who were Converted by Augustin the Monk about the end of the Sixth Century And He no doubt according to S. Gregory's direction made a Liturgy for them taken out of the Roman the Gallican and other Forms which continued in use for some time But after Gregory's Roman way of Singing began to be so generally admired in all these Parts of the World That was also laboured by Augustin's Successors to be brought in here For Bede mentions one James a Deacon who was skilled both in the Roman and the Canterbury way of Song saying of him That Paulinus leaving York and returning to Rochester left this James behind him in the North who when that Province had Peace and the Number of the Faithful encreased being very skilful in Singing in the Church became a Master of Ecclesiastical Song to many after the way either of Rome or of Canterbury (h) Bedae histor lib. 2. cap. 20. circ A. D. 640. Which must signifie his teaching Clerks how to recite Gregory's or Augustin's Forms of Service because in that Age they chanted their Prayers and Praises both About Thirty years after this in Theodorus his Time They learned to Sing the Office all England over and one Eddi after the aforesaid James was their Master in the Churches on the North of Humber (i) Beda ibid. lib. 4. cap. 2. circ An. 670. And a little after those who Instructed Men in Ecclesiastical Offices are called Masters of Singing (k) Idem lib. 5. cap. 20. because the Offices were set to some certain Notes and that alone is enough to prove they then Prayed by certain prescribed Forms it being impossible to set Arbitrary or Extempore Prayers to Notes which though some have affirmed liable to be Canted yet none ever thought them capable to be Chanted But we proceed I doubt not but the Gregorian Forms as well as his way of Singing came into use here before the Year 700 For in the late elaborare Collection of Old Saxon Books and Manuscripts put out by my Worthy Friend Dr. Hicks there is a Sacramentary of S. Gregory which is at least a Thousand years old (l) Grammatica Maeso-Gothic D. Hick p. 148. and then it must be Written about the Year 690. But this is more plain in the Famous Council of Clovesho which sat 24 year after wherein there is not only clear Testimony for the use of Forms but a full Evidence of the prevailing Interest of the Roman Offices For there it is appointed That All Priests shall learn to repeat the whole Office by Law appointed for their Order and shall be able to interpret the Creed the Lords Prayer and the holy Words pronounced in the Mass into the Vulgar Tongue Can 10th As also That all Priests shall perform all their Offices after the same way and manner Can. 11th And further it is Decreed That the Festivals in memory of our Lord be celebrated in one and the same manner in all Offices belonging to them as to Baptism Administring the Communion and the manner of Singing according to the Written Form which we have received from the Roman Church and that the Festivals of the Martyrs shall be observed on the same day according to the Roman Martyrology with the Psalms and Hymns proper to each of them Can. 13th And finally That the Seven Canonical Hours of Prayer be observed with the proper Psalms and Hymns and that the Monasteries shall all Sing alike and shall neither Sing or Read any thing but what is generally used and is derived from Scripture or permitted by the Custom of the Roman Church that so all may with one Mind and one Mouth glorifie God Can. 15th (m) Concil Clovesho Can. 10 11 13 15. apud Spelm. Concil Tom. l. p. 249. circ An. D. 714. From which Canons it is very plain that the Saxons within one Century after their Conversion had Written Forms of Prayer for all Offices and that the Roman Liturgy was now beginning to be generally received in this Land I shall make but one Remark more in so clear a case which is That Venerable Bede dying on Ascension-day is by ancient Historians said to have repeated the Collect for the Day in these Words O King of Glory and Lord of Hosts who as on this day didst ascend triumphantly into the Heaven of Heavens leave us not comfortless but send us the Promise of the Father even the Spirit of Truth (n) Gul. Malms de gest reg lib. 1. cap. 3. pag. 12. Sim. Dunelm lib. 1. cap. 15. and soon after he gave up the Ghost Now this is the Collect in the Old Roman Forms and is yet continued in our Liturgy almost Verbatim which gives that Collect the honour of having been received in this Nation for near a Thousand years But since my Adversary dares not attempt the Saxons and Spelman's Councils afford so many undeniable Proofs of prescribed and imposed Forms used here from the Time of their Conversion I shall not heap up needless Instances but proceed to the Kingdoms and Churches in France and Germany where the same Order and Method of Praying was observed § 5. I have so fully proved Ecclesia Gallicana ab An. Dom. 450. that there was a Form of Service peculiar to the Gallican Church that I need not have added any thing on that Subject but that my Adversary hath the confidence to say In France they had Books for public Service in the 8th Century yet they were used at the discretion of those that officiated who added and left out as they thought fit till Charlemain in the beginning of the Ninth Age would have them Reformed after the Roman guise And this he proves by a Passage cited out of the Chronicle of Engolism related in Mornay of the Mass (o) Disc of Lit. p. 134. but the whole Story is nothing else but Falshood and Fallacy For First He speaks of Books for public Service in France in the 8th Century as if they had none before Whereas we have made it appear That S. Hilary made a Book of Hymns for the Gallican Church in the Fourth Age An. 354. That Museaus of Marseils composed a Book of Prayers for Consecrating the Sacrament in the Fifth Century An. 458. We have shewed That the Gallican Office which is
old Form which all Agree to be certainly right but it is disputable and uncertain whether any other Form be so or no And surely certain things are much to be preferred before uncertain (n) idem ibid. pag 379. Thus this learned Man represents the Matter and if my Adversary who transcribed his Instances had imitated his Ingenuity He could not have framed any Argument from hence for his Liberty of varying Prayers because he reckons his Liberty a Priviledge a Duty and an advantage to the Worship But this variation in Baptism was an irregular Fact generally disliked and censured so as to make the very Office Null or at least very liable to be counted so it was an Illegal thing seldom done never commanded nor directed to be done only when it was done it was condemned by many and excused by very few And suppose now varying the Prayers be such a Fact as this is it Advisable or Eligible No the Comparison shews the taking such Liberty would be an ill thing for which scarce any would undertake to make an Apology And so I have done with his Comparison between Forms of Prayer and the Form of Baptizing § 10. His next Excursion is about the Creeds and being deckt in the Plumes he hath borrowed from Grotius Vossius and Bishop Vsher he fills Four Pages with Pompous Margens to dress up this Argument viz. That in the Primitive Times there was an Agreement in sense not in Words as to the Creed it self and he thinks that they who left themselves and others at so much Liberty in Forms of Creeds would not limit themselves nor others by Forms of Prayer If the Apostles Creed be objected he looks on Ruffinus his Relation to be a Fable and saith that no Writer for 300 years took notice of it And since the Ancients would not be confined to this Creed it argues they would never be confined to Forms of Prayer composed by others and he notes that the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions hath set down a Form of Creed different from that of the Apostles (o) Disc of Lit. pag. 99 100 101 102 103. This is the sum of his Reasoning Which when it is strictly examined will all appear to be either mistaken or fallacious He first directs us to Grotius upon Math. xxviii 19. where that Author brings in Justin Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Tertullian Novatian c. using various Expressions when they give an account of its several Articles But Grotius his Inferences which he cites in his Margen pag. 100. are two First That when they say the Rule of Faith was immutable they do not respect one certain Form of words received in all places but they respect the Force and meaning of the Interrogations And Secondly That Cyprians words seem to him to shew that the Creed or Rule of Faith in his time was not yet tied to those words in which it was afterwards found written and yet it cannot be doubted but the Sense of it was always the same (p) Grot. Com. in Math. XXVIII 19. p. 288 289. Now though Grotius here be not so just perhaps as he ought to be to the Antiquity of Creeds and being a Modern Author his Affirmation in this weighs no more than his Instances prove Yet I will wave that Dispute and for the present admit what he saith were true and then make Parallel between Creeds and Liturgies And in his First Inference he only saith That when the Ancients use various ways of expressing their Faith they do not refer to one certain Form of Words received in all places but only to the force and meaning of the Interrogations Which shews Grotius did not think as my Adversary grosly doth That every one of the Ancients in the places cited pretended to repeat the very Form of the Creed but only to shew the main Doctrins of it which in these occasional Discourses is all that we can expect And therefore the variety of expressions doth not prove there was not one Form of Creed but that these Fathers in these places do not refer to that Form Yet Secondly These Fathers all lived within 250 years after Christ and if we grant to Grotius that then there was not one Form of Creed every where received we may allow the Parallel with Liturgies and suppose that in Cyprian and Novatian's Time and so upwards to Tertullian Irenaeus and Justin Martyr there was not one Form of Liturgy every where received yet for all this Liturgies might be used and received before the year 300 that is before the quiet settlement of the Christian Church 1400 years ago and above 200 years before my Adversary allows them to have come in And this also is all that can be inferred from his words in the second Passage viz. That in S. Cyprians time the Creed was not tied to that Form of words wherein it is found written down afterwards Though he speak this modestly and only say it sâ—ems so to him Yet let it be supposed true and certain and then make the Parallel and no more will follow from thence but this That the Liturgies of the Church were not written down in so many words in the year 250 as we find them written in afterwards Now this being in the Ages of Persecution and while the Miraculous Gifts lasted it will not prove that because the Church then had no such Form of written Liturgy therefore now when the Church is setled and Inspiration ceased we neither need nor ought to have such a Form In the next Page in the Margen he grants the Creeds had more stated Forms in the Fourth Century though even then the Creeds of several Cities in the same Country were not Vniform and he instances in Rome Aquileia and Ravenna in Italy referring us to Vossius and Bishop Vsher (q) Disc of Lit. Marg. p. 101. And a little after he saith it was not put into set Form till the Fourth Age or neer it but the Forms varied in several places in the same Country Now because the Antiquity of Creeds is not our business here we will also for the present suppose this to be true And then if I may Argue from the History of Creeds to that of Liturgies as he evidently doth the Consequence will be That Liturgies were put into set Forms somwhat before the beginning of the Fourth Age though those great Churches which were at that time independent of one another though in the same Country as Aquileia and Ravenna in Italy which then were not subject to Rome had some difference in the Words and Phrases as also in the Order and Method of their Liturgies But as the Roman Creed was imposed upon all those Churches which were under the Popes Jurisdiction properly so called and the Aquileian Creed and that of Ravenna were respectively imposed upon all the Churches subject to these two great Metropolitans So it must follow if Liturgies and Creeds kept pace as he supposes that the Roman
