Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 4 · Section 39
SECTIO. 39. From the 132. leafe to the second face of the 135. leafe of seruice in a straunge tongue.Rastel.
To the Bishoppes challenge, that common prayer was not in a straunge tongue within the compasse of 600. yeares after Christ, he hath nothing in the worlde.Fulk. But onelyonly affirmeth that Augustine the Monke brought Latine seruice into Englande whiche the people vnderstoode not, whiche both is somewhat without the compasse, and also onelyonly said of him without proofe or likelyhoode. He saith, he made not a newe Englishe seruice or Kentish rather, but vsed the Romane fashion and language. Be it graunted that he brought in the Latine seruice, yet how proueth he, that the people did not at that time for the moste parte, vnderstand the Latine tongue? Seeing he could preach to them onelyonly in Latine, beeing a Romane, and they also t…at came with him vnderstoode no parte of the English tongue, as our stories doe testifie. And that he planted not the Romane seruice, it may appeare by the aunswere of Gregorie to his thirde demaunde of the diuersitie of the Romane Churche, and the French Church, in which answere he bindeth him not to the Romane Church, but willeth him to choose out of all Churches, what he thinketh most conuenient and profitable for the Englishe Churche. And seeing the Scriptures and diuerse Homelyes, and Prayers remaine still in the Saxon or old English tongue, I do not see but he might hauehave made a newe English seruice, although by reason of so many mutations & troubles as happened in this land by meanes of ciuil and externe warres, & in the meane time Antichrist daily more and more incroching, the same might growe out of vse, and latine onelyonly be reteined, which perhaps at the first was but vsuall vntounto monasteries or clarkes. But how soeuer it was, this is an inuincible argument that Augustine planted not the Romane seruice in this land, bicause there were so many diuersities of customes as there were diuerse Bishops sees, and al they differing from the vse of the Romane church.
But hauing none authoritie, he hath reasons perhaps to defend latine seruice. First latine seruice is as meete for Englishmen, as English seruice is for Welshmē, wherwith he saith we finde no faulte, wherin he lieth. For the Welshmen that vnderstand not english, hauehave their common praier in their Welshe tongue.
The second reason he vseth that Sainct Paule did write in greeke to the Romanes, ergo the seruice must be in latine to Englishmen. He saith himselfe there be many differences betweene an epistle & a common forme of praiers, which is verie true. But will he proue therby, that the Romanes had their common praiers in greeke? The cause why the Apostle did write in greeke, was bicause he wrote not only to the Romanes, but to the whole churche vntounto which the greeke tongue was more familiar then the latine, and was of many vnderstoode in Rome. And also because the holy Ghoste …ad consecrated the Greek… tongue, beeing the principall tongue of the gentiles, vntounto the writinges of the newe Testament, auoyding to vse the Latine tongue, euen to the Romanes, for the mysterie of the name of Antichriste Latinos conteined in the nomber of the beastes name 666. as Irenaeus doeth testifie. His thirde reason is, that there be many thinges to be saide in publique praier, which ought to be saide in secrete, therefore an vnknowne tongue is best to vtter them. His antecedent he proueth not out of scripture or any auncient authenticall writer, but out of the liturgies falsely ascribed to Saint Basil, and Saint Chrysostome, and yet the argument hath no consequence in the world, for then those prayers in the Latine seruice to the Romanes, shoulde bee in an vnknowen tongue, and all the rest in a knowne tongue to euerie nation.
Finally, where he saith, there needeth no diuersitie of seruice according to the diuersitie of languages, he speaketh directly contrarye to the decree of the councell of Laterane, cap. 9. which commanded the bishoppes to prouide, that the sacraments and other diuine seruice, should be ministred to all people in their diocesse, according to the diuersitie of their languages and customes. By which it is proued, that seruice in an vnknowne tongue is neither so auncient as it is pretended, nor yet so allowed in all times, but that euen a popish councel hath decreed against it.