BOOK III.

THE WORSHIP OF THE CHURCH OF ROME JUSTLY CONDEMNED, AS DIRECTING PRAYERS IN AN UNKNOWN TONGUE.

A DISCOURSE

CONCERNING THE CELEBRATION OF

DIVINE SERVICE IN AN UNKNOWN TONGUE.

ADVERTISEMENT.

CARDINAL HOSIUS; Sanders; Epist. Cler. Gall. Extract. ex Regist. Fac. Par. Procez. &c. quoted in this Tract by the page, refer to a book, called "Collectio quorundam gravium Authorum, qui Sacræ Scripturæ aut Divinorum Officiorum in vulgarem Linguam Translationes damnarunt," &c. Printed at Paris, 1661.

The quotation, though out of Sixtus Senensis, are the words of Ambrosius Compsa, who severely condemning Cajetan for saying, "It is better," &c. gives this as a reason, "that that opinion primo a Diabolo inventa est."

UPON this argument the Church of England* doth fully declare itself in these words, "It is a thing plainly repugnant to the Word of God, and the custom of the primitive Church, to have public prayers in the Church, or to minister the sacraments in a tongue not understood of the people."

But if we consult the doctors of the Church of Rome about it, we shall find them, as in most other points, differing

* Article 24.

extremely among themselves. Mercer,* a very learned person, and professor of Hebrew at Paris, is so free as to say, “Temere fecerunt, &c. They amongst us have done rashly, that brought in the custom of praying in an unknown tongue, which very often neither they themselves, nor our people understand." And Cardinal Cajetan saith,†“Melius est, &c. It is better for our Church, that the public prayers in the congregation be said in a tongue common to the priest and people, and not in Latin." Others of them are of another mind, and say, the having divine service in a tongue known to the people, is new and profane, and the doctrine requiring it "Diaboli calliditatem sapit, smells of the craft of the devil."§ And that the Church, in making use of the Latin tongue therein, "received it by inspiration from the Holy Ghost," as a late author saith.

66

With what consistence soever the former sort may speak to truth and reason; yet I am sure the latter speak with consistence enough to the opinion, declarations and practice of their Church, as is evident from the Council of Trent,¶ the present standard of the doctrine of the Church of Rome, which I find thus Englished to my hands by a noted person of their Church :** Though the mass contain (great) instruction for God's faithful people, yet it seemed not expedient to the Fathers (of the Council) that it should be celebrated everywhere in the vulgar tongue: wherefore retaining in all Churches the ancient rite (or rather, in all places the ancient rite of every Church++), approved by the holy Roman Church, the mother and mistress of all Churches; lest Christ's sheep should hunger, and the children asking bread, none should be found to break it to them, the holy Synod commands pastors and all that have care of souls, that during the celebration of mass, they should frequently either by themselves, or others, expound some part of those things which are read in it; and among other things, let them explain the mystery of the most

*Comment. in Eccles. 5. 2.

+ In 1 Ep. Corinth. c. 14.

Stapleton. Quæst. quodl. Quæst. 2.

§ Sixtus Senensis Biblioth. 1. 6. annot. 263. [vol. 2. p. 413. Venet. 1574.]

|| Portraiture of the Church of Jesus Christ.

¶ Concil. Trid. Sess. 22. c. 8. [Labbe, Concil. vol. 14. p. 854, 855. Lut. Par. 1672.]

** S. C. Answ. to Dr. Peirce, c. 15.

++ Retento ubique cujusque Ecclesiæ antiquo ritu. [Ibid. p. 855.]

holy sacrifice, (the words are, some mystery of this holy sacrifice❜*) especially on Sundays and feasts."

And they conclude,† "If any one shall say, that mass ought to be celebrated only in the vulgar tongue, let him be anathema."

some

To this I shall add for a conclusion, the judgment of the late Pope Alexander VII. in a brief he sent to the clergy of France about a translation of the Missal into that language, at that time newly published; in which he saith, that “ sons of perdition had arrived to that madness, as to translate and publish it, &c. A novelty we abhor and detest, as the seed-plot of disobedience, rashness, sedition, and schism, and of many other evils, and therefore that French Missal, or what shall hereafter be published in any other manner, we condemn, reprobate, and forbid."

From all which we may perceive, what an evident repugnancy there is betwixt the doctrine of the Church of England and that of Rome, in the matter before us and therefore for the better understanding the case, and discerning which is in the right, and which in the wrong, I shall discourse of it in the following order.

First, I shall consider the phrase an unknown tongue.

Secondly, I shall inquire into the lawfulness and expediency of celebrating divine service in a tongue not understood by the people. For so much is affirmed by the Council of Trent, and denied by the Church of England.