Liturgy was imposed on the Roman Clergy and those of Aquileia and Ravenna upon the Clergy subject to those Churches And then my Adversaries whole Book which is written to assert that Liturgies were not imposed before the end of the Fifth or beginning of the Sixth Age that is 200 year after is false and utterly wrong And then also the Church of England both in composing a Form and imposing it imitates a very pure Age of the Church viz. The time a little before the begining of the Fourth Century or thereabouts and hath the Prescription of 1400 years to justifie her in both But because his main Author is Vostius we will here observe what that learned Man freely owns as to Creeds viz. That there was a â—orm in the Oriental Church very like to that which is called the Apostles Creed long before the Council of Nice And this which we call the Apostles Creed was the Roman Form bâ—fâ—re the time of that same Council and the Creed of Aquileia differed from this but very little (r) Vosâ— de trib â—ymb diss 1. §. â—0 pag. 24. Again he saith these Forms were not made by any General Council and were so old in Ruffinus his time that they were taken to be Apostolical (s) Ibid. §. 45. pag. 31. And the Church of Jerusalem had a Form which seems to have been elder than any of them being explained by S Cyril An. 350. and then delivered as from a very ancient Tradition (t) Ibid. §. 51. pag. 34. And both he and Grotius who fancy the Creed consisted at first of no more Articles than those of the Trinity do believe the remaining Articles about the Catholic Church the Remission of Sins the Resurrection of the Body and the Life everlasting were added as early as Tertullian's Time So that if these Authors Conjectures be allowed then there were Forms of Creeds in every great and eminent Church before the Third Century began From whence I thus Argue in my Adversaries own way and almost in his very words It is not probable that they who had a Creed in a Set Form in every Principal Church and did impose this Form to be learned and used by all that were Admitted Members of that Church by Baptism even before the Third Century should not also have their Set Forms of Prayer to the use of which all the Members of that Church and all under its Jurisdiction were obliged How credible and likely is it that they who did not leave their Creed at liberty also did not allow Arbitrary Prayers Since Heresies might creep in by the way of Extempore Prayers and Hymns as easily as by the use of various and arbitrary Creeds If they thought it requisite to limit the Rule of Faith for this Reason there was the very same Reason to Limit the Prayers Supplications Lauds and Litanies (u) See the Disc of Lit. p. 102 103. This is his way of Arguing upon a false Supposition That the Creed was not in a Set Form in the First Ages Wherefore since it appears by his own Authors that it was in a Set Form in or before the Third Century he must allow this to be a firm Argument against him It is nothing to my Question to enter into the Controversie Whether the Apostles themselves made that Creed which goes under their Name But after I have considered all that Vossius c. have said in this Matter I am verily persuaded That the Apostles themselves did make one Form of Faith at first but did not commit it to writing because it was to be taught orally to every Christian at his Baptism and kept as the Cognizance to distinguish between Hereticks and true Believers and the likeness of all the ancient Forms to one another shews they had one and the same Original at first and were derived from the first Planters of Christianity As for the variety between these ancient Forms in several Churches it was the natural and necessary effect of delivering it Orally which in distant Countries and in tract of Time by passing through divers hands must needs produce some small difference in the Order and Words and that shews That Oral Tradition is not so safe a way to convey Articles of Faith as Writing and though the Apostles had left the Scripture to be a standing Rule to secure the Creed from any dangerous Corruption yet it was necessary to have this short Form besides to teach the Candidates for Baptism But if the Reader desire to see this more fully proved I refer him to a Learned Book writ by a very Worthy Author Mr. G. Ashwell Wherein both by Arguments and evidence of Antiquity it is strongly and clearly made out that this Creed was made by the Apostles themselves (w) 〈◊〉 Apoâ—â—â— or â— Dâ—scourse aâ—â—â—ting the Antâ—â—s and Autâ—◠〈…〉 Creed P inted at Oâ—â—a 1683. And there it may be seen how bold my Adversary is to give Ruffinus the Lye since all the Writers of that Age generally agree in the same thing There also it appears that my Adversary is grosly mistaken in affirming that the Ancients took no notice of this Creed for above 300 Years As for his Arguing That the subsequent Creeds varying from it shews they did not own that to be Apostolical especially since they preferred their own Forms before it on the most solemn occasions (x) Disc of Lâ—t 〈…〉 it proceeds upon a Mistake For Vossius owns that the later superadded Creeds were only taken to be Commentaries on the Former and clearer explications of such Articles as the Hereticks had attempted to pervert and he shews that they did not cast off nor disuse the ancient Form when they made these New ones They kept the Apostles Creed still and used that in the most solemn Office of Baptism Yea they gave it the precedence before all other Creeds and therefore the Third General Council says They received in the first place the Creed delivered to them by the most Holy Apostles and then the Confession made by 318 Holy Fathers in the City of Nice (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Act. Concil Ephesin Bin. Tom. I. par 2. pag. 415. Wherefore this was used and reckoned in the first place even after other Creeds came in Finally He need not wonder that the Creed in the Constitutions is not the same with that which we call the Apostles because no Man pretends now that the Apostles made those Constitutions The Creed found there as we have shewed is the Apostles Form as it was varied at Antioch about the Year 330 which Daillé owns to be the Time when that Clemens writ the Constitutions (z) Daill praef ad Dissert de relig cult objecto not the Year 500 as my Adversary falsly pretends (a) Disc of Lit. pag. 111. Now it is no wonder that the same Form in 300 Years time should be varied as much in two several Churches so far distant as Rome and
Antioch especially when it was conveyed for the most part of that time only by Oral Tradition To conclude The Apostles shewed the way of making Forms of the things to be believed and if the Parallel hold between Creeds and Liturgies then we have reason to believe they first Composed Forms also for the things to be asked of God in Prayer and to be spoken to his Honour in Praises Which first and Apostolical Forms are the foundation and ground of all the several Liturgies in great and eminent Churches which like their Creeds agree in the main Essential parts and have so much likeness as to persuade us they all came from one Original Form at first but tract of Time and distacne of Place caused some differences in the Order and Phrases in distant Churches But so that all the Members of every great Church were obliged to learn the Creed of that Church where they received their Baptism and also to use the Forms of that same Church in whose Communion they lived And this may suffice for his Consequences drawn from the Primitive Creeds because it is nothing to our purpose when they came to be used first in the Communion Office forasmuch as he grants they were used in the Office of Baptism from the beginning § 11. He concludes this Set of Arguments by a large and tedious digression about the Variety used in the Form of Renouncing the Devil in Baptism and here again he fills his Margen with the Names of near twenty Ancients who speak of this Form of Renunciation in different Words by which he hopes to prove That this Form was arbitrary since not only divers Churches differed therein but the Authors who lived in the same Church yea the same Author in several places of his Works expresses it variously And then comes his Inference That if they were not limited to a Set Form of Words in this Sentence none can believe they were or would have suffered themselves to be confined to an invariable Form of Words in Praying at Baptism (b) Disc of Lit. pag. 105 106 107 108 109. Now if we should grant his Consequence did follow from these Premisses then we must expect at least that the Premisses shall be fully proved but we shall shew that he hath not made them out sufficiently For first the greater part of his Authors do not pretend to recite the Form but are only applying the Duty in occasional Discourses for which I need no other Evidence but to desire the Reader to consult the Places he produceth out of Origen Ephrem Syrus S. Basil Cyril of Alexandria Pseudo Dionysius Justinian Optatus S. Cyprian S. Augustin in the two later places and S. Hierom These Fathers in Homilies and practical Discourses speak of the thing and press the Obligation but do not pretend to repeat the words they express them in their own Phrases and therefore no wonder if they differ Secondly Many of these Witnesses do not speak of the whole Renunciation but some of the Renouncing the Devil only others only of Renouncing the World as the Subject upon which they were treating required and it is strange that he should cite these Authors to make out a difference in the whole Form when one speaks of one part of it and another Author treats of another part Thirdly Most of these Authors not only lived in several Ages but belonged to several distant Countries and were Members of Churches which had some difference in the Phrases and Order of their whole Liturgy and therefore their differing in the Words or Syllables of this Renunciation doth not prove they had no Set Forms of Prayer in any Church but only that several great Churches had some Variety in their Forms which we freely grant and it cannot hurt our Cause since all were limited to use the Forms of their own Church Thus Origen belonged to Alexandria Constantine's Edict was forged at Rome Cyril was of Palaestina Basil of Cappadocia Salvian of France Pseudo-Dionysius of Laodicea Clemens of Antioch Justinian of Constantinople Tertullian of Africa and S. Ambrose of Milan Now we have proved that there was a Variety between the Liturgies of these distant Churches in many particulars and therefore it is not strange they should differ in expressing the Syllables of the Renunciation supposing every one of them had been repeating the Form of his own Church Yet Fourthly Those of the same Country and espcially those of the same Church do either agree or come as near one another as can be expected from Men who are rather describing than repeating the Form Thus Ephrem-Syrus and Cyril of Jerusalem do agree exactly both of them no doubt referring to the Form used in Palaestina Salvian twice mentions this Form in the same words referring to the Liturgy of the Gallican Church and S. Chrysostom differs very little from Justinian because both had respect to the Constantinopolitan Form and that of Antioch related in the Constitutions is very near it So Tertullian and S. Augustin where they speak closely do exactly agree in the African Form And it is very probable that Constantine's Edict refers to the Roman Form Basil to that of Naeocoesarea and S. Ambrose to that of Milan Now if each of these great Churches had a certain Form to the use of which all that belonged to it were obliged then probably they had also such a Form for other Prayers And Fifthly it is very plain that every great Church had such a Form because the Fathers do very often charge those who were Baptized to remember the very words in which they made this Renunciation so doth S. Ambrose (c) Quid interrogatus es recognosce Quid responderis Ambros de iis quae initiant cap 2. and S. Chrysostom (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys in 2 Cor. hom 2. p. 555. Now this Charge had been ridiculous and had required an Impossibility if the Words were arbitrary and every one of them had made the Renunciation in a different Form of Words I conclude therefore That every Great Church had one certain Form and all of them were so like that they must come from one Original at first and it was only length of Time and distance of Place that had made the small Variations between the Forms of several eminent Churches Which also was the Case of Liturgies in general and of the whole Baptismal Office as well as of this peculiar part of it We have now done with all his Arguments of this kind and will leave the Reader to judge of the Modesty and Truth of those mighty Brags which he makes of the narrow search he hath made into Antiquity and the full Answer he hath given to all that either he could meet with or that others had produced on Behalf of Liturgies whose Primitive Original and general Use is but more cleared by all his Objections against them § 12. My Adversary concludes his Book first by fixing the Period when Liturgies did come
