The Antibarbarian, Treatise · Chapter 11
CHAP. XI. An examination of the proofes which Mounſieur the Cardinall du Perron draweth from antiquitie for ſervice in a tongue not underſtood.
IF our Adverſaries reaſons have beene weake, their allegations out of Antiquitie have no more colour. Mounſieur the Cardinall Du Perron is he that hath brought the moſt to this purpoſe.
He ſaith that the ſervice in the time of the ancient fathers was never ſaid in the Chriſtian Religion ſaving in two tongues, to wit, Againſt the King of great Brittaine. lib. 6. chap. 1. p. 1089.in the Greeke tongue and in the Latine, this he affirmes without proofe, and againſt the truth, and we already have given a multitude of proofes to the contrarie. He himſelfe in the beginning of that Chapter acknowledgeth that the Syrian Churches had their ſervice in the old Syrian, and the Ethiopian in the ancient Ethiopian tongue. And the Armenians in the ancient Armenian tongue. It had beene then his part to proove that the Armenians and the Ethiopians ever had their Liturgie in Greeke or in Latine, which can never bee made to appeare. I ſay the ſame of the Indian and Perſian Churches, the which never had in their Liturgie, no more then in civill vſe, any vſe of either of the Greeke or of the Latine, unleſſe that which in this laſt age, the Ieſuits have brought into ſome corners of the Eaſt-Indies.
Hee alledgeth in the Sequell the Iewes, who in their Synagogues uſed the Hebrew tongue, which is not the vulgar in any Countrey of the world. He beareth up himſelfe upon the example of the ſworne enemies of Ieſus Chriſt; whoſe example if we muſt follow, wee muſt with all circumciſe our ſelves, and renounce Chriſtianitie. We on the contrarie, doe acknowledg in this, the accompliſhment of Gods curſe uppn this people. It is that which God had foretold of them: I will ſpeake to this people by folke of another tongue and by ſtrange lips, and ſo they ſhall not underſtand mee. 1. Cor. 14. ver. 21. Eſay 28.11. for as for the Iewes in the time of Ieſus Chriſt and of the Apoſtles. Wee have prooved in the ſixt Chapter, that the people then underſtood the Hebrew tongue.
Du Perron pag. 1077.It is not unto the very Pagans and Mahumetans, but the Cardinall imployeth himſelfe, and hath his recourſe, thinking that the Church of Rome hath dealt very wiſely to conforme her ſelfe unto their example. We muſt needs ſay, that the Word of God failes him ſeeing he hath recourſe to ſuch examples he ſaith then that the Turkes and Perſians do their ſervice in the Grammaticall Arabick and not in the vulgar of the ſimple Turkes and Perſians, that the verſes of the Saliques, in which were contained the ancient ſervice of the Romane common-wealth, were hardly underſtood of the Prieſts: He might alſo add that the Magicians farce their conjurations with barbarous words, ſuch as are not underſtood. If in this queſtion the Divell which ſeduced the Pagans, and which blinds the Mahumetans, be taken for judge, there muſt be no ſervice of God, nor Goſpell, needs muſt that cauſe be adjudged deplorable, and without ſupport, that's drived to imploy ſuch poore proofes. We muſt obſerve by the way, that this Prelate making as though hee were very well ſeene in Hiſtorie, diſcovers himſelfe to be but a very novice and ſmatterer therein. For the Arabians which are neere the halfe of the Mahumetans, have the ſervice and the Alcoran in the vulgar tongue; and the Salique verſes containe but a ſmall part of the ſervice of the Romanes, to wit, the ſervice of Mars, and Quirinus, for they were the Prieſts of Mars. The bodie of the Romane religion was contained in the Toſcane diſcipline, given by Numa.
