The Novelty of Popery Opposed to the Antiquity of True Christianity, Book 7 · Treatise · Chapter 5
CHAP. V. That the Publick Service in a Language not underſtood, is contrary to the Word of God, and to Reaſon.
I. THe abuſe in the publick Service is more pernitious then in private devotions, becauſe they make uſe of God himſelf to help the abuſe; for they make him Barbarous unto men, and his Word not intelligible, as if they would fruſtrate God of his intention, which is to ſpeak to us to inſtruct us; As if Chriſt had deſcended from Heaven purpoſely to ſpeak unto men, ſo that he may not be underſtood. For in the Maſs you have not only prayers unto God, but Texts of Scripture in which God ſpeaks to men.
For Prayers in an unknown Tongue they uſe this impertinent excuſe, That God underſtands all Languages, as if we ſpake with our mouth that we might be underſtood of God. But here where it is queſtion of God ſpeaking to us, that excuſe can have no place. For when God ſpeaks unto men, he will be hearkened unto and underſtood. And indeed when they bring that excuſe, that God underſtands all Languages, they preſuppoſe that he to whom they ſpeak, muſt underſtand that which is ſaid to him.
II. Wherefore Scripture tells us, that when God is angry with a people, he makes their eares heavy that they may not hear, and that their heart may not underſtand; as God himſelf ſaith by his Prophet Iſa. 6.10.
III. And it is one of Gods curſes whereby he puniſheth mens unthankfulneſs, and the contempt of his Word, when he ſpeaks unto a people in a Language which they underſtand not, as the Apoſtle teacheth, 1 Cor. 14.21. where he alledged God ſpeaking thus by his Prophet Iſaiah, With men of other tongues and other lips will I ſpeak unto this people, and thus they ſhall not hear me ſaith the Lord. Iſa. 25.11.Wherefore tongues are for a ſign, not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. This threatening is fulfilled in the Roman Church, in which God puniſheth the hardneſs of men, by ſpeaking to them in a tongue which they underſtand not.
IV. In this matter this Maxime taken from the nature of man, and the intention of the Creatour, muſt be laid for a ground, that the tongue was given unto man to be the interpreter of his thoughts, and the meſſenger of his conceits. Whence it follows, that to uſe the tongue for a contrary end, and to ſpeak that one may not be underſtood, is overthrowing nature, and as far as in us lyeth, fruſtrating the Creatour of his intention, changing mans ſpeech into an uſeleſs ſound, and a voyce beating the air. And if that be true in him that ſpeaks to others in a Tongue which they underſtand not, it is yet more true in him who is neither underſtood by himſelf nor by others.
V. From the ſame Maxime it follows, that when the Prieſt ſpeaks Latin in the Church, he ought to ſpeak to be underſtood of ſome. Let our Adverſaries tell us whether he ſpeaks to be underſtood by the aſſiſtants, or by himſelf, or by God; for there is no fourth. He ſpeaks not to be underſtood by the aſſiſtants, ſince he ſpeaks low and in a Language which the people underſtand not; and in private Maſſes he ſpeaks alone and without aſſiſtants. Neither doth he ſpeake to be underſtood by God; for God underſtands us without our ſpeaking, and before we open our mouth. It cannot be ſaid alſo, that the Prieſt in the Maſs ſpeaks that he may underſtand himſelf, for he knew his own thought before he ſpake. Speech was given unto man, not to make him know his own thought, but to make it known unto others. That man is altogether ſenſeleſs, who ſpeaks to himſelf that he may underſtand himſelf.
VI. To this add, that in many places of the Maſs the Prieſt ſpeaks unto the people, ſaying Oremus, and Orate pro me fratres, &c. and many the like paſſages, in which the Prieſt commands the people to ask of God ſuch and ſuch things, and to joyn their prayers with his. But the people is far from obeying that command, not knowing what the Prieſt commands them. The people might ſay to him with good reaſon, Make thy ſelf underſtood to us, if thou wilt be obeyed.
VII. Wherefore in the Church of the Old Teſtament all the publick Service was done in the vulgar tongue; and the Prayers which Aaron and his Succeſſors made for the Hebrew people were in Hebrew, which tongue being altered ſince the Captivity of Babylon, yet was underſtood by the people, as we will ſhew hereafter.