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
224. And not he alone but all the Calvinists do generally allow and use prescribed Forms of Prayer as Mons Durell hath very largely made out to whose Observations I will add two very Learned Men of the French Church who freely own that Liturgies and stated Forms are of very ancient use in the Christian Church and these are the Lord Du-plessis and Mons Daillè both which my Adversary often cites as if they were of his Opinion concerning the late Original of Prescribed Forms But first Mornay Lord Du-Plessis in his Book of the Mass having shewed That the Jews had Forms of public Service adds the First Christians then framed themselves after this manner of Service (d) Mornay of the Mass Book 1. pag. 19. and so runs the parallel between the Jewish and the Primitive Liturgy And a little after he tells us That those Authors who lived about the Year 800 declare That some Forms were used from the beginning and that they had industriously searched out the ancient Service of the Church and they might also in their days possibly find the Books of Rites or Prescribed Forms used in the Church before the Pope assisted by the Power of Great Princes had abolished the use and memory thereof (e) Id. ib. pag 22. Again he owns a very ancient Form of Prayer used at the Offertory (f) Ib chap 5. pag. 36. and saith there was a General Prayer for the whole World and the Estate of the Church which the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Form whereof continued as we have seen it since the time of the Primitive Church and is to be found and read in the Writers of that time (g) Ib. pag 37. He also confesseth in the same place that there was anciently One Form of Salutation and Prefaces Yea in this whole Book he every where owns there were Primitive Forms long before the Roman Church had corrupted their Service and speaking of the Liturgies of the Greek and Latin Churches he doth not so much as pretend they had no prescribed Forms only he notes That though in substance the Service of these Churches do agree together yet we must not imagine there was one and the same prescript Form observed and kept in them all (h) Mornay ut supr chap. 6. pag. 43. We see he grants Forms in all Churches but so as there was some Variety between the Forms of several Churches And now how is it possible that this Great and Learned Man had he not been misinterpreted should be Evidence for my Adversaries Opinion of Liturgies coming in after the Year 500 The like may be said of M. Dailé who understood Antiquity as well as any Writer that ever was of the French Reformed Church Now he frequently cites the Book which goes under the Title of the Apostolical Constitutions ascribed to S. Clement wherein there is a very ancient Form of Liturgy used as we have shewed in the Church of Antioch wherein there are prescribed Forms for all the Parts of Divine Service at large Now this Learned Man thus speaks of that Writer He seems to have compiled his Work a little before the Nicene Council (i) Dailé de Confirm lib. 2. cap. 11. p. 120. And in another place he saith In this Book of the Apostolical Constitutions I think no man who understands any thing of Antiquity can deny but that the Author hath painted out the Form of Ecclesiastical Worship such as it really was in those Times when he Writ (k) Idem de Relig. cultus objecto lib. 3. cap. 12. By which we see that he believed The Ecclesiastical Worship was performed by a prescribed Liturgy even before the First Council of Nice Which appears also to have been his Opinion by his citing this Liturgy of the Constitutions with divers other ancient Liturgies and then concluding thus We our selves truly do not deny but that very many of these Liturgies which we have produced are ancient and written about the very beginning of the Fourth Century though we think that they were corrupted by Additions and Alterations at several times after their first Original (l) Dailé de cult Latin relig lib. 3. cap. 13. p. 359. Wherefore this studious Searcher into Antiquity can be no Witness for my Adversary since he very expresly affirms That these Liturgies were written out for Public use in the very beginning of the Fourth Century that is as soon as the Church became setled by the Conversion of Constantine the Great To these we may add the Testimony of the Helvetian Divines and others who did not Reform after Luther's Pattern Bullenger saith The Church hath Supplications she also hath Holy days and Fasts the Church celebrates the Sacraments according to certain Laws at certain times in a certain place and by a prescribed Form which is according to the received Rules and Vsage of the Church (m) Bulleng Decad. 2. Serm. 1. pag. 38. In which Words he evidently justifies a prescribed Form and owns That the Church hath power to make such a Form and that all her Members are obliged to use it The eminent Lud. Lavater himself published the Common-Prayer-Book of the Tigurine Church which I have seen and read The Title of which is this A Little Book of the Rites and Institutions of the Trigurine Church Wherein is contained The whole Order of their Divine Service with the several Forms by which they Administer the Sacraments and all other Offices which belong to the Ministerial Function (n) De ritib. institutis Eccles Tigurinae Opusculum Edit à Ludovic Lavatero An. 1559. so that they also have stated and prescribed Forms And Zanchius one of the most Learned of the Divines of that Age tells us That Concord and Decency or Order cannot be observed in the Church nor can all things be done decently and in order as S. Paul commands without Rules and Traditions by which as by certain Bonds Order and Decorum is preserved because there is such diversity in Mens Manners such variety in their Minds and such opposition in their Judgments that no Polity is firm unless it be constituted by certain Laws and without a Stated Form no Rites can be preserved (o) Hieron Lanch Tom 7. In Com. praecip cap. Doctrin Christ Loc. 16. So that he pleads for the necessity of such a Form and accordingly all setled Protestant Churches have composed a Liturgy and made Forms of Divine Service for their Clergy to Officiate by So have the Churches of Holland whose Common-Prayer-Book I have seen Translated into the Greek Tongue with this Title (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Impres Ludg. Bat. An. 1648. The Christian and Orthodox Doctrin and Order of the Belgick Churches viz. Their Confession of Faith their Catechism their Liturgy and their Ecclesiastical Canons And in that Part which is their Liturgy there are the Forms of Prayer prescribed for Baptism for the Lords Supper
and for all the Occasional Offices which Book so translated was Printed at Leiden An. 1648. To this I may add another Book put out by Jo. Alasco a Noble Polonian Protestant in the days of King Edward the Sixth the Title whereof runs thus The Form and Manner of the whole Ecclesiastical Ministration in the Church for Strangers and especially Germans appointed at London by the most Religious King Edward the Sixth An. 1550 (q) Forma ratio tota Ecclesiastici ministerii c. Lond. An. 1550. Wherein there are also divers Set Forms of Prayer and Thanksgiving to be used in the several Offices of their Church And to name no more I have in my possession a Scotch-Common-Prayer-Book said to be Composed by Mr. Knox containing A Kalendar with Holy-days The Psalms of David in Meeter Forms of Prayer in the Visitation of the Sick Forms of Confession of Sin A Form of Intercession for all Estates of Men A Form of Prayer for the King Forms for Administring the Lords Supper and Baptism The Form of Matrimony and other occasional Offices c. for the use of the Kirk of Scotland Imprinted at Middleburgh An. 1594. I do not cite these Books as if there were no other or no more Protestant Liturgies but because I have seen all these lately and have most of them by me and because these are sufficient to convince any man That all established Protestant Churches do approve of and use Prescribed Forms so that if we should cast off ours to oblige that sort of Dissenters whom Mr. Clarkson Patronizes we must act contrary to the judgment and practice of the most famous Protestant Churches abroad and the most eminent Reformed Divines of all Nations and therefore I refer it to any Man to consider if this be a probable way to unite us with all Forein Protestants as some vainly discourse § 4. I know nothing can remain to be objected now unless it be That there are some great and just Exceptions lye against our Liturgy in particular To which I shall not now Reply by Repeating what I have said in my Larger Discourses upon the Common-Prayer where every one of the Objections that I have ever met with are considered and answered already But I shall now shew what esteem our Common-Prayer-Book hath been in among the most learned and judicious Protestant Writers ever since it was first Compos'd And I begin with Alexander Alesius an eminent Scotch Divine who Translated King Edward's Common-Prayer Book into Latin and in his Preface to it he saith He did this that it might be seen and read by many for the honour of the English Church whose care and diligence herein he doubted not would be for the example and comfort of some and for the shame of others and he hoped it might provoke the rest of the Reformed to imitate this most noble and divine Work in setling the Church believing that God put it into his hands to publish it at that time for the General Good (r) Praef. ad Libr. precum per Alex. Aâ—es inter Buceri script Anglicaâ— pag. 373 3â—5 c. with much more to the same purpose And here I must note that probably this was that Interpretation of our English Service Book which the judicious and modest Mr. Bucer looked over so diligently to satisfie himself whether he ought to conform to it And upon this he saith When I throughly understood it I gave Thanks to God who had granted to this Church to Reform her Rites to that degree of Purity For I found nothing in them which was not taken out of the Word of God or at least which was contrary thereunto if it were candidly expounded (s) Buceri censura super Libr. Sâ—croâ— praef pag. 456. And when by Archbishop Cranmer's special Command he had perused the whole Book in order to his censuring what he thought was to be amended He declares his Judgment thus In the prescript Form for the Communion and the daily Prayers I see nothing writ in this Book which is not taken out of the Word of God if not in express Words as the Psalms and Lessons yet in Sense as the Collects and also the Order of these Lessons and Prayers and the Times when they are to be used are very agreeable to the Word of God and to the Constitution observed in the Ancient Church (t) Buceri censura c. cap. 1. p. 457. And afterwards he is for writing down all holy Rites and the Words of the sacred Administrations and he owns that the Church of England hath done this very purely and conformable to Christ's Institution As for the things which he modestly supposed might be altered for the better it is evident That most of them were regulated afterwards and many of them were rectified according to his Advice there so that we not only see he was clearly for the use of prescribed Forms but liked the Book of King Edward with some few Amendments and had he seen our present Common-Prayer no doubt he would have wholly approved it The next Evidence shall be the most learned Archbishop of Spalato who affirms against Suarez That the English Liturgy containeth nothing in it which is not holy which is not pious and truly Christian as well as Catholic (u) Ant. de Dom. Spalat osteus error Fran. Suarez cap. 6. §. 