Now in this place we are told, that the whole company Introduct. lift up their voice with one accord, and faid, (i. e. they joined all together with audible voices in ufing these words,) Lord, thou art God, &c. which they could not poffibly have done, unless the prayer they used was a precomposed fet form. For whatever may be faid in favour of joining mentally, with a prayer conceived extempore; I fuppofe nobody will contend, that it is poffible for a confiderable congregation to join vocally or aloud, as the Apostles and their company are here said to have done, in a prayer so conceived.

66

But fome may object, that " though it is affirmed, that "the whole company lift up their voice, and faid the prayer here mentioned; yet it is poffible that one only might do fo in the name of all the reft, who joined mentally with him, though not in an audible manner." To this we anfwer, That the Scripture never attributes that to a whole congregation or multitude, which is literally true of a fingle perfon only, except in fuch cafes, where the thing related requires the confent of the whole multitude, but could not conveniently be performed or done by every one of them in their own perfons. But I suppose no man will pretend, either that it was impoffible for the Apoftles and their company to lift up their voice, and fay the prayers recited in the context, or that God could not hear or understand them when speaking all together.

But that which puts the matter out of all doubt, is the following confideration, viz. that the company is not barely faid to have lift up their voice, but to have lift it up [duoduμador] with one accord, or all together; which adverb is fo placed, that it cannot be joined to any other verb than pav; and nothing is more evident, than that this adverb implies and denotes a conjunction of persons : and confequently, fince it is here applied to all the company, and particularly to that action of theirs, viz. their lifting up their voice; it is manifeft that they did all of them lift up their refpective voices, and that they could not be faid to have lift up their voices in that sense, which this objection fuppofes, viz. by appointing one person to lift up his fingle voice for them all. For if they did fo, then the Hiftorian's words muft fignify, that the whole congregation lift up their voice together, by appointing one man to lift up his particular voice in conjunction with himself alone: which is fuch nonfenfe, as cannot, without blafphemy, be imputed to an inspired Writer. So that it

is

Introduct. is undeniably plain, that the perfons here faid to have been prefent, uttered their prayer all together, and spake all at the fame time; and confequently, that the prayer muft be a precompofed fet form.

66

If any perfon fhould be fo extravagant as to imagine, that the whole congregation was infpired at that very "inftant with the fame words; and, confequently, that they might all of them break forth at once, and join vocally in the fame prayer, though it were not precom"pofed," we need only reply, that this affertion is utterly groundless, having neither any fhew of reason, nor fo much as one example in all hiftory to warrant it.

But it may perhaps be objected, that "the Apostles "and their company could have no notice of this un"foreseen accident; and therefore could not be prepared "with fuch a precompofed fet form of thanksgiving; "and that it was uttered fo foon after the relation of "what had befallen the Apoftles, that if it had been "compofed upon that occafion, it feems impoffible that "copies of it fhould have been delivered out for the. company to be fo far acquainted with it, as immedi"ately to join vocally in it." To which we answer, (1.) That fince we have evidently proved, from their joining vocally in it, that it muft have been a precompofed fet form; it lies upon our adversaries to answer our argu ment, more than it does upon us to account for this difficulty: for a difficulty, though it could not be eafily accounted for, is by no means fufficient to confront and overthrow a clear demonftration. But, (2.) this difficulty is not fo great as it may at first appear: for there is nothing in the whole prayer, but what might properly be ufed every day by a Chriftian congregation, fo long as the powers of the world were oppofing and threatening fuch as preached the Gofpel, and the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost were continued in the Church: fo that those who think this prayer to have been conceived and used on that emergency only, and never either before or after, do, in reality, beg the queftion, and take that for granted which they cannot prove. For the Scripture fays nothing like it, nor do the circumftances require it; and therefore it is very probable that it was a standing form, well known in the Church, and frequently used, as occafion offered and confequently, upon this occafion, (on which it is manifeft it was highly feasonable and proper,) they immediately brake forth, and vocally uttered, and jointly

:

faid it, and perhaps added it to their other daily devo- Introduct. tions, which, we may very well fuppofe, they used at the fame time, though the Hiftorian takes no notice of it.

There remains ftill another objection, which may poffibly be made, viz. that "the holy Scriptures, when they "relate what was fpoken, especially by a multitude, do "not always give us the very words that were spoken, "but only the fense of them: and accordingly in this "inftance, perhaps the congregation did not jointly offer "( up that very prayer, but when they had heard what "the Apoftles told them, they might all break out at "one and the fame time into vocal prayer, and every man utter words much to the fame fenfe, though they "might not join in one and the fame form." But to remove this objection, we need only reflect upon the intolerable confufion fuch a practice muft of neceflity caufe: for that they all prayed vocally, has been evidently proved: if therefore they did not join in the fame prayer, but offer up every man different words, though to the fame fenfe; it muft neceffarily follow, that the whole. company would, inftead of uniting in their devotions, interrupt and distract each other's prayers.

How much more reafonable then is it to believe, that the Apostles and their company, who then prayed all together vocally, upon fo folemn an occafion, did really ufe the fame prayer, and join in the fame words? And if fo, then the argument already offered is a demonftration that they joined in a precompofed fet form of prayer, befides the Lord's prayer and pfalms.

And that the primitive Chriftians did very early use. precompofed fet forms in their public worship, is evident from the names given to their public prayers; for they are called the common prayers**, conftituted prayers, and folemn prayers. But that which puts the matter out of all doubt, are the Liturgies afcribed to St. Peter, St. Mark, and St. James; which, though corrupted by later ages, are doubtlefs of great antiquity. For befides many things which have a strong relifh of that age, that of St. James was of great authority in the Church of Jerufalem in St. Cyril's time, who has a comment upon it still extant",

C.

