Innocent . l. Ep. Rom. An. Dom. 402. § . I. Pope Innocent the First begins this Age , in whom we cannot expect much Evidence in our Question , because he hath nothing extant but only some few Epistles , which treat of different Subjects . Yet first he argues against the Pelagian Doctrin , of our not needing the assistance of Gods Grace , from that old Roman Form , taken out of the Psalms , which still is the beginning of their Mass , Deus in adjutorium , &c. The Priest saying , O God make speed to save us , O Lord make haste to help us . Now saith he ) Pelagius and Celestius would set aside this whole Response out of the Psalms , and abdicating this Doctrin , hope to perswade some , that we neither want , nor ought to seek the help of God ; whereas all the Saints bear witness , that they can do nothing without it (e) (e) — seposita omni responsi●re Psalmorum aliquid abdicatâ doctrinâ , suasuros se aliquibus esse confidunt nos Adjutorium Dei nec debere quaerere nec egere , &c. Innoc. ep. 24. B n. Tom. 1. par. l pag. 622. . Where we see he argues from this Form , used in the Liturgy by all the Saints or holy Men , against the false Doctrin of these Hereticks ; which shews it was a known and usual Response in that Age. The same Author , though he was shie in writing Mysteries in a Letter , yet plainly enough describes The Prayer for all Estates of Men , in which the Names of the Offerers were recited , and God was desired to accept their Alms and Oblations , as also those Prefaces , of which we spake before (f) (f) Prius ergo oblationes sunt commendandae , ac tunc eorum nomina quorum sunt oblationes , edicenda , ut inter sacra mysteria nominentur , non inter alia quae ante praemittimus . Id. Ep. 1. cap. 2. ibid. pag. 609. . And , which is most considerable in the Preface of the same Epistle to Decentius Bishop of Eugubium , Innocent declares (g) (g) Si instituta Ecclesiastica , ut sunt à beatis Apostolis tradita , integra vellent servare Domini sacerdotes , nulla diversitas , nulla varietas , in ipsis ordinibus & consecrationibus haberetur . Sed dum unusquisque non quod traditum est , sed quod sibi visum fuerit , hoc estimat esse tenendum , inde diversa , in diversis locis vel Ecclesiis teneri aut celebrari videntur . Id. ibid. , That if those Ecclesiastical Institutions which the Apostles delivered had been kept intire by the Bishops , we should not have had any diversity or variety , in the order of Worship or Consecration . But while every one thinks he must hold , not that which was delivered ; but which best pleases him , thence we see divers ways of celebration are used in divers Churches . Now , from hence we note , First , That this Pope believed there was one way of Worship and Consecration ( that is , one Form of Prayer and administring the Sacrament ) setled by the Apostles at first , and delivered to all the Churches they planted . Secondly , That the variety which then appeared ( not in the same Church , but ) in divers Churches , was an Innovation proceeding from several Bishops ( called here S●cerdotes ) who forsook that one Original Rule , and followed their own Devices . Thirdly , That this variety was not a liberty taken by private Ministers in the same Church , but by divers Bishops in their several Diocesses . Fourthly , That this diversity ( as Innocent there adds ) was a scandal to the People , who not knowing that human Presumption had corrupted the ancient Traditions , fancied either there was no good agreement among the Churches , or that the Apostles and Apostolical Men set up this variety . Fifthly , For remedy hereof he advises all those Churches , which had their Original from Rome , to follow those Customs which S. Peter had delivered to that Church , and were kept there ever since . Which place , so clear for the Antiquity and Necessity of Uniformity , our Adversary cites over and over , and spends many Pages , to shew that this very Epistle proves there were no Forms prescribed at Rome in those days (h) (h) Disc. of Liturgies . p. 40 , 41. & pag. 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82. : For ( saith he ) when the Bishop of Eugubium enquired of divers particulars concerning the Church-Service , he doth not refer him to any written Orders , but to what he had seen practised at Rome ; and he will not write down the Words used in the Office of Chrism , calling the Words of Consecration , Those things which he might not publish : Adding , That it was matter of enquiry then , whether the Kiss of Peace should be given before or after the Consecration ? and whether the Names of the Offerers should be recited before or after the Prayer over the Oblation ? Concluding from these passages , That there could be then no setled Order or Form at Rome ; and that which Innocent would have fixed was no more than a Rubric or Direction , and this for Imitation , not for strict Conformity ; so that in Innocents Time , every one in Italy Consecrated as he thought fit . This is the sum of his Inference .