82. pag. 340. And a little after The Form of Divine Offices that is of Public Prayers for all England which as I have said is taken out of the most ancient and most laudable Liturgies approved even by the Roman Church collected with great Judgment so as to leave out those things which the Romanists themselves are not very ready to defend (w) Ibid §. 37. pag. 342. Thus this Great Man stops the Mouth of a Malicious Enemy to our Liturgy And Causabon at the same time had as great an esteem for it For in his Epistle to King James the First he saith Your Majesty hath such a Church in your Kingdoms partly so instituted of Old and partly so regulated by your Endeavours that none at this day comes nearer to the Form of the most Flourishing Ages of the Ancient Church following a middle way between those who have offended both in the Excess and the Defect (x) Causaâ— Ep. ad Reg. jac praeâ—ix ad exerc Baron And in an Epistle to Salmasius he saith If his Conjecture do not fail the soundest part of the whole Reformation is in England (y) Id. Ep. ad Salmas qu. 709. Moreover Salmasius himself though in some Points he differed from our Church yet relates it as a Reason of King Charles the Martyrs constancy to our Liturgy That the Form of it was long since approved by most of the Reformed Pastors and those Men of the first Rank both in France and elsewhere and as being a Book which seemed to contain nothing but what agreed to Piety and to the Evangelical Doctrin (z)
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
scattered and dispersed Fourthly His Quotations are not faithful for he frequently disguises the Evidence which he produces both by false Translating divers Passages and Citing them wrong So in the Council of Carthage he reads Quascunque for Quicunque (n) Disc of Lit. pag. 44. And in that of Milevis Cum prudentioribus collatae for à prudentioribus collectae (o) Ib. p. 49. So he Translates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cum his caeteris hujusmodi gratiarum actionibus (p) Ib. p. 76. pretending they used a diversity in their Praises whereas S. Chrysostom's Words only import That they did give Thanks for Variety of Blessings for these and all such like And it is very remarkable that he cites many Authors imperfectly drawing a Line thus and leaving out the most material Words if they seem to make against him So when he perverts Nazianzen as if he spake of Words in Extempore Prayer he draws a Line before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and applies it falsly to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in Nazianzen there are three Substantives The Throne the Altar and the Holy Things in that Sentence which he twice leaves out (q) Disc of Lit. pag. 60 pag. 77. to which Substantives 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 plainly belongs for it was not the Words but the Throne the Altar c. which were present to him by the Holy Ghost By the same Trick he draws a Line in S. Cyprian after Quidam dicunt (r) Ib. p. 98. to conceal the next Words which shew it was Hereticks only which said this My Answer hath variety of Instances of such like dealing which a Man might expect rather from the Disciples of Loyola than from Persons that pretend to Tenderness of Conscience Lastly Whereas he often saith He hath Answered all the Places of the Ancients which either others had alledged or He in his diligent search of Antiquity had met with which seem to make for Liturgies (s) Disc of Lit. p. 179 alibi I doubt not but to make it appear that he hath not only omitted but industriously concealed some Hundreds of Proofs for Liturgies which I shall produce in my Answer and by comparing that clear Evidence with the slight Testimonies which he produces to confute it will appear to every Intelligent Reader that he resolved to keep all Testimonies of this kind out of sight except only those which he hoped he could either blunder or pervert to some other Sense Having given this short but just Character of his Book I will say something of my own wherein I have taken Care that this Ill-dealing should not transport me into any Personal reflexions and am plainly content to shew my Adversary is either ignorantly or wilfully mistaken without giving the Epithets that properly belong to both kinds of Mistakes Nor will I make it my chief business to confute his Book but to render my Discourse more useful than it could possibly have been if I had only followed him through his various Windings and Turnings I have Collected in every Century as many Testimonies concerning Liturgies and their Antiquity Original and Use as my Time would permit or the Argument needs though not all which might have been found and I have placed these in the exact Order of time under the several Names of the Fathers and then reduced the scattered Pieces which he objects under every one of these Fathers as I go along giving a distinct answer to them all that are material which I judge to be the fairest way to find out the true Sense of Antiquity in this Question And by this distinct and regular proceeding I hope not only to discover the Weakness of my Adversaries pretended Evidence but to give a clearer and fuller account of the early beginning and general use of Liturgick Forms than hath yet been done by any who have Writ upon this Subject And the use hereof may be First to confirm the Devout Members of our own Church who are the greatest and most considerable part of the Nation in their just Veneration for those Holy Forms by which they daily serve God when they find them so very agreeable to pure and genuin Antiquity which the Romanists have deserted by new Additions to their Forms consonant to their Superstitious Innovations and Corruptions and so have our High-flown Separatists also by new pretences to a Gift of Prayer long since ceased and by Praying Extempore upon ordinary occasions in Public Assemblies a Method unknown to the Ancients ever since there was a setled Christian Church And Secondly I will not despair but those moderate Dissenters who honestly desire to serve God in the best manner and have been abused by False-Teachers into an ill Opinion of Forms may by perusing these Papers lay aside their Ill-grounded prejudices against Liturgies when they clearly discern that the most Pious and Learned of the Primitive Martyrs and Fathers in the best and purest Ages of the Church did always approve of and use prescribed Forms in their public Worship So that they cannot reject Liturgies as a corrupt carnal cold and formal way of Praying without condemming the Devotions of the best and dearest Servants of God in all Ages both of the Jewish and Christian Church Which is a censure as void of Truth and Modesty as it is of Charity and Humility It is certain Millions of Holy and Admirable Men have Prayed thus with wondrous Fervency and God hath heard such Prayers and if they be lawful in themselves aceptable to Heaven and sufficient to procure what we Pray for there can be no reason why this Church should not enjoyn them now as all other Modern regular Churches do and the Primitive Church also did I grant such as have had a false Notion of them cannot be expected to use them so devoutly as others do but if their Judgment were rectisied those prejudices would soon wear off and a little Time and Experience of the great benefit of Holy Forms would convince them That a Pure and Prudent Pious and proper Liturgie such as ours is the most rational and Advantageous way of Paying our public Service to Almighty God and the greatest help to true Devotion in the World I confess my first design was to have gon through every Century that can be called Ancient but my time not permitting me as yet to transcrible all my Observations in Vindication of the Antiquity of Liturgies from the unjust Cavils of my Adversary I have now published only the first Four Centuries till the rest be made ready because if we find them within that compass all Men must own they are Truly Primitive And it is not fit to delay a just Censure of this Fallacious Treatise Since that Party so extremely dote upon it as to think it unanswerable For one of them in his Book called The healing Attempt that is a project to heal the Dissenters by the Wounds of the established Church lately talks at this vain
rate concerning it As to what relates to stinted Forms of Prayer the Judicious Mr. Clerkson in his excellent Dicourse of Liturgies having so Learnedly and fully discussed it he needs only commend its perusal to the Candid Reader with an Assurance That until it be cleared that stinted Liturgies are Ancienter than that Learned Person represents them to be they shall be Freed from a strict Imposition Thus far he Who hath been so grosly mistaken in his Character of this Discourse that I know not how he can make satisfaction for being so Confident in his Error but by giving us another assurance that if we prove Liturgies are much more Ancient than his Friend represents them to be He and those who have been misled with him will no longer disturb the peace of the Church and Nation by opposing them but will quietly submit to the strict imposition of them since it is no more but to be obliged to Serve God in public by the most Primitive and Prudent way of Worship ERRATA PAg. 3. lin 13. Marg. read Philo p. 34. l. 20. Marg. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 35. l. 28. Marg. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 48. l. 9. r. of praying 〈◊〉 the Pagan way p. 63. l. 3. r. assign no p. 85. l. 23. r. this cause p. 96. l. 3. r. Cardinal Bona p. 101. l. 25. r. eldest Fathers p. 109. l. 16. r. cannot be p. 115. l. 22. stop thus parts for the Heathen Worship p. 123. l. 8. r. Liturgy is put for p. 139. l. 22. Marg. verbum praedicet p. 154. l. 28. Marg. r. pag. 161. p. 156. l. 24. Marg. r. Coci censura p. 176. l. 27 177. l. 16. r. Constitutions p. 190. l. 7. r. Public Service p. 195. l. 3. stop thus provâ—â— before there p. 202. l. 19. r. is in the Manner p. 207. l. 19. Marg. r. de bapt Servator p. 211. l. 21. r. that the words p. 212. l. â— r. giving us many p. 228. l. 8. Marg. r. mundo p. 243. l. 18. r. a Solecism p. 251. l. 17. r. such Mistakes With some other literal Errors which the Judicious Reader can easily correct A Scholastical History OF THE PRIMITIVE ORIGINAL And general Use of LITURGIES IN THE Christian Church The Introduction concerning the Grounds for Liturgies in Holy Scripture § 1. THough LITURGIES have great reputation from their Ancient use in the Church and the principal design of this Tract be to prove that yet since a late Author is so bold to say They pretend not to Scripture (a) Discourse concerning Liturgy p. 1. I shall introduce my Discourse by shewing That Liturgies have a great reputation also for the testimony which the Scripture bears to them not only as the Phrases and main parts of them are the words of Scripture but because the Holy Bible makes it appear That the People of God from the beginning did generally use Forms of Prayer and Praises in their public Worship The Learned Fagius thinks they are as old as the time of Enosh when Men began publickly to call upon the Name of the Lord (b) Gen. iv 26. but it is certain that the first piece of solemn Worship among the Israelites recorded in Scripture is a Form of Praise sung in parts by the Men and Women after their deliverance from the Egyptians (c) Exod. xv ver 1. compar'd with ver 21. Soon after God himself prescribed a Form of Words by which the Priest was to bless the People (d) Num 6.23 and Forms of Prayer for those who offered their First-fruits and Tithes (e) Deut. xxvi ver 5 13. yea God prescribes a Form of Prayer for the Penitent Jews and charges them to Take words with them and turn to the Lord and say Take away all Iniquity c. and upon their using this Form He promises to heal their backslidings c. (f) Hos xiv 2 3 4. The Psalms of David were Forms of Prayer and Praise endited by the Spirit of God not only for his private use but for the publick service of the Temple (g) 1 Chron. xvi 7. 2 Chro. xxix 30. Chap. v. 13. And I could bring innumerable Proofs both out of Jewish and Christian Writers if it were needful to shew that the Jews did worship God by Set Forms and had a fixed Liturgy (h) Josephus Philo P. Fagius Scaliger Buxtorf Synag Seld. in Eutych but I shall only refer to two Great Men Doctor Hammond who proves both that they had Forms and that their Forms were in the same Method with our Common-Prayer (i) Dr. Hamm. View of Direct p. 136. Oxford Papers p. 260. Vol. 1. And Dr. Lightfoot who not only asserts they had stated Forms (k) Dr. Lightfoot Vol. 2. p. 158. p. 1139. but sets down the order both of their Hymns and Supplications gives us the Words which they used (l) Idem Vol. l. p. 922 942 946. and learnedly demonstrates that these Forms continued even to our Saviours time and long after (m) Ibid. p. 157 Exp on Mutiâ— vi 9. Now from this short but full Evidence we thus argue If the Jews who were Gods only People and the best among them even such as were inspired and in the purest times of that Church did worship God acceptably by Set Forms of Prayer in their public Devotions then a Liturgy is no argument of a corrupted Church no hindrance to servency no way displeasing to God nor unfit for public Assemblies as our Adversary pretends But neither he nor his Friends are able to produce one instance where either God disliked Forms or good Men complained of them under the legal Dispensation Therefore I may conclude That Liturgies are very agreeable to the Scriptures of the Old Testament and may be justified from many places thereof § 2. To this it may be objected That though this Method of Praying was agreeable to the old Law it is not suitable to Gospel-times To which I reply First That this yields the Cause as to the Jewish Church and is a clear acknowledgment that the Faithful did then Worship God by Forms But Secondly Since the Duties of Prayer and Praise are grounded on the same Reason now that they were then and neither are nor were intended to be abrogated they who say this must assign some satisfactory Reason why these Duties may not be performed now in the same manner that they were performed then otherwise it is not probable that a Form as such is unsuitable to the Gospel way of Worship especially since Christ and his Apostles who duly frequented the Temple-Worship where these Men grant Forms were used did never shew any dislike of that way of Worshiping and though they taxed their other Corruptions very freely they joyned in these Forms and never reproved the Jews for using them Thirdly This way of serving God having been so anciently and universally used if Jesus had designed to alter it and set up the new
p. 127 c. do not at all prove Extempore Praising or Praying was then in use Or shew That Ministers then used no Forms in the public Worship both because Origen saith this of all the People who cannot be supposed universally to have had this Gift of Praising God and Praying to him Extempore nor if any of them had it were they allowed ordinarily to exercise it in public Assemblies And also because the Phrases do signifie no more than Praying or Praising God by Forms with all possible fervency and devotion Origen therefore is a good Witness for Liturgies and all his Sophistry cannot draw one Argument from him against the use of them in his time § 4. The holy Martyr S. Cyprian S. Cyprian An. Dom. 248. witnesseth the very same thing For that he was not against the use of Forms of Prayer may appear from his allowing the Lords Prayer to be used as a Form of Prayer which Christ himself gave us (b) Cypr. de orat Dom. §. 1. pag. 309. And he would have us repeat the very Words of it because we may be assured The Father will know the Words which were made by his own Son (c) Id. ibid. § 2. Yea from the manner of drawing up this Prayer so as all the People are supposed to repeat it with the Minister he justifies the use of Set Forms wherein the Congregation bears a part for he observes That the Christians had a public and Common-Prayer (d) Publica est nobis communis oratio ibid. §. 5. p. 310. and that Christ Commanded us to Pray for all Men in a Common Prayer wherein all agreed (e) Oratione communi concordi prece pro omnibus jussit orare Cypr. ad cler pleb ep 8. pag. 24. Now suppose we grant that he speaks this of the Lords Prayer yet since all other Prayers were to be drawn up by this pattern this will prove that their other Prayers were in all things like to this that is that they were not made Extempore but were put into a Form as the Lords Prayer is and repeated by all the Congregation either with or after the Minister But there are still more evident Proofs in him not only of Forms but of a Liturgy viz. where he cites and explains those very Words of Common-Prayer in the Prefaces which were used in all Churches in the same Words for he persuades Christians to attend to their Prayers in public by putting them in mind that the Priest before the Prayer prepares the Hearts of the Brethren by a Preface premised saying Lift up your Hearts so that when they answer We Lift them up unto the Lord they may be admonished to think upon God alone (f) Ideo sacerdos ante Orationem praefatione praemissà parat fratrum mentes dicendo Surium corda ut dum respondeat plebi habenus ad Dominum admoâ—eatur se nihil aliud quam Dominum debere cogitare Id de orat Dom. §. 22. Now here we have a Form of Words used in the Eucharist not only in Africa but both in the Eastern and Western Churches and this also used by way of Response and divided between the Priest and People which is impossible to be done in any thing that the Priest saith Extempore And though he cites no more of this Preface than the first Words yet other Authors both in the African and Greek Church mention the rest of this primitive Form viz. It is meet and right so to do c. Even as it is yet in so many Words Transcribed in our Communion Service wherefore the Judicious Centuriators do rightly infer from hence That there were undoubtedly Set Forms of Prayer in S. Cyprians time (g) Magd. Cent. 3. cap. 6 p. 135. which they prove by citing this Preface Yea B. Bilson concludes from this and other passages that Christs Church taking her direction from S. Pauls Doctrin framed her public Prayers in such order that the Pastor and People both joyntly and interchangeably Praised God and Prayed to him each with other and each for other (h) Bilson of Christian Subjection Part. 4. pag. 435. Now how could there be these fixed places for Responses if the Priest had made only one long Extempore Prayer as our Dissenters do It is plain from this very method of Responses that there were then public Forms allowed and used And we may observe not only by this Preface but also by another passage that the African Church and the Eastern did hugely agree in these Liturgick Forms because as the Greeks say Give holy things to those that are holy (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lit. â— Basil Chrysost Clem. Constit So it seems they did at Carthage where as S. Cyprians Notes they were daily charged to keep that which was holy in a pure Conscience according to our Lords command not to cast that which is holy to Dogs (k) Cypr. ad Demetr p. 324. That is in the Eucharist which they then daily celebrated they used that Phrase Give holy things to holy Persons For though S. Cyprian writing to a Heathen will not express the very Form it self yet he comes so near it that he can mean nothing else being obliged to conceal the sacred Offices from Demetrian And that is the reason also why when he hath occasion to mention the Christian Litany he doth it only by setting down these general Heads of things desired therein viz. For driving away Enemies for procuring Rain and either for removing or moderating adversities we always pour out our Supplications and Prayers as well as for your peace and safety (l) Cypr. ad Demetr p. 324. so that our Adversary is very weak in despising those who urge this of as a Form of Prayer (m) Disc of Liturg. p. 137. because none of us think it was the very Words of the African Liturgy and we know Tertullian describes it when he also writes to Heathens in different Words but if we compare the two Fathers or both of them with the ancient Litanies wherein the general Heads of Evils which were to be Prayed against were named by the Priest and the People answered O Lord hear us or O Lord deliver us we may conclude they had a certain Form but concealed the Phrases of it from Unbelievers But the disputer against Liturgies who fraudulently conceals all but the last of these Testimonies picks up another passage or two by which he hopes to shew there were no Forms used in S. Cyprians time The first is in his Epistle to Pope Lucius where he saith we cease not in our Prayers and Sacrifices to give thanks to God the Father and to his Son Christ our Lord Praying and requesting that he who is perfect and makes us perfect would keep for you and perfect in you the glorious Crown of a Confessor (n) Cypr. Epist 58. p. 163. Hence he infers that being at liberty to put up any occasional Petition