VIII. The Lord Jeſus inſtituted and celebrated the holy Communion among his Diſciples in the vulgar tongue,1 Cor. 11.26. intelligible to the aſſiſtants. He commanded them that as often as they eate this bread and drink this cup, they ſhould announce the Lords death till he come. To obey that command, they muſt ſo ſpeak that they may be underſtood when they announce the Lords death; for a thing is not announced when it is propounded in an unintelligible tongue.
IX. To the ſame end he gave to his Apoſtles the gift of divers Languages, that in all Nations they might eſtabliſh the Service of God in the Language of the Country, and that in every tongue God might be ſerved. So that the diverſity of Tongues, which in the building of Babel was a curſe, in the building of the Church became a bleſſing.
X. The Apoſtles followed their Maſters example; For St. Paul writing to the Corinthians, who were Grecians, giveth them in their Tongue the Form of the celebration of the Lords Supper, 1 Cor. 11.
XI. Is it like that Chriſt who is the light of the World, came to pour darkneſs upon the World? And ſince God ſpake to his People by Moſes in an intelligible tongue, would he now delight to propound his Word, and give his Sacraments in a barbarous and ſtrange Tongue?
XII. But the ſtrongeſt weapon in this combat, and the ſword that cuts the knot, is the Apoſtles Authority, who imployeth the 14. Chap. of the firſt Epiſtle to the Corinthians wholly almoſt upon this matter, even to condemn the uſe of ſtrange Languages not underſtood in the Church. If (ſaith he v. 8.) the trumpet give an uncertain ſound, who ſhall prepare himſelf to the battel? So likewiſe you, except ye utter by the tongue words eaſie to be underſtood, how ſhall it be known what is spoken? but ye ſhall speak into the air. And v. 11. If I know not the meaning of the voyce, I ſhall be unto him that speaketh a Barbarian, and he that speaketh ſhall be a Barbarian unto me. And v. 16. When thou ſhalt bleſs with the Spirit, how ſhall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned ſay Amen at thy giving of thanks, ſeeing be underſtandeth not what thou ſayeſt? For thou verily giveſt thanks well, but the other is not edified. Whence he concludeth, v. 19. In the Church I had rather speak five words with my underſtanding, that by my voyce I might teach others alſo, then ten thouſand words in an unknown Tongue.
(a)6. Book. 1. ch. pag. 109.Cardinal Du Perron anſwers, that St. Paul ſpeaks not of an unknown tongue ordinarily uſed in the Church, but of infuſed and miraculous tongues; and that St. Paul by tongues, ſignifyeth unknown tongues. This I readily grant, for it increaſeth the ſtrength of the Text, againſt the ordinary ſervice in an unknown tongue; for theſe miraculous gifts of tongues were rare, and given unto ſome Chriſtians for a ſhort time, to make Gods vertue to appear: And by conſequent the uſe of them in the Church brought a benefit, which the Maſs in Latine cannot yield. Yet the Apoſtle forbids them to uſe that miraculous gift in the Church, without expounding preſently, becauſe he will have nothing ſaid in the Church that is not underſtood. How much more doth he condemn ſtrange Language in the ordinary Service, where that extraordinary evil, which the Apoſtle will avoid, becomes ordinary? The Apoſtle forbids not the uſe of an unknown tongue in the Church, becauſe it is miraculous, but becauſe it is not underſtood, and becauſe he that ſpeaketh becomes barbarous unto him that heareth, and becauſe that which is ſaid is not underſtood; and becauſe ſpeaking thus is beating the ayr, and becauſe the people cannot ſay Amen to a thankſgiving which they underſtand not, and becauſe the hearers are not edified: Which are true reaſons, whether he that ſpeaks an unknown language in the Church, hath learned that language by miracle or ſtudy. Here the queſtion is not of the manner, how a man hath learned a tongue, but of the inſtruction of the people. St. Paul had learned Hebrew without miracle, yet he would not have celebrated the Lords Supper at Corinth, or at Rome, among the Gentiles in the Hebrew Tongue. Upon the whole matter he giveth two general rules without exception; the one, that it is better to ſay five intelligible words in the Church, then ten thouſand unintelligible: The other, that it is a curſe of God, when he ſpeaks to a people in a language which they underſtand not.