Hee ſaith further,Pag. 1089. that for the regard of the Eaſt-Church, the ſervice was therein done onelyonly in Greeke: This wee have convinced to be falſe. Never had the ancient Churches of Armenia, of Perſia, and of the Indians their ſervice in Greeke. Nor muſt it be doubted that the Church of Ieruſalem in the time of the Apoſtles celebrated the Sacraments in the ſame tongue in the which Ieſus Chriſt had inſtituted them,In primitiva Eccleſia myſteria Hebraicè celebrabantur. Sed tem pore Adriani I. Imperatoris Graecè in Eccleſia Orientali Chriſtianorum, primo celebrari caeperunt. and was underſtood by the people. Durand in his Rational * lib. 4. Chap. 1. ſaith, that in the Primitive Church the myſteries were celebrated in Hebrew, but that in the time of the Emperour Adrian, they began to be celebrated in Greeke in the Weſterne Churches of the Chriſtians. Vnderſtanding by the Eaſt-Church that which on the Eaſt ſide was ſubject to the Romane Empire: to wit, Syria, Iudea, Natolia, or Aſia the leſſe, unto the which may alſo be added Egypt. In theſe Countreys every where, where the ſervice was done in Greeke, there alſo their Sermons or preachings were likewiſe done in Greek. An evident proofe that the Greeke tongue was there moſt uſed, although it was different from the ancient vulgar tongues. So Athanaſius and Cyrill, and Theophilus preached in Greeke to the people of Alexandria: and Cyrill of Ieruſalem preached in Greeke at Ieruſalem: And Euſebius in Caeſaria of Palestine: And Chryſoſtome in Antioch, Capitall of Syria, and Baſil in Caeſaria of Cappadocia, and Gregorie of Nazianzen at Nazianzen, Graeca leguntur in omnibus ferè gentibus, Latina ſuis finibus exiguis ſanè continentur.and Gregory of Nyſſe at Nyſſe. Cicero in his Oration for the Poet Archias, ſaith that the Greeke was read in a manner thorowout all nations. For the Empire of the Greeke Succeſſors of Alexandria had planted the Greeke tongue in Syria, and in Egypt, and in Cilicia, and in Cappadocia, and Galatia, and had made it ſo familiar, that the vulgar tongues uſed before the raigne of Seleucides, and of Ptolomie, were leſſe familiar then the Greeke: For evermore preaching ought to be accommodated to the eare of the ſimple people, even ſo in the Churhes of Gaſcogne, and of Languedock Sermons and publicke ſervice are performed in French, although different from the tongue of the Countrey. But the French is there in ſuch ſort underſtood by the people, that they farre better love the French then the Gaſcogne, and underſtand it with like facilitie. Mounſieur the Cardinall was not ignorant of this, which appeareth by this, that he maintaines onelyonly that in the Eaſt the Greek was not the vulgar tongue, but maintaines not that the Greeke was not there underſtood, by that meanes he wanders from the queſtion. For our difference is not, that the publike ſervice ought to be ſaid in a vulgar tongue, but whether it ought to bee done in a tongue underſtood of the people. Saint Hierome in the preface of his ſecond booke upon the Epiſtle to the Galathians, ſaith that the tongue of the Galathians was like to that of the Gauls of Treves. But there he ſpeakes of the tongue that the Galathians had brought to the Countrey, and not of that, which they there had learned. The Cardinall Du Perron uſeth this place of Saint Hierome to prove that in Galatia the Greeke was not the vulgar tongue. But he faſifies this place according to his wonted manner, which maketh wholly againſt him. The words of Saint Hierome are, Galatas, excepto ſermone Graeco, quo omnis Oriens loquitur, propriam eandem linguam habere quam Treveros: That the Galathians beſides the Greeeke tongue which all the Eaſt uſeth, have a tongue proper, like to that of them of Treves. This place ſpeakes clearely, that the Greeke was current in Galatia, as in all the Eaſt. But the Cardinall alleadgeth Saint Hierome in theſe words, The tongue of the Galathians was like to that of the Gaules neere to Treves. This falſification is evident. Beſides, the Apoſtle writing to the Galathians in Greeke, preſuppoſed that they underſtood the Greeke. The Lycaonian language which is mentioned in the 14. Chapter of the Acts, verſe 11. was rather a dialect, then a diverſitie of tongues, and though indeed it had beene a tongue a part of it ſelfe; yet ſo it is that it appeareth, that the Greeke tongue was underſtood by Lycaonians, ſeeing that Paul and Barnabas ſpeake to the multitude, the preſſe and throngue of the people in Greeke.