imitated an innovation or a Method taken up lately or only by few And Nazianzen tells us That Julian saw Christianity was Famous for its Doctrins but more Famous and remarkable for those Forms of the Church anciently delivered and still preserved (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naz. Orat. 3. pag. 101. which Forms most certainly were Forms of Prayer and of Administration of the Sacraments derived as Nazianzen believed from Ancient Tradition and retained to his very time and to imitate the Doctrins we see Julian set up Schools and Lectures to imitate these Forms he appointed a Form of Prayers in parts Secondly Nazianzen did believe this way of Praying by Forms to be very agreeable to the Gospel because he there saith That these Forms of Prayer and other things before mentioned were clearly belonging to the good Order of the Christians (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. ibid. So that we may be sure both of the use of Forms of Prayer in this time and of Nazianzens approving them This Evidence for the Antiquity of Liturgies my Adversary suppresseth but cites two other places out of Nazianzen which he would perswade us will make out the use of Extempore Prayers First he tells us that Nazianzen being to discourse of the holy Ghost prayeth that he may be enabled thereby for the expressions (t) Disc of Liturg. p. 59. The words are these That being to speak of the Spirit he may have the presence of the Spirit and that it may give him such a faculty of discoursing as he desires at least such as is suteable to the occasion (u) Nazianz. Orat 44. p. 409. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he translates in the plural number Give me such expressions But let it be noted that this is not properly a Prayer but a Rhetorical Apostrophe in the middle of an Homily by the polite style whereof we may conclude it was composed in his Study before he he came to the Church and therefore both the Prayer and Homily were made in his Closet however being part of a Sermon this is nothing at all to the Churches public Prayers about which we dispute For many Conformists do use such Apostrophes to God or Christ or to the holy Ghost in their Sermons yet none will argue from thence that we have no Liturgy in England Secondly He pretends that Nazianzens Father prayed at the Eucharist by the Spirit and shortned the usual Prayers there when he was sick And of this he his so proud that he quotes it twice (o) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 60 pag. 76 77. But he gives us only the Epitome of this story out of the Centuriators which he imagined sounded more to his purpose Therefore we will give the Fathers own Words who saith His sick Father awaking the Night before Easter first moved himself a little and then more strongly soon after he called on his Servant by Name with very low Voice to give him his Garments and lend him his Hand the Man came with amazement and did readily obey him and leaning on him as on a Staff he imitated Moses upon the Mount and staying up his Hands in the posture of Prayer he readily performed the former and latter part of the Mysteries of the People in few words indeed because he was weak in Body but with a Mind it seems very perfect O admirable Without a Pulpit on the Pulpit a Sacrificer without an Altar a Priest at a distance from the things to be consecrated but these things were made present to him by the Holy Spirit as he knew though those who were present did not see them After this repeating the accustomed Words of the Eucharist and Blessing the People he went to Bed again (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Nazâ—â—at 19. pag. 305. After which he relates how he Recovered and went to Church and solemnly celebrated the Sacrament with the whole Church on the first Sunday after Easter Where I think the Centuriators and our Adversary both mistake the point in supposing the old Bishop to do all this in the Church for there is nothing in the Relation to shew that he went out of his Chamber and his being without a Pulpit an Altar and the things to be consecrated viz. the Oblations of the People brought to the Church do make it plain this was a private Communion celebrated in his Chamber to some few that were about him yet he performed that as nigh the public Forms as he was able And though he abbreviated the long Prayers before the Consecration out of meer necessity yet he kept strictly to the Words of Consecration as he was wont to do he did not alter that Form in the least So that a Man may as well argue We have no larger Office for the Communion in our Liturgy because we have a shorter Office for the Sick as our Adversary can infer from this short way of private Communicating in a case of necessity and in a Chamber That there was no Form of Prayers for public Communions in that Age yea we see by the weak old Bishop 's coming as near the Public Form as he was able and in the most Essential part keeping close to it that there was a Public Liturgy then And Secondly Our Adversary both in his Greek * Note that in citing the Greek after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he draws a Line to conceal his being without a Pulpit c. and goes on thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. See the Marg. of Discourse of Liturg. pag. 77. and Latin omits all those Words viz. of his being without a Pulpit an Altar and things to be consecrated on purpose first to abuse this Reader into the mistake of the Bishops being in the Church to which we see he did not come till a Week after And then secondly he would make us believe that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These things refers to his abbreviation of the Office to his Short Words that so he may pretend Those Words were given to him by the Inspiration of the Spirit which is a manifest falsifying of the Father who saith The Pulpit Altar and Consecrated things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These things were made present to him by the Holy Ghost as Nazianzen believed though no Body there saw them which is a flight of Rhetorick usual in him but upon the gross perverting this Expression all our Adversaries Argument of Expressions and Words in Prayer being given by the Holy Ghost doth depend I beg the Readers Pardon for this Excursion which clearly demonstrates that this Adversary of mine did wilfully misinterpret the Greek after he had read it and cited it with a designed omission to hook in an Argument for his false Notion of praying Extempore by the Spirit but when genuine Antiquity affords no better Testimonies than this They have more use of their Wit than of their Integrity But I doubt not all impartial Men will gather from this very
Church once at least in one Assembly (k) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 3. We note by the way that our Adversary means the Communion Office here by the Daily Service but takes no notice that the Christians had other daily Assemblies viz. at Six in the Morning Three in the Afternoon and at Candle-lighting Now if the Lord's Prayer were repeated but once at one Assembly yet still it might be repeated Four times in one day Secondly He grants there is in S. Chrysostom an Order visible that is a certain Method wherein they agreed to administer the several parts of Worship particularly in the Sacrament so as each had its known fixed place (l) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 5. Thirdly He cites S. Chrysostom to prove the People of old had a part in the Prayers (m) Ibid p. 44. Fourthly He owns That S. Chrysostom did bring in the usage of Singing alternately that is by Turns and Responses into the Church of Constantinople (x) Ibid. p. 168. Now let us put all this together and if they used the Lords Prayer so often every day as a Form and had a certain Order for the several parts of Worship so that every part had so known and fixed a place and so that the People could bear a share and make their Responses in this Worship both as to the Hymns and the Prayers doubtless this Order was a Liturgy because if the Words of it as well as the Method were not prescribed the People could not know where and when to come in with their Parts Thus then he hath given up the Cause and owned a Liturgy in the Fourth Century But we have better Arguments than his Concessions who never produces any one Evidence for Forms but what he hopes he can answer since S. Chrysostom abundantly assures us not only that there was a Liturgy in his time but sets out the Method and explains the Words and Phrases of those Forms as often as any occasion offers it self And First He tells us Their Office consisted of Prayers Litanies and Prefaces (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chryâ— hom 3. in Colost Tom. 4. p 106. more particularly He mentions one Prayer for the Catechumens (p) Hom. 2. in 2 Cor. p. 553. and three more The first is the Prayer full of Mercy when we pray for those that are Possessed The second is for those under the Censures of the Church to desire Mercy for them The third Prayer saith he is for our selves (q) Com. in Matth. hom 72. edit Front Vol. â— p 768. that is for the Faithful And in another place he saith Both Priests and People make Common Prayers for the Possessed and the Penitents and all of them say that one Prayer the Prayer full of Mercy (r) Hom. 18. in 2 Cor. edit Savil. pag. 647. Now for the better understanding here of let it be considered that S. Chrysostom was bred up at Antioch before he came to Constantinople and therefore the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions who as we noted before hath set down the Liturgy of Antioch as it was used before S. Chrysostoms time must be the best Commentator upon S. Chrysostom for here he plainly alludes to some known Liturgy and probably to that in the Constitutions or one which had corrected it in some few things both in the Expressions and the Method yet they are so very like each other that both seem to have been but one Liturgy originally Now in that Liturgy in the Constitutions there are just so many Prayers and exactly in the same order The first for the Catechumens the second for those that are Possessed the third for the Penitents and the last Prayâ—r for the Faithful (s) 〈…〉 Apolâ—◠〈◊〉 câ—p 5. â—â—â—p â— câ—p 13 And this Author makes us understand what S Chrysostom means by The Prayers full of Mercy For these are the Forms of Litany which they made for these several sorts of Persons and when the Deacon hath repeated the Petition viz. For such and such things and let us pray to the Lord the People answer to every Petition Lord have mercy (t) 〈…〉 Dâ—acâ—â—â— pepulâ—â— ut pradâ—x 〈…〉 Câ—n lit Aâ—ostâ—â— cap 5. From the frequent Repetition of which Sentence S. Chrysostom calls this the Prayer full of Mercy and to assure us he means this very Litanick Form he saith It is a Common Prayer made both by the Priests and People â—â—â—â—stom 〈…〉 pâ—g â—â— And that it was enjoyned we may also be assured because when he is about to set down the very Form of this Prayer for the Catechumens he brings it in with this Preface The Laws of the Church command that the Prayers shall be made thus (w) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. hom 2. in 2 Cor. p. 553. which shews it was a Form established by Law and he there repeats the Words and expounds it as he goes on And though it be long yet to silence all that deny the use of prescribed Forms we shall here recite it First The Deacon saith Let us pray earnestly for the Catechumens And then he begins the Prayer Beseeching the All-merciful and Compassionate God to hear their Prayers To open the Ears of their Hearts To instruct them in the Word of Truth To plant his fear in them To confirm their Minds in the Faith To reveal to them the Gospel of Righteousness To give them an Heavenly Mind wise Reasoning and a vertuous Conversation To make them continue in his Law day and night To deliver them from all evil and absurd Actions And from all the Temptations of the Devil and Assaults of the Adversary To cloath them with the Garment of Immortality in his due time To bless their going out and their coming in To bless their Houses and their Servants To bless their Children and bring them to perfect age and understanding To make all things work together for their good After this the Catechumens who had kneeled while this Litany was said are bid to rise up and pray For an Angel of Peaâ—e (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alio scil hom 3. in Coloss Tom. 4. p. 106. That their Affairs might prosper That this and all the days of their Lives might be peaceable And that they might make a Christian End After all they are bid To commend themselves to the living God by Christ Jesus and so to bow their Head and depart (y) Chrysost hom 2. in 2 Cor. pag 553 ad pag. 556. Here therefore we have a large Form in Words prescribed and enjoyned by the Church upon every Period of which this Holy Father makes a Comment which he could not have done had it been usually varied or had it been an Extempore Prayer The Form also is the manner of Litany room being left for the People to say Lord have mercy after every Petition And I must observe further that this very Litany is very short expressed in the Liturgies of S. Basil and S.