XIV. Others try another way to eſcape. They ſay, that St. Paul ſpeaks not of the ordinary ſervice which was ſaid in the Church, but of certain hymnes and ſpiritual ſongs. By ſpeaking thus they will perſwade us that ſuch hymns were to be pronounced in a tongue underſtood of all, but that the reſt of the ſervice was ſpoken in a language not underſtood by the Corinthians; which they know to be moſt falſe; for it is a thing known that in Greece the publick Service was always done in Greek, and ſo is done to this day. If thoſe hymns and ſpiritual ſongs were to be pronounced in a known tongue, much more the ordinary prayers, and the reading of Gods word, from which the people receiveth more edification.
XV. But it is eaſie for us to prove that the Apoſtle in this Text ſpeaks of other things then hymns and ſpiritual ſongs: for when he ſaith that ſtrange tongues are for a ſign, not to believers, but to Infidels, and puts this among the threatenings and curſes of God, when God threatens to ſpeak to a people in a ſtrange language that he may not be underſtood, it is clear, that he ſpeaks not of hymns and ſongs in which men ſpeak to God, but of the word of God directed unto men.
XVI. And when the Apoſtle ſaith, that he had rather ſpeak five intelligible words in the Church to inſtruct others, then ten thouſand in an unknown language, it is evident that he ſpeaks of all that is pronounced in the Church.
XVII. And theſe words, If I know not the meaning of the voyce, I ſhall be unto him that speaks a Barbarian, and he that speaketh ſhall be a Barbarian unto me, are as true, no doubt in reſpect of him that reads Scripture in publick, as of him that pronounceth hymns; for all thoſe are held barbarians whoſe language is not underſtood: Which is that which Ovid ſaith of himſelf, exiled among the Getes:
(b)Ovid. Triſt. l. 5. Eleg. 10.Barbarus hic ego ſum quia non intelligor ulli,
Et rident ſtolidi verba Latina Getae.
XVIII. Alſo when the Prieſt pronounceth prayers in the Maſs, where the people underſtands nere a word, may we not, and indeed ought we not to apply unto him the ſentence of the Apoſtle, How ſhall the unlearned ſay Amen at thy giving of thanks, ſeeing he underſtandeth not what thou ſayeſt?
Chryſoſtom expounding this Text, underſtands it as we do; for he perſonates the Apoſtle ſpeaking thus,(c)Chryſoſtom. Hom. 35. in 1 Cor. foreign? Ʋnleſs I ſay that which may be intelligible to you, and that may be evident, but ſhew you only that I have the gift of tongues, you ſhall go away without any benefit from that you have heard of unknown tongues. For what benefit do you get by a voice which you underſtand not?
(d)Si utique ad aedificandam Eccleſiam conveneritis, ea debent dici quae intelligant audientes. Nam quid prodeſt ut quis loquatur lingua quam ſolus ſcit, ut qui audit nihil proficiat? &c.Ambroſe in his Comment upon this place underſtands it ſo. If (ſaith he) you aſſemble your ſelves to edifie the Church, ſuch things muſt be ſaid as the hearers may underſtand. For what good doth it when a man speaketh a tongue which he alone underſtands, that they that hear may get no good by it? And a little after, The Apoſtle ſaith, (e)In Eccleſia velo quinque verba loqui per legem, ut & alios aedificem, quam prolixam orationem habere in obſcuro.I chooſe rather to speak five words in the Church according to the Law, that I may edifie others alſo, then to make a long ſpeech with obſcurity.
Hierom in his Comment upon the ſame place(f)Omnis ſermo qui non intelligitur barbarus judicatur. Every diſcourſe which is not underſtood, is judged barbarous. And in the ſame place,(g)Si quis incognitis aliis linguis loquatur, mens ejus non ipſi efficitur ſine fructu, ſed audientis; quicquid enim dicitur ignorat. If any ſpeak to others in unknown tongues, his mind is made unfruitfull, not to himſelf, but to the hearer; for he underſtands nothing of that which is ſaid.
