Answer to Book by Romish Priests, Doctrine 52 – Conclusion
LII. That the Publick Service of the Church, ought not to be ſaid, but in a Language that all the People may underſtand.
Anſwer.
IT is ſome ſatisfaction that we ſhall part fairly; for in Concluſion he ſpeaks truly and plainly. This is our Doctrine, which is ſo agreeable to the expreſs words of the Bible; that unleſs the Bible contradict it ſelf, nothing can be found there to the contrary.
I Luke 8.St. Luke I. 8. ſaith nothing of any words the Prieſt ſpake, when he miniſtred in the Sanctuary. Nor do we find in the Bible, the leaſt mention of Publick Prayers he made there, but only of burning Incenſe; which the People well underſtood repreſented the going up of their Prayers to God with acceptance; which they made without, while he burnt Incenſe within. Which may be called a Symbolical Prayer; the meaning of which was as well underſtood by the People, as what they themſelves ſpake. The Angel indeed tells him, v. 13. thy Prayer is heard; but this doth not prove he ſpake any words, but rather lifted up his mind to God, when the Incenſe aſcended towards Heaven. For it is manifeſt he continued his Miniſtration after he was ſtruck Dumb; and therefore it was not the Cuſtom to ſpeak any words. But ſuppoſe he did, how doth it appear he did not ſpeak in the Language he uſed at other times, the Language of the Country? Tho it is not material whether he did or no; for the People were not in a Capacity to hear his Voice. And therefore this place, if it prove any thing, proves too much; that the Publick Service of the Church may be ſaid in a place ſeparate from all the People, where they can neither hear, nor ſee the Prieſt.
The XVI. Levit. 17.XVI. Lev. 17. is moſt abſurdly alledged to ſerve this purpoſe, becauſe it ſpeaks of a Typical Service in the moſt Holy Place; unto which we have nothing here anſwerable upon Earth, but is fulfilling in the Interceſſion which our Lord Jeſus Chriſt makes for us continually in Heaven, by virtue of his moſt precious Blood, wherewith he entred in thither. Beſides, the High-Prieſt of old, ſaid not one word while he ſtaid there; and therefore this can be no argument the People need not underſtand the Publick Prayers of the Church, which are made, not in ſuch a Secret Place as that was, but openly in the hearing of all the People. Who, by this reaſoning, may be ſhut out of the Church, as well as excluded from underſtanding the Prayers, and the Prieſt left there to a ſilent Service by himſelf.
Here Fathers being wanting (for they are all againſt a Service in an unknown Tongue) he pretends he hath no need of them; tho he needleſly heapt them up, where he could find a word, that ſeemed to look that way he would have it. But he ſupplies this want with a bold untruth, That the practice of the whole Chriſtian World, for theſe many hundred years hath been againſt us, who would have Divine Service in a Language the People underſtand: Which can be ſalved by nothing, but by another proud falſity, that the Roman Church is the whole Chriſtian World. For no Church uſes Latin Service, but ſuch as are under the Dominion of the Pope of Rome; all others uſe the Language of their ſeveral Countries. Nay, there are ſome who have acknowledged his Authority, that would ſtill have the Publick Service in their own Language, which the People underſtood.
For ſhame, let theſe men leave off Writing, and betake themſelves to their Prayers, that God would forgive them their abominable Falſhoods, wherewith they have laboured to maintain their Cauſe; particularly in this point, about Publick Service in a Language the People do not underſtand. Which they are ſenſible is againſt the expreſs Doctrine of St. Paul, in 1 Cor. XIV. and therefore this man thinks himſelf concern'd to attempt an Anſwer unto what we alledge from hence.
At firſt he diſtinguiſhes between Publick Prayer and Private, which here is very idle, for it is evident, the Apoſtle ſpeaks of Publick Prayers in the Church, verſe 19. When the whole Church came together in one place, verſe 23.