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
stand up and with great Decency (o) Id. hom 4. de natura Dei And that Holy things must be given to Holy persons (p) Idem hom 17. in Hebraeos Both which passages are in the Liturgy in the Constitutions in so many Words (q) Constit lib. 8. cap. 15. cap. 20. And also in every one of the ancient Liturgies which go under the names of S. James S. Basil and S. Chrysostom in all which also there is a Form of Prayer after the Holy Communion (r) Constit lib. 8. cap. 22. and S. Chrysostom hath a Homily to reprove those Who left the holy Liturgy unfinished and went out before the last Prayer which is the Title of that Homily (s) Chrys Tom. 5. edit Front Dac et p. 522. All which abundantly proves that there was a set and prescribed Liturgy at that time by which the Eucharist was Administred I might be much larger in my proof of this had I time to make a narrower search in the learned Volumes of this elegant Father but I take this to be sufficient especially if we consider the Evidence we have that S. Chrysostom did compose that Liturgy as to the main which now goeth under his name The Authorities and Arguments for which being much the same with those produced for the Liturgy of S. Basil (t) See before in this Chap. §. 15. we refer the Reader thither And shall here only observe First That Proclus who was S. Chrysostoms successor at Constanstinople and came into that See within 27 years after Chrysostoms Death affirms That this Holy Father like a good Pastor who was careful of his Flock resolved to root up all the pretences which human sloth was wont to make and therefore drew up a shorter Form of Prayers for the celebrating of the Eucharist lest Men who hate to be confined too long being deceived by the craft of the Devil should omit this Divine Ordinance (u) Proclus de traditione divinae Missae And the Greek Church hath ever since used this Liturgy as the genuin composure of S. Chrysostom Secondly The main part of this Liturgy is found either explicitly or by plain intimations in the genuin Works of S. Chrysostom who reckons up the same Ceremonies Hymns and Prayers and generally in the same order And also upon occasion comments upon and explains both the Rites and ancient Forms and covertly refers to many more passages in this Liturgy only he would not speak out because his Homilies were Preached to a promiscuous Auditory Thirdly There is a great part of this Liturgy very pure Primitive and worthy of this great Author even so much of it as is Recorded in his own Writings and in the Works of S. Cyprian S. Cyril S. Basil S. Augustin and others or so much of it as is taken out of Holy Scripture And in all this there is nothing of Praying to Saints to Angels or the blessed Virgin nothing of any Prayers for delivering the deceased from pain nothing of venerating the Cross or any other Image The passages which look this way are later Patches tacked to this holy Liturgy in corrupter times easily distinguishable from the Original composure both by the Stile and Matter wherefore these Parts we reject but must not throw away the Wheat with the Chaff there being no Father to which some corrupt Additions have not been made but we must not for the sake of these spurious Tracts reject that which is true and genuine Fourthly Since it is so clear that Forms had been long used in the Church and that the Gift of Prayer was ceased before this Century began it cannot but be very probable that so great a Bishop of so eminent a Diocess and with so large a Jurisdiction should model and correct the ancient Forms and adapt them to the use of the Churches under his care as S. Basil had done for those under his charge especially since no ancient Author did ever contradict this Universally received Notion That this Liturgy was made by S. Chrysostom Nor doth any Historian assign any other Person as the maker thereof or mention this Liturgy as coming into use in any other Age. § 20. And now we will consider those things which are objected both against the use of Forms in this Age and against the Authority of this Liturgy my Adversary produces divers places out of S. Chrysostom to prove that Words spoken in the Celebration of the Sacraments were Mysteries which S. Chrysostom thinks ought to be concealed and therefore he supposes there were no Written Forms in his time however none of his Wrting (w) Discourse of Liturg. pag. 29. pag. 35 36 37. I have often answered this Argument before But I shall now observe That this Notion of the great Sin of divulging Mysteries to the Unbaptized hinders S. Chrysostom in his Discourses which are generally Sermons Homilies and Orations made to a promiscuous Auditory from giving as many Passages of the Ecclesiastical Forms which he generally there wraps up in dark Expressions yet his appealing to the Faithful and telling them they knew and remembred such and such things is a certain sign that there were known and prescribed Forms For how could he appeal to the Initiated or tell them they knew or remembred such or such a Passage which he darkly hinted if Sacraments had been celebrated or Prayers made in the Extempore way by Phrases daily varied Thus in those Instances which my Adversary brings Speaking of the Litany used by the Faithful S. Chrysostom saith It is a Mystery but the Initiated know how it abounds with Mercy (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chry◠in Matth. hom 71. p. 451. Disc of Liturg. pag. 29. This must be some Form which they knew otherwise he could not have made this Appeal So when this Father speaks of the mystical Words in Baptism he doubts not but those who were baptized could remember what they Answered (y) Id. Hom. 40. in 1 Cor. p 514. Disc of Liturg. Marg. pag. 29. which shews they Answered in a certain Form of Words And it appears they also had a set and certain Form of renouncing the Devil because S. Chrysostom appeals to the Initiated and bids them Remember those Words by which they renounced the Devils Tyranny (z) Hom. 2. in 2 Epist ad Cor. pag. 555. yet our Adversary by a dexterity of arguing peculiar to himself cites this to prove there was no Form of Renunciation (a) Discourse of Liturg. p. 37. By which rare Art also he quotes S. Chrysostom's Exposition of Gal IV. 28. where he saith The Faithful knew the Divine Words pronounced by the Priest at their Baptism (b) Chrys hom in 4 Galat. p. 748. Disc of Liturg. p. 37. to prove there were no Forms and yet if there had not been known Forms this Appeal could not have been made For no Dissenting Pastor who Officiates Extempore can appeal to his Congregation and say You know
their Time were to be prayed for but the New Editions of these Liturgies have no Emperours or Bishops Name at all only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 leaving it to the Priest to add the Names as Persons changed To conclude I have not seen one solid Objection against the main Body of S. Chrysostom's Liturgy and there is enough of that which we defend and is genuine to shew that Liturgies were used in this Age and there is clear Evidence and good Reason to believe not only that S. Chrysostom approved of Forms but that he Corrected the Ancient Office and made all that is Essential pure and primitive in this very Liturgy which now goes by his Name And this may suffice for this Father § 21. At the same time when S Chrysostom was Famous in the East S. Augustin S. Augustin An Dom. 3â— flourished in the African Church and He also is a good Witness for us in this Age For it is impossible he could be against Forms of Prayer written in a Book and to be read out of it because he affirms That Christ therefore left us a Form of Prayer in writing knowing Words were necessary to moveâ— us and that we might look upon that which we ask (a) Nobis ergo necessarâ—a sunt Verba quibus commoveanâ—ur inspiciamus quid pâ—tamuâ— Aug. ad Prob. Ep. 121. p. 129. Now for the Church to imitate Christ and write down our Prayers in a Book could not be a fault in the opinion of S. Augustin who owns the Lords Prayer to be a Form and in divers places affirms that the Faithful repeated it every day (b) Aug. de verb. Ap. Ser. 31. Item hom 42. alibi And therefore he will not grant that any Christians wanted the Spirit to help them with Words and Expressions that he saith cannot be the meaning of our not knowing what to Pray for as we ought Rom. viii 26. because it is not Credible that either the Apostle or those to whom he Writ were Ignorant of the Lords Prayer (c) Id. ad Prob. Ep. 121. pag 129. And therefore he goes on to expound the Spirits helping our infirmities of the Spirits giving us Patience so that we do not pray absolutely to be delivered out of our Afflictions as naturally we should do if the Spirit did not convince us they were for our good So that S. Augustin takes away the main Text on which our Adversaries ground their Extempore Prayers and thinks there is no need for the Spirit to furnish us with expressions We have now seen by other Fathers that they had a Liturgy in every Church by which care was taken for proper expressions and S. Augustin seems to have believed that the Original of these Liturgies the most essential parts wherein almost all Churches agreed was from S. Paul himself for he saith as my Adversary cites him (d) Disc of Liturg. Marg. pag. 173. The Apostle speaking of the Eucharist presently adds The rest will I set in order when I come giving us to understand that though it was too long for an Epistle to intimate all that order of Administration which the Vniversal Church observes yet he did ordain that which is every where observed without Variation (e) Aug. ad Januar. Ep. 118. p. 116. Now the use of Forms was every where observed and though there was some little variety in the Longer Forms of Prayer and Thanksgiving which were made afterwards yet the use of the Lords Prayer the Prefaces the Prayer of Consecration as to the Evangelical Words and some of the Hymns All which were Forms and of Universal use these S. Augustin affirms were ordered and ordained by the Apostle