Baſil in his Asketicks is very expreſs upon that, in the 278. anſwer of his brief definitions; He asketh, How is it that the Spirit of a man prayeth, but his underſtanding is without fruit? Then he anſwereth,(*)foreign, &c. foreign. This was ſaid (by the Apoſtle) concerning thoſe that make their prayers in a tongue unknown unto them that hear: For, he ſaith, If I pray in a tongue, my ſpirit prayeth, but my underſtanding is fruitleſs: for when the words of the prayer are unknown to the aſſiſtants, the mind of him that prayeth is unfruitfull, doing no good. But when the aſſiſtants underſtand the prayer, which may profit them that hear it, then he that prayeth hath this fruit, the bettering of thoſe that have got profit thereby. The ſame is in all declarations of the word of God: for it is written, if there be ſome good words for the edification of faith. This holy man underſtands this Text, not only of the hymns and ſongs, but of any prayer, and of any reading or pronouncing of the word of God.
Upon that, we have a Law of the Emperour Juſtinian, in the 123. Novel, in the Greek Editions, in theſe words,(h)Ad haec jubemus ut omnes Epiſcopi pariter et Presbyteri non tacito modo ſed clara voce quae à fideli populo exaudiatur, ſacram oblationem & preces in ſancto baptiſmate adhibitas celebrent, quo majore exinde devotione in depromendis Dei laudibus audientium animi efferantur: Ita enim & Divus Apoſtolus docet prima ad Corinthios Epiſtola. We command that all Biſhops and Prieſts celebrate the holy oblation, and the Prayers added to the holy Baptiſm, not with a low, but with a clear voice, which may be underſtood by the faithfull People, that thereby the minds of the hearers be raiſed with a greater devotion to ſet forth the praiſes of the Lord God. For thus the Apoſtle teacheth in the firſt Epiſtle to the Corinthians. This Imperial Law is found in the Greek exemplaries of Haloander, and is alledged at large by Caſſander a Divine of Collen, and is acknowledged by Cardinal Bellarmine in the 2. Book of the Maſs 12. chap. Wherefore the fraud and perverſity of thoſe that have raſed it out of the Latine verſions of the Novels of Juſtinian, is to be deteſted.
To this Law Bellarmine anſwereth, that it belongs not to an Emperour to give Laws concerning ſacred things. But if that Novel is not received for a Law, at leaſt it is a witneſs of the cuſtom of the Church in the Roman Empire, untill the time of that Emperour, who died about the year of Chriſt, 565.
Bellarmine ſaith alſo, that this commandment was made only to the Greek Churches: but Bellarmine could not be ignorant that the City of Rome, and the Biſhop of the ſame were at that time under the ſubjection of the Emperour Juſtinian: which appeareth in the ſame Novel, in which the Biſhop of Rome is taxed by the Emperour in four thouſand crowns for the entry of his charge, and the other Patriarchs in three thouſand; for in thoſe days the Biſhops of the principal Sees paid the Annuat unto the Emperour: And the ſame Emperour created two Biſhops of Rome, Sylverius and Vigilius.
Truly this text of St. Paul of 1 Cor. 14. whereby he condemneth the uſe of ſtrange languages in the Church, doth ſo vex our adverſaries, that ſome of the moſt conſcionable among them freely condemn their cauſe in this point.
Nicholas de Lyra in his Notes upon this chapter ſpeaks thus,(i)Hic conſequenter idem oſtendit in oratione publica, quia ſi populus intelligat orationem ſen benedictionem Sacerdotis, melius reducitur in Deam, et devotius reſpondet Amen. Here conſequently the Apoſtle ſheweth the ſame of publick prayer, becauſe if the people underſtand the prayer or bleſsing of the Prieſt, he is the better brought unto God, and anſwereth Amen more devoutly. Again, If the Prieſt bleſſeth in Spirit, that is, not being underſtood by the people, what good doth that to the ſimple people that underſtand not?