In Answer to which I must observe , First , That those particulars which the Bishop of Eugubium enquired about , and for which Innocent refers him to what he had seen used at Rome , were Rites and Ceremonies , as appears by the several Matters treated of in this Epistle , viz. Cap. 1. Of the Kiss of Peace . Cap. 2. Of reciting the Offerers Names . Cap. 3. Of the Anointing the Baptized . Cap. 4. Of the Saturday Fast . Cap. 5. Of the Leavened Bread . Cap. 6 , 7. Whether a Priest might lay Hands on the Possessed , and the Penitents . Cap. 8. Whether he might not Anoint the Sick . Now these things being all external Rites , which he might see and hear at Rome , and so commit to his Memory the Method used there , it was not necessary to refer him to the Roman Liturgy ; nor doth it follow , there was no such Liturgy for the Prayers themselves , because when the Pope was ask'd about the Rites and Customs of Rome , he doth not ( as my Adversary saith ) refer him thither for satisfaction in these Matters . Yet , Secondly , this very Epistle makes it plain , they had certain Forms at Rome for their several Offices ; for when he speaks of Anointing the Baptized , he saith , Verba verò dicere non possum , ne magis prodere videar quam ad consultationem respondere , Ibid. Cap. 3. I cannot tell you the words , lest I betray the Church under pretence of answering your Question . And so about the Forms used in the Communion-Office , he thus expresseth himself . Post omnia quae aperire non debeo , &c. The Kiss of Peace comes after those things which I must not publish : And a little after , Quae scribi sui non erat — Those things which it is not lawful for me to write down , Ib. Cap. 8. All which places necessarily suppose , they had certain and fixed Words , which were capable of being written down ; but since in that Age divers ( as he notes out of Chamier , pag. 41. Marg. ) were not initiated , some being then Pagans , and others as yet but Catechumens ; Innocent would not set down the Forms in a Letter , which might be intercepted or fall into the hands of such as ought not to know these Sacred Mysteries . But now , if at Rome every Priest had prayed Extempore , and not only differed from others , but daily varied from himself ; then Innocent could not have discoursed at this rate , but must have said , As for the Words I cannot write them down , ( not because it is unlawful , but ) because it is impossible ; for you know every Priest varies them daily as he pleases . Wherefore this Notion of keeping the Words secret ( which was strictly observed in that Age ) proves they were stated Forms , capable of being writ down , and learned by Unbelievers , if they had been published to them . And nothing can be weaker ( to say no worse ) than to argue , as he doth , Innocent would not write the Forms in a Letter which might miscarry ; therefore they were not written down in Books closely kept by the Bishops and Priests at Rome . Thirdly , For his Objection , That it was matter of Enquiry then , what place in the Eucharistical Office should be assigned to the Kiss of Peace , and to the recital of the Offerers Names (i) (i) Disc. of ●it . pag. 78. ; which he thinks could not be , if there had been setled Forms at Rome ; It is very frivolous , For the Bishop of Eugubium doth enquire of these Matters , because he knew there was a certain Order at Rome ; and though he had seen it ( and perhaps knew it very well ) yet his Neighbouring Bishops having different ways , as to the order of these , He desires to have it under the Popes hand , what was the Custom at Rome , hoping by this to bring his Neighbouring Bishops to an Uniformity in these Matters . For Eugubium was a small Bishopric under the immediate Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishops , as he was a Metropolitan ; ( being but 70 Miles distant from Rome it self ) and he having no power over his Equals , gets the Popes Letter , under whose Jurisdiction all these Neighbour Bishops of his were , thereby to unite them all , by conforming to their Mother Church , which ( as Innocentius affirms ) had one certain Form in these Offices received from S. Peter . Fourthly , Since this Bishop was so desirous to settle Uniformity even in these Ceremonies of far less concernment , we may reasonably believe