changeably, in some instances, to the same productions. The catechetical lessons were familiar instructions given to candidates for baptism, or to persons who had just received that ordinance; and varied very much according to the age, character, and circumstances of the catechumens. Sometimes they were of a doctrinal, and at others of a practical character; and again, they were adapted more especially to the young; just as the instructions of the missionary are necessarily qualified by the circumstances of the people to whom he goes, or the particular class whom he may chance to address. But in either case they are strictly catechetical.

The nature of these instructions in the ancient church was greatly modified by the general introduction of infant baptism, in consequence of the corresponding change of the relations and institutions which attended this change in the ordinance. For it must be remembered that such addresses were delivered, at first, chiefly to persons of full age, previous to their admission to the church by baptism. They are, therefore, not to be brought into comparison with catechisms of the present day, provided for the use of children. They were familiar instructions, doctrinal and practical, like those which the modern missionary gives to converts from paganism.

The catechetical discourses of Cyril of Jerusalem, bearing date, A. D. 334-349, contain the most ancient and authentic summary of this class of instructions. These the catechumens were expected to commit to memory, and habitually to study as a compend of the Scriptures, and a substitute for them, to such as had not a Bible. Such was also the nature and intent of all subsequent formularies of this kind. They have a close analogy to the ancient symbols of the church, and were in many respects the same.

The principal points of catechetical instruction, even when no catechism in form was used, were

1. The Decalogue.-The fathers in the church unitedly agreed in regarding this as essentially a summary of the Old Testament, and obligatory upon Christians. They were accordingly diligently taught this compend of the moral law. Pliny, in his famous epistle, has clearly declared how faithfully the primitive Christians observed this law, and the same is known from many authorities.2

Many of the fathers disagreed in the division of the law of the two tables, some making ten, others seven, etc. In regard to their different views, see references.3

2. The Symbols, or Confessions of Faith, particularly that which

is styled the Apostles' Creed, after the adoption of this famous symbol by the ancient church. But the completion of it in its present form, dates back only to the fifth or sixth century.*

3. The Lord's Prayer comprised a part of the catechetical instructions. This was used in baptism, and, after Gregory the Great, at the sacrament of the Lord's supper. It was regarded as a summary of the proper topics of prayer.

4. While the secret mysteries of the church were continued, instructions respecting the sacrament could not have been publicly given. But from the time when the prevalence of infant baptism changed the style of catechetical instructions, they must have included the subjects of baptism, absolution, and the Lord's supper.

CHAPTER XV.

OF THE PRAYERS OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH.

§ 1. OF EXTEMPORE PRAYER.

"THE Christian church, unlike the Jewish," says Neander, "was far from restricting prayer to certain stated times, as though there were any merit in these carnal ordinances. It regarded prayer as a quickening spirit, drawing forth the inward aspirations of the soul after God. The entire life of the Christian should be sanctified by prayer; and life should be but a continued prayer of thanksgiving for saving grace and supplication for increasing sanctification." Origen, A. D. 235, speaks also of the life of the Christian as one prolonged prayer, and each act of devotion as only a part of this prayer. Some, says Clement of Alexandria, half of a century earlier, contend for prayer at stated times, but the mature Christian prays always; through all his life striving thus for closer communion with God. So Cyprian also contends, that the Christian should, day and night, without ceasing, pray and give thanks to God.

The primitive Christians contended earnestly against all prescribed attitudes and forms in prayer, and directed their attention only to the state of the heart, as the requisite qualification for offering our prayers acceptably to God. Origen directs the suppliant, first of all, to collect his thoughts and turn them inward on himself, to impress on his mind a sense of the majesty of God and of his own sins, and to lift up unto God his heart rather than his hands; his mind rather than his eyes. He then proceeds to say, that of all attitudes, that is to be preferred in which the eyes are upraised and the hands outstretched, as an emblem of the proper state of the mind in prayer; but he adds, that other attitudes may be equally acceptable and becoming in certain circumstances.

"God," says Tertullian, in opposition to those whose voice was too loud in prayer, "God listens not to the sound of the voice, but

to the utterance of the heart, for he looketh upon the heart." Against those who laid undue stress upon the washing of the hands before prayer he says, "Of what avail is it to come before the Lord with clean hands and an impure heart. True purity consists in no outward rites, which many are so careful to observe, reference being had to superstitions which Jewish and pagan converts had transferred to the Christian religion. Our hands," he adds, "are sufficiently clean, since the whole body has once for all been washed in Christ."