Thirdly, I shall inquire, whether the celebrating service in a tongue not understood by the people, hath been the ancient custom of every Church? For so much also is affirmed by that Council, and denied by the Church of England.

Fourthly, I shall consider, whether the provision made by the foresaid Council, of having some part of the mass expounded, be sufficient to countervail the mischief of having the whole in a tongue not understood by the people, and to excuse that Church in their injunction of it?

Fifthly, I shall inquire, whether upon the whole, the public service of God ought not to be celebrated in a tongue vulgarly understood? Which proposition whosoever holds, is anathematized by the foresaid Council: and yet is owned by the Church of England.

* Sanctissimi hujus sacrificii aliquod mysterium. [Ibid.]

+ Canon. 9. [Ibid. p. 856.]

Collectio quorundam Author, &c. cum Decretis, &c. [Par.] 1661.

SECT I.

Of the phrase, Service in an Unknown Tongue.

Towards the fixing the sense of this phrase, we are to observe,

I. That there is the vulgar tongue of a country, which is universally understood by the natives of what rank or quality soever. Such was the Latin tongue formerly in Rome; such now is English with us.

Before we dismiss this, it is to be further considered:

1. That there are different dialects or ways of expressing and pronouncing the same tongue: which differences of words or pronunciation do not so alter the tongue, but that throughout under all these variations it agrees in much more than it differs; so that he that speaks the one, is generally understood by him that useth the other. Such anciently were the different dialects of the Greek tongue, well known to the learned: and such are the northern, southern, and western ways of speaking among ourselves in this nation.

2. Where there are these different dialects, there generally is one way of speaking, which either from the eloquence or fashionableness of it, so far prevails, as to be the standard of the tongue, and to be used in writing books, letters, &c. and is understood by all. Such I conceive was anciently that which is called the common dialect in Greek: and of the like kind is that which is spoken in and about the court, and by scholars and persons of a liberal education amongst us, and elsewhere.

3. If a tongue in process of time, by a mixture of other nations, or by the removal of a people from one country to another, or by any other cause comes to be so altered, as the mother and original tongue is not to be understood (as Ledesma saith it is in Spain),* then it is no longer a vulgar tongue, but it is to be reckoned amongst the unknown.

II. There is a common tongue, which though not the mother or national tongue, is however with that commonly and generally understood.

Thus it was anciently in many places with the Greek and Latin. The former of which was the common tongue of a great part of the then known world, and continued so to be

* De Script. Div. et Missæ sacr. celebr. ling. vulg. c. 20. n. 5.

from the time of Cicero, to that of St. Jerome,* for the space, that is, of four hundred, if not five hundred years; insomuch that not only the Scriptures were read in Greek in the public congregations, from Egypt to Constantinople, as St. Jerome informs us; but the Christians also had their worship, as is confessed,† and the Fathers preached to them in that language. So did St. Chrysostom, St. Basil, St. Cyril, and St. Athanasius, in their several sees of Antioch, Cæsarea, Jerusalem, and Alexandria.

And the Latin was so well known, understood, and commonly spoken, together with the vulgar tongue, in divers countries, through the industry of the Romans in their several provinces, that the vulgar was scarcely more. Thus we find it in the proconsular Africa, where, though less accurately spoken than at Rome, it was so well understood, that St. Austin saith,|| he learned that language of his nurse, and at play, and did write as well as preach in it for the use of the vulgar; and calls it " our speech," whereas the Punic was the vulgar tongue of that country.

And such a common tongue is French in Flanders, Lingua Franca in the Straits, and English in some parts of Wales.

III. There is a learned tongue, which though common amongst the learned, yet they being few in comparison of the vulgar, that understand it not, it cannot be called a common tongue; such are Greek and Latin now.

IV. There is a tongue understood and spoken by none in a nation, or so few, as are next to none: and which if used in divine offices would be wholly unintelligible; such are Persic and Indian with us.

The use of all this niceness is partly to clear the state of the question, and partly to prevent many of the objections which the case is cumbered with; and without the observing of which, the dispute will be turned from the point that is controverted, to that which is not. As it happens for the most part among those of the Church of Rome that undertake the management

*Cic. pro Archia. Hieron. tom. 9. 1. 2. prooem. ad Galat. [vol. 7. p. 427, 428, Veron. 1757.] tom. 3. Præf. 1. in paralip.

+ Ledesma, c. 33.

L. Valla Eleg. præf.

§ Ledesma, c. 3. n. 7.

L. 1. confess. c. 14. [vol. 1. p. 78. Par. 1679.] Retract. 1. 1. c. 20. [Ibid. p. 31.] In Psal. 138. De Verb. Apostol. Serm. 24. [Ibid. vol. 5. p. 804.] De Doctr. Christ. 1. 2. c. 14. [Ibid. vol. 3. par. 1. p. 27.]