In Basil's liturgy we find the preface or thanksgiving making mention of seraphim with six wings; with whom the congregation are encouraged and supposed to join in singing Tersanctus. Gregory Nyssene elsewhere argues in support of the divine voraywyía, or liturgy, that the oblation of our gifts, or exai, (things devoted or vowed to God,) should take place before we pray to God for his benefits*. This accords exactly with the order and substance of Basil's liturgy, when the verbal oblation of the gifts of bread and wine takes place before the solemn prayers Y. We may observe that Gregory Nyssene speaks of the same order which we now perceive in Basil's liturgy, as the established and well-known order of those churches, which it could scarcely have then been, had it been first introduced by Basil. Gregory Nazianzen preserves a cautious silence on the rites of the eucharist; he only speaks of bishops as priests who offer unbloody sacrifices to God", which is explained by the liturgy of Basila. If we compare the liturgy of Cæsarea improved by Basil with that used at Antioch and Jerusalem * In speaking of our Saviour's words, örav mрooreuxnabe, he says, ἔξεστι δὲ δι ̓ αὐτῶν τῶν τῆς προσευχῆς λόγων τὴν θείαν μυσταγωγίαν κατανοῆσαι, then afterwards, εὐχὴ μὲν ἐστὶ, καθὼς εἴρηται, χαριστήριος δωροφορίας ἐπαγγελία, ἡ δὲ προσευχὴ τὴν μετὰ τὴν ἐκπλήρωσιν τῆς ἐπαγγελίας τῷ Θεῷ γινομένην πρόσοδον διερμης νεύει· διδάσκει οὖν ἡμᾶς ὁ λόγος, μὴ πρότερον αἰτεῖσθαί τι παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, πρὶν αὐτῷ τι τῶν κεχαρισμέ νων δωροφορῆσαι. εὔξασθαι γὰρ χρὴ πρότερον, εἶτα προσεύξασθαι. Gregor. Nyss. de Orat. Dominica Orat. 2. tom. i. p. 724. See also the context. y Goar Lit. Basil. p. 168. 170, &c. κ Ω θυσίας πέμποντες αναιμάKTOUS lepnes. Gregor. Naz. tom. ii. p. 81. Θέῳ δὲ δῶρον, θυσίαι καθάρσιαι, ibid. p. 201. ε τὰ σὰ ἐκ τῶν σῶν σοι προστ pépovres, Goar, Rit. Græc. Lit. Bas. p. 168. in the fourth century, we shall find the order and substance of both exactly the same. This identity will be seen by comparing together the accounts which I have given of the Anaphora of both. It may well furnish an object of interesting inquiry, how a substantial uniformity of liturgy could have been caused in such a great tract of country at so early a period; more especially, when we reflect that the bishops had the power of making improvements in their liturgies, and that in fact almost all the monuments of this liturgy exhibit circumstantial varieties. In the fourth century no œcumenical bishop had yet been created. Antioch and Cæsarea were subject to independent patriarchs. I know not how we are to account for this uniformity of liturgy in any other manner, than by supposing it to have prevailed from the beginning. In fact, we find vivid traces of this liturgy, as used at Antioch, in the second century. The liturgy of Cæsarea may have subsisted as long. In the fourth century the same form appears to have been long used all through the patriarchate of Cæsarea. This (besides being inferred from the Fathers of that patriarchate) is to be presumed from the simple fact, that Basil's liturgy was immediately and silently received into use by all the churches of that patriarchate. The Greek or Constantinopolitan text of Basil's liturgy is found in Goar's "Rituale Græcorum c." The text, however, which he has printed is modern. To confirm and ascertain it, we must refer with much trouble to the various readings of MSS. which he has placed at the conclusion of the liturgy. It b See section I. of this Dissertation, p. 41, 42. c P. 158, &c. were to be desired, that some critic versed in ritual studies would give us an edition of Basil's liturgy, drawn from the oldest MS., with various readings at the foot of the page. None of the rubrics are found in the oldest MSS., and it would perhaps be better to explain the rites which they describe in notes, so as not to encumber the text with interpolations. Goar's notes on the liturgy of Basil are few; but as the liturgy of Chrysostom is substantially the same as Basil's, the notes of Goar on the former liturgy may be consulted with satisfaction by those who wish to understand the rites of the latter. SECTION III. LITURGY OF THE PATRIARCHATE OF CONSTANTINOPLE. The church of Byzantium, originally subject to the metropolitan of Heraclea, in the Thracian civil diocese, was elevated to dignity and power by means of Constantine the Great, who transferred the seat of empire from old Rome to that city, which thenceforth bore the name of Constantinople, or New Rome. The second general council, held at Constantinople A. D. 381, elevated the bishop of that church to the rank of patriarch, assigning to his care the entire civil diocese of Thrace, which comprised a large portion of European Turkey. Ere long the patriarch of Constantinople extended his authority over the ancient exarchates or patriarchates of Ephesus and Cæsarea, which were formally placed under his jurisdiction by the council of Chalcedon A. D. 451 a. And the whole of Greece also became subject to him. Besides the liturgy of Basil which I have noticed in the last section, the churches subject to the patriarch of Constantinople have from a remote period used another liturgy, which bears the name of Chrysostom. It must be confessed, that the records of antiquity do not furnish us with many allusions to this appellation of the Constantinopolitan liturgy. A tract ascribed to Proclus, patriarch of Constantinople in the early part of the fifth century, certainly speaks of the liturgy of Chrysostom. But this tract is probably spurious, since it does not seem to have been referred to before the thirteenth a Bingham's Antiq. book ii. c. 17. §. 10; book ix. c. 4. §. 2. century; and yet its contents are of so interesting a nature, that it must have been noticed before that time had it been long in existence. It also seems to me that the author of this tract refers to the liturgy of St. James as we now see it, with the voluminous additions made by the orthodox of Jerusalem subsequently to the council of Chalcedon, A. D. 451; for he describes the liturgies of Basil and Chrysostom as being much shorter than those of James. And hence I suspect that this author lived considerably after the time of Proclus, for there is not the slightest presumption from any other source that the liturgy of James in the time of Proclus was longer than that of Basil; on the contrary, I am of opinion that it was rather shorter: and a large portion of James's liturgy, as now extant, was certainly added at a period much later than the age of Proclus. Theodore Balsamon speaks of the liturgy of Chrysostom", and Leo Thuscus translated it into Latin for Rainaltus de Monte Catano, about A.D. 1180. I have not seen a work of Grancolas, who is said to have collected in it several testimonies to the antiquity of the appellation of this liturgy . But however interesting it might be to prove that Chrysostom had improved or corrected the Constantinopolitan liturgy, we should remember that a public formulary of this kind is of more importance as exhibiting the sentiments of the church, than as a Theodor, Balsamon, Respons, ad Marcum Alexandrinum ap. Leunclavii Jus Græco-Rom. lib. v. b This version is found in the Liturgie sive Missie Sanctorum," &c, by F, Clau dius de Sainctes, Antwerp, 1560, e Johannes Grancolas, “Les "anciennes Liturgies," &c. Paris, 1697. referred to by Zaccaria Bibliotheca Ritualis, tom. i. p. 13. |