Tertullian then proceeds to censure other vain superstitions, which, like these, are neither authorized by Christ himself, nor by the apostles, and in this connection adds, "Such things pertain not to true religion, but to superstition; and are indicative of attention rather to useless outward forms than to intelligent consistent worship. Such surely ought to be suppressed, that we may not seem to worship as the heathen do."*

On another occasion Tertullian adds, "we pray with head uncovered, because not ashamed; without a monitor, because from the heart." This he says in direct contrast of the prayers of Christians with those of the heathen, and to show the sincerity and loyalty of Christians in their prayers. The heathen were accustomed, it is well known, to make use of set forms of prayer, and a prompter used to precede the suppliant with the form of prayer, which the worshipper repeated after his monitor.‡

* Quæ ratio est, manibus quidem ablutis, spiritu vero sordente orationem obire ? quando et ipsis manibus spirituales munditiæ sint necessariæ, ut a falso, a veneficiis, ab idolatria, ceterisque maculis, quæ spiritu conceptæ manuum opera transiguntur, puræ alleventur. Hæ sunt veræ munditiæ, non quas plerique superstitiose curant, ad omnem orationem etiam cum lavacro totius corporis aquam sumentes. Id cum scrupulose percunctarer, et rationem requirerem, comperi commemorationem esse in Domini deditionem. Nos Dominum adoramus, non dedimus. Imo et adversari debemus detitoris exemplo, nec propterea manus abluere, nisi quod conversationis humanæ inquinimentum conscientiæ causa lavemus. Cæterum satis mundæ sunt manus, quas cum toto corpore in Christo semel lavimus. . . . . Sed quoniam unum aliquod attigimus vacuæ observationis, non pigebit cætera quoque denotare, quibus merito vanitas exprobranda est; siquidem sine ullius aut dominici aut apostolici precepti auctoritate fiunt. Hujusmodi enim non religioni, sed superstitioni deputantur, affectata, et coacta, et curiosi potius, quam rationalis officii; certe vel eo coercenda, quod gentilibus adæquent.

+ Capite nudo, quia non erubescimus, denique sine monitore, quia de pectore.Apol. c. 30.

In candida veste, verbenas manu præferens, capite velato, præibat preces regi. Cited in note of Migne's Patrologiæ, vol. ii., Apol. c. 30, p. 443.

The manner in which Christians paid their devotions to their God is here strongly contrasted with the forms of worship which the heathen observed. They prayed with the head covered; Christians with the head uncovered. Their prayers were heartless forms, dictated from a prayer-book by a monitor. Those of Christians were offered without a monitor, because from the heart: "out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh."

"What is to be understood by praying from the heart will best appear from inquiring into what is opposed to it, viz. the praying by a monitor. Now, the praying by a monitor, as is acknowledged by all, was praying by a book; but thus Tertullian affirms the primitive Christians prayed not: 'We do not pray,' saith he, 'with a monitor, reading our prayers out of a book. No, but on the contrary, we pray de pectore, from the heart, our own heart and soul dictating to us what is most proper and suitable to be asked, having no need of any other monitor besides.""

Such is the comment of Chancellor King upon this passage; and with him we must believe that the prayer-book belongs to the ceremonials of an age subsequent both to that of Christ and the apostles and that of the primitive fathers and apologists for Christianity. The use of forms of prayer was one of the numerous changes which, from the third century, began to impair the primitive form of worship and government of the church. The history of the church, from that period, abounds with instances of corrupt imitations of Jewish and pagan worship, which finally produced an entire subversion of the simplicity of primitive worship.

In the earliest ages of the church, no complaint is made of any change of forms of prayer, liturgy, or creed, evidently because no uniformity had yet been established by ecclesiastical authority. After they are known to have existed, they are known to have been the subject of perpetual change.

The apologists made use of many arguments against their enemies, and often cited the Scriptures in their defence, and in evidence of the unjust imputations of their opponents against them; but they make no reference to prayer-book, liturgy, or missal, neither is any ever mentioned by their persecutors. The obvious inference is, that none were then known.

Tertullian affirms the benevolent intentions and loyalty of the Christians toward their rulers, and appeals to the Scriptures in proof,' which requires us to pray for "kings, and for all that are in authority." How naturally and conclusively would his appeal