44 Kowai sixaí. Juft. Mart. Apol. 1. .85. p. 124. 1. 28.

45 Εὐχαὶ προσαχθείσαι. Origen. cont. Cell. 1. 6. p. 312. Aug. Vindel.. 1605.

46 Preces folennes. Cypr. de Lapf.
P. 132.
47 Catech. Myft. 5. a p. 295. ad p.

301.

Introduct. which St. Jerom fays was writ in his younger years 43

and it is not probable that St. Cyril would have taken
the pains to explain it, unless it had been of general use in
the Church; which we cannot fuppofe it could have ob-
tained in lefs than feventy or eighty years. Now St. Cy-
ril was chofen Bishop of Jerufalem either in the year 349,
or 351; to which office, it is very well known, feldom
any were promoted before they were pretty well in years.
If therefore he writ his comment upon this Liturgy in his
younger years, we cannot poffibly date it later than the
year 340; and then allowing the Liturgy to have ob-
tained in the Church about eighty years, it neceffarily
follows that it must have been compofed in the year 260,
which was not above 160 years after the apoftolical age.
It is declared by Proclus and the fixth general Coun-
cil 50, to be of St. James's own compofing. And that there
are forms of worship in it as ancient as the Apostles, seems
highly probable; for all the form, Surfum corda, is there,
and in St. Cyril's comment. The fame is in the Liturgies
of Rome and Alexandria, and in the Constitutions of Cle-
mens ", which all agree are of great antiquity, though
not fo early as they pretend: and St. Cyprian, who was
living within an hundred years after the Apoftles, makes
mention of it as a form then used and received 52,
52, which
Nicephorus does alfo of the Trifagium in particular 5. We
do not deny but that these Liturgies may have been inter-
polated in after-times: but that no more overthrows the
antiquity of the ground-work of them, than the large ad-
ditions to a building prove there was no houfe before. It
is an eafy matter to fay, that fuch Liturgies could not be
St. James's or St. Mark's, because of such errors or mis-
takes, and interpolations of things and phrases of later
times. But what then? Is this an argument that there
were no ancient Liturgies in the Churches of Jerufalem'
or Alexandria; when fo long fince as in Origen's time 54,
we find an entire collect produced by him out of the Alex-
andrian Liturgy? And the like may be fhewed as to other'
Churches, which by degrees came to have their Liturgies
much enlarged by the devout additions of fome extraor-

48 Catalog. Scriptor. Ecclef. tom.i. p. 317. num. 123.

49 De Trad. Div. Liturg. ap. Bonam. de Rebus Liturgicis, 1. 1. c. 9. P. 157.

50 Can. 32. Concil. tom. vi. col. 1158. B.

51 L. 8. c. 12. tom. i. p. 345. E. 52 De Orat. Domin. p. 152. 53 Hift. Ecclef. 1. 18. c. 53. tom. ii. p. 883. B.

54 Orig. in Jerem. Hom. XIV. vol. i. p. 141. Edit. Huet. Rothomag. 1668.

:

dinary men, who had the care of the feveral Churches Introduct. afterwards: fuch as were St. Bafil, St. Chryfoftom, and others. So that, notwithstanding their interpolations, the Liturgies themselves are a plain demonftration of the ufe of divers precompofed fet forms of prayer, befides the Lord's prayer and pfalms, even in the firft and fecond centuries.

And, that in Conftantine's time the Church used fuch precompofed fet forms, is evident from Eufebius, who tells us of Conftantine's 55 compofing a prayer for the use of his foldiers; and in the next chapter so gives us the words of the prayer; which makes it undeniably plain, that it was a fet form of words. If it be faid, that "Con"ftantine's compofing a form is a plain evidence, that at "that time there were no public forms in the Church;" we anfwer, that this form was only for his Heathen foldiers; for the ftory tells us 57, that he gave his Christian foldiers liberty to go to Church. And therefore all that can be gathered from hence is, that the Christian Church had no form of prayers for Heathen foldiers; which is no great wonder, fince if they had, it is very unlikely that they would have used it. But that the Church had forms of prayer is evident, because the fame author calls the prayers which Conftantine used in his court (Exxanolas Osa Tpónov, according to the manner of the Church 58 of God) suxas vdéopes, authorized prayers: which is the fame title he gave to that form which he made for his Heathen foldiers 59%. And therefore if by the authorized prayers, which he prefcribed to the foldiers, he meant a form of prayer, as it is manifeft he did; then by the authorized prayers, which he ufed in his court, after the manner of the Church of God, he muft mean a form of prayers alfo. And fince he had a form of prayers in his court, after the manner of the Church, the Church must neceffarily have a form of prayers too.

It is plain then, that the three first centuries joined in the use of divers precompofed fet forms of prayer, befides the Lord's prayer and pfalms: after which, (befides the Liturgies of St. Bafil, St. Chryfoftom, and St. Ambrofe,) we have also undeniable teftimonies of the fame 6. Gre

55 De vita Conftant. 1. 4. c. 19.

P. 535. B.

56 De vita Conftant. 1. 4. c. 20. P. 535. C.

57 Ibid. c. 18. p. 534. D. 58 lbid. c. 17. p. 534. A.

59 Ibid. c. 19. P. 535. B.

60 See St. Chryfoft. Homil. XVIII. in Ep. 2. ad Corinth. tom. iiì. p. 647. Concil. Carthag. 3. càn. 23. tom. ii. col. 1170. De Concil. Milev. 2. can. 12. tom. ii. col. 1540. E.

gory