there was no difference in the Forms themselves , that is , in the Prayers used in all Divine Offices by these Bishops who lived so near to Rome ; because , if they had varied in the substantial parts of the Office , Decentius must have complained principally of that Variety , and Innocents chief labour would have been to have agreed and setled that Matter , it being ridiculous for them to be so earnest for Uniformity in Order and Ceremonies , if these several Diocesses , had differed in the main , and had infinite variety in the Offices themselves : so that both Innocent and Decentius being silent as to any such variety , gives us Reason to believe , they had all the same FORMS . Fifthly , What he saith of Innocents design being only to settle a Rubric , is easily answered . For the difference was only in Rubrics which my Adversary at last confesseth , when he saith , this Epistle is most concerned about Ri●es and Order (k) (k) Disc. of Lit. pag. 83. ; he might have said ( as appears by the several Chapters before , ) only concerned about Rites and Order , the Preface alone excepted ; For there is not one Answer nor Question , that supposes any difference in the Words or Forms of these Offices ; therefore it was enough for Innocent , to settle that wherein the only difference lay , which was variety of Rites , not of Prayers . Sixthly , He adds that Innocent setled this Rubric rather for Imitation than strict conformity (l) (l) Disc. of Lit. pag. 80. . I Answer , This is not setling any thing at all , for where every Priest is Arbitrary , nothing is fixed . But Innocent , when he hath declared the custom of Rome , expresly requires of this Bishop ; First to take care that his own Diocess and Ministring Clergy , were well instructed in it ; and then that he should give a Form to other Bishops , which they ought to imitate or follow (m) (m) — ut tuam Ecclesiam , & Clericos nostros , qui sub tuo Pontificio divinis famulantur officiis , bene instituas , & aliis formam tribuas quam debeant imitari . Innoc. Ep. 1. vers. fin . . Where we see he requires he should carefully instruct his own Clergy , in order to their strict conformity no doubt ; for otherwise , to what end did he teach them these Rules ? And then he doth expect he should give this Form to others , that is , to his neighbor Bishops , and affirms it is their Duty to observe it ; For since he is speaking of Acts and Ceremonies , there is no way to imitate them , but by doing them ; there is no Medium between strict Conformity , and total Non-conformity in these cases ; so that his distinction between Imitation and strict Conformity , is nothing but Words without Sense . I conclude this passage , with my Adversaries censure of Pope Innocent out of Erasmus (n) (n) Disc. of Lit. p. 81. & 82. , as if he were fierce in his Nature and no good Orator . And shall note , that Erasmus doth not censure him , for pressing an Uniformity , nor doth he give any ill Character of him for this Epistle , but for others , which he Writ in the Pelagian Controversie (o) (o) Vid. Aug. ep. 91. & ep. 96. cum notis Erasm . & Coci censura . p. 111. . And what Erasmus saith of two other Epistles , if it be never so true , cannot prove that in this Epistle ( wherein he Writes of the Customs of his own Church ) he is not a good Evidence for matter of Fact ; and if that be granted , then we have here this Popes Testimony , that the Metropolis of Rome had certain Forms of Words , for their several Offices , and one way and Method , both in their Service and Rites ; and that all Churches under her immediate Jurisdiction , ought to be uniform even in their Ceremonies by conforming to their Mother Church ; which is sufficient to shew how falsly my Adversary affirms , that in Italy in Innoconts time , every one Consecrated as he though fit . For the Question was not about all Italy , but only about Eugubium , and the neighboring Diocesses ; not about private Ministers , but Bishops ; not about the Words or Forms of Consecrating , &c. but about Rites and Ceremonies in the Eucharist and other Offices ; yet even in these he labours to settle an Uniformity ; and gives sufficient indication , not only that they ought to have , but then had , one prescribed Liturgy for the Offices themselves , differing only in some Rubrics .