Secondly, He ſaith this place is againſt us, becauſe it proves the Common Service of the Church, was not then in a Tongue which every man underſtood, but in another Language, not ſo common to all, verſe 16. Mark, how he contradicts himſelf; before he ſuppoſed (or elſe he talk'd impertinently) that the Apoſtle diſcourſes of Private Prayers; now he acknowledges it is the Common Service of the Church, of which he ſpeaks, but ſhews it was not in the Common Language. What a brow have theſe men, who can thus out-face the cleareſt truth? That which the Apoſtle condemns as a fault of ſome Perſons, and condemns as utterly inconſiſtent with the very end of Speech, as well as with the Edification of the Church; this man makes to have been common allowed Practice. Was there ever ſuch Prevarication? A man had better have no uſe of Reaſon, than Diſcourſe on this faſhion; no Tongue at all, than talk at this rate, expreſly againſt the Apoſtle's Injunction, who requires him, who could not deliver what he ſpake in a known Tongue, or had no Interpreter, To hold his peace, and ſpeak to himſelf, and to God, v. 28.
His Argument to juſtify their Practice is ſo ſilly, that it cannot but make a good man ſigh deeply, to think that poor ignorant People ſhould be miſ led by ſuch Ideots. For he takes him, who occupied the place of the unlearned (in verſe 16.) to be one, who was required, or ſuppoſed to be there, to ſupply the unlearned man's place, That is, ſaith he, one who ſhould have further underſtanding of that Tongue in which the Service of the Church is ſaid. Which he imagines is a proof, the Service was not in the Vulgar Tongue, for then there had been no need of one to ſupply the Ideots place, &c. This is ſuch a groſs piece of Duncery, as his Maſter Bellarmine would have corrected, if he had look'd into him, or any of the Ancient and Modern Interpreters: Who by one that takes up the place of the Ʋnlearned, do not underſtand, one that acts in the ſtead of an Ʋnlearned Perſon, (that's a dull fancy, never heard of among the Learned) but one that ſits in the Place or Bench, is in the Form, as we ſpeak, of the Ʋnlearned. That is, an Ignorant Perſon, who is the man that the Apoſtle ſaith, could not ſay, Amen, if he underſtood not what was ſaid in the Thankſgiving. So Menochius upon that Text, He that ſits among the Simple and Rude, who are ignorant of Tongues, how ſhall he ſay, Amen? That is, approve thy Prayer, if he do not underſtand it.
His Cavil therefore at the Geneva Miniſters is fooliſh, if not malicious; for they tranſlate the words honeſtly, not deceitfully, according to the certain ſenſe of them; there being no difference between an Ideot, and he who ſupplies the place of an Ideot.
We know of no Reformed Churches, where they do not ſay Amen to their Publick Prayers. Here we are ſure the People are enjoyned ſo to do. Therefore it is another Slander, if he object this to us, who have not turned Amen into So be it, as he ſays many of the Reformed Churches have done. If it be true, that any have expounded the word, into others of like ſignification, it was for the Edification of the People, and no body hath juſt reaſon to find fault with them, if the People did not underſtand its meaning. Which they did in Greece, as much as in Judea, and therefore the Apoſtle had reaſon to retain it.
But he belies St. Auſtin, as he hath done us, when he makes him ſay, It is not lawful to turn Amen into any other language, without the ſcandal of the whole Church. For he ſaith, *L. 2. de Doct. Chriſt. c. 10.There is ſuch variety of Latin Interpreters of the Scripture, as makes the knowledge of the Hebrew and Greek neceſſary; that when one doubts of the Latin, recourſe may be had thither; (this is worth marking for other purpoſes). Tho ſome Hebrew words indeed we often find are not interpreted, as Amen, Allelujah, Racha, and Oſanna, &c. Which Antiquity hath preſerved, partly, for the more ſacred Authority, tho they might have been interpreted (obſerve that) as Amen, and Allelujah; partly, becauſe it's ſaid they cannot be tranſlated into another tongue, as the two other words, Racha, and Oſanna. In which diſcourſe he ſays nothing of the unlawfulneſs of Tranſlating the Hebrew words, nor of the ſcandal their Tranſlation would give; but only of ſome of them, particularly, Amen, being more venerable in the Original Language, than in any other. What he ſays in his Epiſtles I cannot ſtand to examine; for in that Epiſtle which he quotes, there is nothing to be found about this matter.