when he came to Corinth so that he maks the Original of using Forms of Prayer and Praise in the Sacrament to be Apostolical And the same thing he affirms in another place where he is arguing against Hereticks Let us look saith he upon the Mysteries of the Ecclesiastical Prayers which the whole World hath received by Tradition from the Apostles and which are uniformly Celebrated in every Orthodox Church that the Rule for our Prayers may fix the Rule of our Faith (f) Oâ—secratiâ—â—rum quoque sacerdâ—talium Sacramenta respiciamus quae ab Apostolis tradita in tâ—to modo atque in omni Catholicâ Ecclesiâ Uniformiter Celebrantur â—â— legem credendi lex statuat supplicanâ— Aug. de Eccles dog cap. â—â— Tom. 3. pag. 4â— He must mean this of Forms Extompore Prayers being invisible but these might be looked on yet these he saith were derived from Apostolical Tradition and uniformly Celebrated therefore there was then a written Liturgy appointed at first by the Apostles as S. Augustin thought and used by all Christians to the Words of which he appeals for Evidence against Hereticks in matters of Faith Now if the Prayers had been daily varied by the Extempore Gift he could not have appealed to the Words of them and if these Forms had been composed but a little before this time of S. Augustin he could not have urged their Authority in matters of dispute with Hereticks or others Therefore they had Forms written in former Ages and by their Antiquity become of great Authority in this Century Whereupon the same Father wishes that such as are weak and doubtful in the Question of perseverance would look upon those Prayers of theirs which the Church always had and ever will have (g) ut intuerentur Orationes suas quas semper habuit habebit Ecclesia Aug. de bon persev lib. 2. Tom. 7. pag. 279. That is upon the public Liturgy from the certain Words of which he draws Arguments to satisfy their doubts not fearing they would question the Authority of those Prayers which the Church ever had used from the beginning And therefore he boldly challenges Vitalis who hâ—ed some Erroneous Opinions to dispute if he saw fit against the Prayers of the Church when he heard the Priest of God at the Altar Exhorting his People to Pray so and so c. (h) Aug. ad Vital Ep. 107. pag. 102. which shews not only that there were Forms because Extempore Prayers can never be urged for or alledged against the Church But it shews that these Forms were by long usage become so venerable that their Authority was esteemed sacred and indisputable And they were accounted the best Evidence of Apostolical Tradition after the holy Scripture The particulars of this African service agreeable to the parts of the Greek Liturgy S. Augustin saith were these The Singing of Hymns reading of Lessons and Sermons the Prayers made by the Bishop in an audible Voice and the Common-Prayer enjoyned by the Deacon (i) aut Antâ—stâ—tes clara voce deprecantuâ— aut communis Oratio v ce Diaconi indicitur Aug. ad Januar. Ep. 11â— p. 119. That is the Collects and the Litany to the First of which the People answered Amen To the Second they made Responses at the end of every Petition
Greek Word (m) Galat. iii. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For a Covenant or Testament which had been confirmed and ratified long before And therefore Balsamon expounds these Words Prayers which had been confirmed before and were Customary (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bals Annot. Bev. pag 640. and an ancient Scholiast saith that the other Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifies The whole Liturgy (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schol. in Codic Amberbach Bever Tom. 2. pag. 208. which is very Rational because the Canon treats of Prayers which ought to be said at the Altar and reckons up the several essential parts of the Liturgy Prayers properly so called Prefaces Commendations and Imposition of Hands Now then if all these parts of Liturgy had been heretofore confirmed and ratified in Council then it undeniably follows That there were Forms of celebrating the Eucharist in Africa setled by Ecclesiastical Law before the time of this Council and my Adversary had no shift to hide it but by corrupting the Words of the Canon As he doth again Thirdly in translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 May be used by all whereas we must joyn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with this Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And then it will run thus It seems good to us or We order such Prayers shall be performed by all For if as he insinuates Men might use these approved Prayers or might not use them then this Council enjoyned â—othing but left all Men at liberty which is absurd to imagine where they make a plain Decree To have these Prayers used by all Whence we observe Here are all the Essentials of a Liturgy which had been confirmed before by a Council and are now enjoyned upon all Ministers so that they are bound to use them But Fourthly He hath yet another false Translation of the last Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he renders Which shall be Communicated with the more discreet but very fallaciously the Verb not being of the Future Tense nor yet signifying to Communicate a thing with another but to gather together and this very Word in the same Tense in the New Testament is translated Were gathered together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. xiii â— Câ—p. xxii 34. So that the Council speaks not of new Prayers hereafter to be communicated to the more discreet but of Prayers which had been collected and gathered already out of ancient Forms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by learned and discreet Bishops and Pastors So also in the Canon of Milevis à prudentioribus Tractatae is the African Phrase for Prayer Composed (q) Inde Homiliae c. vocantur Tractatus hoc est Compositiones by the more Learned and Judicious My Adversary therefore falsifies the Canon to impose upon his Reader That any Man might make New Prayers or pick them up where he pleased and use them after he had shewed them to the more Discreet But it is plain that the former Canon of Carthage hoped to have kept out Impertinent and Heretical Prayers by obliging such as had writ out any Forms to shew them to the more discreet before they used them which Remedy not proving effectual This African Canon makes a strict Order against all manner of Prayers that had not been Collected out of some elder Forms by Judicious Persons Having thus discovered his corrupting the Text of this Canon it will easily appear a good Evidence for the use of Liturgies For here is an Office consisting of all those Prayers which ought to be used at the Altar and particularly Prayers for the Catechumens Penitents c. and then Prefaces about Lifting up the Heart c. among the Faithful Intercession for all Estates of Men which is here called Commendations and the Prayer of Consecration when the Bishop laid his Hands on the Bread and Wine and blessed them which I think is here meant by Imposition of Hands These primitive and essential Parts were long before written down or else how could they have been read or approved in a former Council And these ancient and approved Forms are now again enjoyned to all that Officiate at the Altar The rest of the Canon seems to respect those Forms which were used in other Assemblies and not at the Eucharist that is at the several Hours of Prayer in the Morning early in the Afternoon and late at Night And as to these the Council orders that no Person at no time do bring in any Forms contrary to the Faith to prevent which unavoidable Consequence of Extempore Prayers and leaving Men at liberty to collect their own Forms this Council decrees That those Prayers only shall be said in the Church I suppose at the Hours of Prayer which had formerly been collected out of ancient Forms by such as could judge whether they were Orthodox and fit for Public use And the Canon of Milevis rightly Translated being a Confirmation of this Canon in the beginning of the next Century justifies this clear and plain Exposition The Words are these It also seems good that the Prayers Supplications and Masses which have been approved in Council whether Prefaces Commendations or Impositions of Hands shall be celebrated by all and that no other Prayers shall be said in the Church but such as have been Composed by the Judicious or Approved in the Council lest by this means through Ignorance or Negligence any thing be Composed contrary to the Faith (r) Concil Milev An. 416. Can. 1â— Bin. Tom. 1. par 1. pag. 705. Where we see the Parts of Liturgy are reckoned up more particularly Prayers that is Collects Supplications that is Litanies or Masses that is the Eucharistical Office consisting of Prefaces Commendations and Impositions of Hands The Forms of every one of these having been formerly approved by a Council are now enjoyned to all who are ordered to use these and no others And for all other Prayers in the Church they were to be such as either had been approved in a Council or at least were Composed by Judicious and Orthodox Persons So that the Main Liturgy was formerly established and is now enjoyned again and care also taken that none should pray at any other time in Public but by Forms and by such Forms as had passed the Test of a Synod or had been formerly collected by the Judicious And the Reason given will ever hold good against Extempore Prayers or private Mens arbitrary Composures which is that this may easily bring Heresie into the Church Therefore Smectymnuus freely grant That the Milevitan Canon would have no other Forms used but those that were approved in the Synod (s) Senectymnuns Answ to Remonstr pag â— But my Adversary is not so ingenuous yet his Objections are so manifestly Mistakes that to Repeat them is enough to Answer them (t) Discourse of Litu g. pag. 49 c. First he saith The African Canon left them at liberty to use any Prayers that were allowed by some Prudent Brethren