Anſelmus whom the Pope hath Sainted, in his Expoſition upon this chapter,(k)Bonum eſt quod loqucris, ſed alter non aedificatur in verbis tuis quae non intelligit. Ideo cum ad Eccleſiam propter aedificationem conveniatis, ea d…bent in Eccleſia dici quae in…elligantur hominibus, et praeſtent aedificationem audientibus. That which thou ſayeſt is good; but another is not edified by thy words which he underſtands not. Wherefore ſince you meet in the Church for edification, things muſt be ſaid in the Church which may be underſtood by men, and that bring edification to the hearers.
Thomas, the Prince of Schoolmen, in his Comment upon this firſt Chapter of the Apoſtle, in the fourth Leſſon is brought to ſuch a perplexity about this Text, that in the end he is brought to ſay, that this command of the Apoſtle was good for the Primitive Church, but that now it is practiſed no more, becauſe the faithfull are better inſtructed:(l)Sed quare non dantur benedictiones in vulgari, ut intell gantur à populo et conforment ſe magis eis? R. Dicendum eſt quod hoc forte fuit in Eccleſia primitiva, ſed poſtquam fideles inſtructi ſunt et ſciunt quae audiunt in communi officio, fiunt benedictiones in Latino. Why (ſaith he) are not the bleſſings given in the vulgar tongue, that the people may underſtand them, and conform themſelves better unto them? His anſwer is, that perhaps it was done ſo in the Primitive Church; but after that the faithfull have been inſtructed, and know the things which they hear in the ordinary Service, the bleſſings are done in Latine. In the fifth Leſſon he ſaith, that in the Antient Church it would have been a folly to pray in a Language not underſtood, becauſe then men were rude, but that now all are inſtructed. Wherein he is very wide of the truth; for never was the people more ignorant then it was in the Age of Thomas, and the two following Ages. Even in our Age, in which Scripture is brought to the ſight of the world, and humane Letters are flouriſhing, ſcarce of a hundred men in the Roman Church ten are to be found that know what is contained in the Maſs, or that do ſo much as to enquire about it. Harding in the 3. Article of his Diſpute againſt Jewel in the 30. Section, hath followed the impiety of Thomas, ſpeaking thus,(m)Quod autem Divus Paulus morem precandi lingua in Eccleſia tanquam fructus et aedificationis expertem improbare videtur, et quinque verba aut ſententias intellectas et perceptas ex quibus reliquus populus inſtituatur, decem millibus peregrino et incognito ſermone pronuntiatis anteponere; iſta omnia ad illorum temporum conditionem referenda ſunt, quae hodierno Eccleſiae ſtatui longe diſſimilis eſt. As for that it ſeemeth that St. Paul condemneth the cuſtom of praying in [unknown] Language in the Church, as being void of fruit and edification, and referreth five words or ſentences underſtood, whereby the peo…le be inſtructed, unto ten thouſand pronounced in an unknown and ſtrange Language; all theſe things muſt be referred to the condition of thoſe times which is far different from the condition of the Church in our days. Mark the impiety and audaciouſneſs of the man which cuts down the authority of Gods word at the root. For if it be permitted unto men to ſay, This Law was in the beginning, and ſo they taught in the Apoſtles time, but now it is altered, and the Church being better inſtructed doth otherwiſe; What remaineth but to alter wholly the word of God, and to give unto the Pope the authority of abrogating Divine Laws, and pulling God from his throne to raiſe the Pope above God.
Cardinal Cajetan was aſhamed of that; for in his Comment upon the 14. chap. of the firſt Epiſtle to the Corinthians he ſpeaketh, as wiſhing that Latine were baniſht out of the publick ſervice, and that the Service were made in the vulgar tongue.(n)Ex hac Pauli doctrina habetur quod melius ad aedificationem Eccleſiae eſt orationes publicas quae audiente populo dicuntur dici lingua communi clericis et populo, quam dici Latine. By this doctrine of St. Paul (ſaith he) it is gathered, that it is better for the edification of the Church to have the publique prayers (which are ſaid in the hearing of the people) ſaid in the common tongue, both to the Clergy and the peo le, then ſaid in Latine. This is indeed a notable confeſſion, from a Cardinal ſo eminent, and of ſuch authority in the Roman Church.