In concluſion, he is driven to this ſhift, to ſay, That our own Service is not underſtood, becauſe it conſiſts partly of the Pſalms of David (which he moſt falſly ſays are the hardeſt part of all the Bible) and of Leſſons out of the Old and New Teſtament, which are not underſtood by the people. But is this all that our Service conſiſts of? Have we not Prayers and Thanksgivings, eaſie to be underſtood every word? As in the other part of the Service they underſtand enough for their Edification; whereas of their Maſs, the ſimple people underſtand nothing: Or ſuppoſe they underſtand a little, yet this will not make their caſe like ours; becauſe the people with us have all in their vulgar Language, tho they do not every one underſtand all; but they have not a word in their vulgar language, tho ſome perhaps may underſtand a little of the Latin Tongue.
And what is the reaſon they dare not truſt the Maſs in the vulgar language? Becauſe it is hard to be underſtood? No, but quite contrary, becauſe the people would eaſily find things there which confute their own Religion, and are conformable unto ours. For who would believe Purgatory any longer, who heard the Prieſt ſay in the vulgar tongue, Lord, remember thy ſervants and handmaids that are gone before us, with the ſign of Faith, and ſleep in the ſleep of peace? If they be in peace, every one would be ready to ſay, Then they are not burning in the Purgatory fire; and what need I give my money to Pray them out from thence? The like paſſages there are, that would make them believe Tranſubſtantiation to be a Fable; and that it is a novel thing to have the Divine Service in an Ʋnknown Tongue; which I have not room to mention: But deſire the Reader to obſerve how this practice is condemned out of the mouths of many great perſons in their own Church. I will name Two.
One is Cardinal Cajetan, upon 1 Cor. XIV. who ſaith, Out of this Doctrine of Paul we learn, That it is better for the Edification of the Church, that the Publick Prayers which are ſaid in the audience of the people, ſhould be ſaid in the tongue common to Clerks and People, than ſaid in Latin. A moſt ingenuous Confeſſion; in which he doth but follow one of their Saints, viz. Anſelm, in his Expoſition of the ſame Chapter; That is good which thou ſayeſt, but another is not edified by thy words, which he underſtands not. Therefore ſince you meet in the Church for Edification, thoſe things ought to be ſaid in the Church, which may be underſtood by men, and afford Edification to the hearers.
CONCLƲSION.
NOW I leave all men, who have a grain of common ſenſe and common honeſty, whether this man, who (both in the Title and Concluſion of his Book) pretends to judge us out of our own mouth, II. Jam. 4.be not, as St. James ſpeaks, a judge of evil thoughts: That is, as his Menochius expounds it, one who reaſons ill, and therefore judgeth ill: 1 Tim. I. 7.Who deſiring to be a Teacher of others, underſtands neither what he ſaith, nor whereof he affirms. As will be confeſſed by all who follow our Saviour's Rule,
VII. John 24.
Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
FINIS.
ERRATA.
PAge 38. line 20. r. to be come.
P. 54. l. 26. r. of Religion.
P. 90. l. 24. r. all together.
P. 105. l. 1. r. Arts; whereby.
P. 145. l. 24. r. 1 Cor. IX. 27.
P. 172. l. 25. r. heard of, much leſs have ever ſeen.
P. 184. l. 5. r. Rich Man.
P. 187. l. 14. r. ad Pop. Antioch.
P. 193. l. 21. r. things done at.
P. 207. l. 15. r. ſolemn Rite.
P. 213. l. 6. r. moſt ſuitable.
P. 217. l. 16. r. Tert. Sum.
Ibid. l. 17. r. mere impudence.
P. 218. l. 1. r. Bona for Bonell.
P. 224. l. 21. r. S. Victore.
P. 231. l. 21. r. ſpeaking of Virgins.
P. 250. l. antepenult. r. viſible.
P. 253. l. 11. r. God's footſtool.
P. 262. l. 14. r. of Fathers to countenance.
End of the text · Simon Patrick, Answer to Book by Romish Priests (1692)