« PoprzedniaDalej »
ever they may have meant by the words just quoted, I think that it is quite clear that the First Common Prayer Book of K. Edward, and all succeeding ones, were not in fact aimed at the abolition of varieties of music, but of a variety of prayers, and rites, and ceremonies. This object was effected. A diversity of singing nevertheless continued, not only in different dioceses, but also in different churches of the same diocese : and I am not aware that at present, there is any rule, except the Precentor's pleasure, even for the daily singing in a cathedral. However, we do not conceive the Preface to the Common Prayer to be evaded, or the Act of Uniformity to be broken by this, whatever may be said of other practices. Merbecke, as is well known, about a year after the publication of the First Book, tried something of the sort which the reformers hinted at ; but his book was unauthorized, limited in its impression, and never reached a second edition:” which it necessarily must have done, if either the demand for it had been great, or an attempt made to recommend it. Elizabeth in her Injunctions, which were supplemental to her Act of Uniformity, and were grounded upon an especial clause in that Act, attempted to supply the deficiency: yet they did not enjoin a particular or one mode of singing, but simply that there be “a modeste and destyncte songe used in all partes of the common prayers in the Churche.” The portions of the Missals which are reprinted and arranged in this edition, form but a very small portion of their respective volumes: but by far the most important.
* See however a note in the Dissertation on the Service Books, Monumenta Ritualia. vol. i. p. 21.
* The 49th of these Injunctions declares that “because in dyvers Collegiate and also some paryshe
Churches heretofore, there hath ben levynges appointed for the mayntenaunce of men & chyldren to use synging in the church, by meanes whereof the lawdable science of musicke hath ben had in estimation and preserved in knowledge: the Quenes maiestie
In examining them the student must bear in mind, that although he may have expected to find greater and more numerous variations between them, such variations were not likely to occur, even in so large a proportion, in the Ordinary and the Canon. These, especially the last, were parts of the Divine Service which were studiously guarded against alterations, additions, or omissions: and even changes of single words, and differences of arrangement which he will find in them, constitute as decidedly as far more considerable differences in other parts of the books would, a variety of Use. And I do not hesitate to say, that the distinctions of the ancient liturgies of the Church of England, both between themselves, and the modern Roman Use, in the Ordinary and the Canon, are not only as great but greater, and more in number, and involving points of higher consequence, than a previous acquaintance with these matters, before an actual examination of the English missals would have authorized us to expect. It would be far too extensive a subject of enquiry, for me to attempt even a sketch of the innumerable variations which existed in other parts of the English missals. But, take for example the beginning of the Sanctorale according to the Uses of the Churches of Salisbury and York. The first is the service of the Vigil of S. Andrew. In this, the Psalm, the verse after the gradual, one of the secrets, and one of the post-communions are different. Upon S. Andrew's day, the Psalm again differs. Upon S. Thomas's day, the gradual, the offer
wylleth and commaundeth, that understanded, as if it were read fyrste no alteration be made of such without singing.”
assignementes of levynge but that Injunctions geven by the the same so remayne. And that Quenes Maiestie. Imprintthere bee a modeste and destyncte ed by Jugge and Cawood. songe so used in all partes of the Anno. M.D.LIX. Reprinted common prayers in the Churche: in Cardwell. Doc. Annals.
that the same maye be as playmelye i. 196.
tory, and the post-communion are different. Upon the feast of the Conversion of S. Paul, the introit, the Psalm, the sequence, and the post-communion. Upon the feast of the Purification, the sequence, tract, offertory, and secret. Or again, compare one or two services from the Commune of the missals of Hereford and Bangor. The services “In natali unius martyris et pontificis,” agree only in the Epistle and Gospel. For “many Martyrs,” different lections, graduals, secrets, and communions are appointed. And, once more, in the service for a Confessor and Bishop, the tract, offertory, communion and post-communion are different. The Ordinary and the Canon therefore occupying, as I have said, only a small part of the Missal, the rest of that volume was filled with the various Collects, Epistles, Gospels, Sequences, Graduals, etc. proper to the great festivals and fasts, the Sundays, and to especial occasions when the Church offered up especial prayers in behalf, for example, of the king, or in the time of any dearth, or pestilence. These were of course used, at least many of them, only once a year: but the Ordinary and the Canon were daily said. In these latter, moreover, were contained those rites which have been held from the earliest times to be essential to the valid consecration of the Holy Eucharist. The several collections by Asseman, Renaudot and others, of liturgies which have been used in different Patriarchates of the Catholic Church, contain those portions which are edited in the present volume : the other parts of many are altogether lost, and possibly some of the earlier liturgies had little else beside." As I shall have occasion presently to observe, so here also I may remind the
* All that part, (says Bishop ancient Liturgies, is a latter addiRattray, speaking of the Liturgy of tion to the service of the Church, S. James) which precedes the Ana- as appears from the account given phora, both in this and the other thereof by Justin Martyr, from the
reader, that the Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord was never, since its institution, administered without the due observance of certain appointed ceremonies and prayers. These of course would be characterized during the first century of the existence of the Church, by a greater simplicity than in after years: and this, solely because many just reasons for the addition of other prayers and rites had not arisen, or they could not from the violence of persecution be allowed their due weight. But as time went on, and the roll of the saints and martyrs increased, commemorations of them were added, and collects, and hymns, and antiphons were increased in number, and the Faithful sought to shew their deep reverence for the Service itself, by a greater solemnity in its performance; all which was well fitting to the Church of Christ, when she was no longer driven to celebrate her mysteries in secret places, and hurriedly, and
with the constant dread of cruel interruption.
Clementine Liturgy, and from the 19th canon of the Council of Laodicea. By comparing of which with other ancient authorities, we plainly find that the service of the Church began with reading of the Scriptures, intermixed with psalmody; after which followed the sermon. Then the dxpowpeyo and daria rol, the hearers and unbelievers, being dismissed, there followed in order, the bidding prayer of the deacon, and the collect of the bishop, first for the catechumens: then after they were dismissed, for the energumens: and after they were dismissed for the competentes or candidates for baptism: and lastly, after dismissing them likewise, for the penitents. Then all these being dismissed, the Missa Fidelium, or Service of the Faithful, began with the #vX's 31&
always, the silent or mental pray-
- 3|HE chief Liturgies which have been preserved R. $o are those which are called St. James's, St. J. Mark's, St. Chrysostom's, St. Basil's, the os Roman, and preeminent above all these, of an acknowledged greater antiquity than any, the Clementine. As I have reprinted this liturgy of St. Clement at the end of the present volume, it seems necessary that I should make one or two remarks, by which it is to be hoped the reader will be able to judge its value. Theological questions and doctrines of the highest importance, are involved in enquiries into the origin and relative authority of the ancient liturgies. Some writers upon the subject have boldly argued that the Apostles themselves left an accurate Form, not merely of the doctrine of the sacrament of the Blessed Eucharist, but of rites and ceremonies and prayers, in short, a Liturgy, according to which it should be administered: and that this still exists either in the liturgy of Antioch, or Alexandria, or Rome. Those who hold this opinion chiefly rely upon a passage in a treatise, generally attributed to Proclus, Bishop of Constantinople in the 5th Century, in which the writer states that the Apostles whilst they were together at Jerusalem, before their dispersion into various quarters of the world, were accustomed daily to meet and celebrate the Holy Communion; “et cum multam consolationem in mystico illo Dominici Corporis sacrificio positam reperissent, fusissime, longoque verborum ambitu missam decantabant.” S.
* See the whole passage cited 94. And in Bona. Rerum Liturg. in Gerbert, De Cantu. tom. i. p. tom. i. p. 75.