was used all over the Greek Church, except perhaps that part of Syria where Syriac was the most vulgar language, that is, in Osdroene, and Mesopotamia, where they had a Syriac translation made from the Hebrew not long after the time of the Apostles. This was called the Old Translation in opposition to another, which was made from the Septuagint in after ages. In all other parts of the East the Septuagint was the common translation. But this by tract of time and variety of copies was much corrupted, upon which account it was revised and corrected by several learned men, which laboured in this work, particularly by Origen, and Hesychius the Egyptian, and Lucian of Antioch, two martyrs who suffered in the Diocletian persecution. Hence, as St. Jerom informs us,' there came to be three famous exemplars or editions of the Septuagint, used in the Eastern Churches. Alexandria and Egypt followed the copy revised by Hesychius. Constantinople and all the Asiatic Churches as far as Antioch used that of Lucian. The Churches of Palestine and Arabia read the copy corrected by Origen and published by Eusebius and Pamphilus. And so between these three editions, the whole world was divided. Origen did two things further in this matter. First, he published an edition of the Bible, which he called his Hexapla, because it was in six columns, the first was the Hebrew in Hebrew characters, the second the Hebrew in Greek characters, the third the translation of Aquila the Jew, the fourth the translation of Symmachus, the fifth the translation of the Septuagint, and the sixth the translation of Theodotion the Ebionite. To these he afterwards added two other translations found at Nicopolis and Jericho, and these made up his Octapla. And in process of time, he published another lesser edition containing only the four translations, of the Septuagint, Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion, which he

'Hieron. Præfat. in Librum Paralipomenon. Alexandria et Ægyptus in Septuaginta suis Hesychium laudat auctorem. Constantinopolis usque Antiochiam Luciani martyris exemplaria probat. Mediæ inter has provincia Palæstinos codices legunt, quos ab Origine elaboratos Eusebius et Pamphilus vulgaverunt: totusque orbis hâc inter se veritate compugnat. 2 Vid. Euseb. lib. vi. cap. 16.

called his Tetrapla. Secondly, he published the Septuagint with the additions of Theodotion mixed with it, to supply the places where it was defective, which additions he marked with an asterisk to distinguish them; and such places as were redundant in the Septuagint, and not to be found in the Hebrew, nor in Theodotion, he also marked with an obelisk or strait line for distinction also. But this mixing of the two translations together in process of time occasioned some confusion, and St. Jerom complains of it as a bold undertaking, and therefore he set about a new edition and translation of the Septuagint for the use of the Latin Church. Hitherto all Churches used the translation of the Septuagint, except the Syrian Churches, as was said before, and except on the Book of Daniel, which in all Churches was read according to the translation of Theodotion, as the same St. Jerom informs us in several places, particularly in his Preface upon Daniel, because by some means or other, the Septuagint translation of that book was more corrupt than any other part of Scripture. But there were abundance of faults in that translation in other places, partly by the design of the interpreters, who added some things of their own, and left out others, and often changed the sense at pleasure, especially in texts that had any relation to the Holy Trinity, as St. Jerom shews at large in his Preface upon the Pentateuch where he exposes the story of their having distinct cells, and their being esteemed inspired writers; and partly from the great variety of copies, and the great corruptions that were crept into them by the ignorance or negligence of transcribers: and this both in the Septuagint copies themselves, and the Latin translations that were made from them. Upon this account St. Jerom, by the instigation of Chromatius and Heliodore, and other pious bishops of the Latin Church, set about a translation of the Psalms and Old Testament from the original Hebrew: but this met

Hieron, Præfat. in Paralipom.

2 Hieron. Præfat. in Josue. 'Hieron. Præfat. in Josue. It. Com. in Daniel. iv. et Apolog. ii. cont. Ruffin. Hieron. Præfat. in Daniel. Danielem Prophetam juxta Septuaginta Interpretes Domini Salvatoris Ecclesiæ non legunt, utentes Theodotionis editione et hoc cur acciderit nescio.- -Hoc unum affirmare possum, quod multum à veritate discordet, et recto judicio repudiatus sit.

with great opposition for some time: for though many applauded it, and read it in the Churches, yet others opposed it, and Ruffin and others bitterly inveighed against it, as reflecting on the Church, which had used and recommended the Septuagint, and the translations made from it, ever since the time of the Apostles. St. Austin' himself dissuaded him from the undertaking, and when it was finished, he would not suffer it to be read in his diocese for fear of giving scandal to the people; telling him further what a tumult had been raised in one of the Churches of Africa, by a bishop's introducing his translation, which he was forced to lay aside again for fear all his people should have deserted it. But in other places it met with a kinder reception. For by degrees it came to be used by learned men in their expositions. Gregory the Great makes use of both translations, calling St. Jerom's the New translation, and the other the Old; which was otherwise called the Itala, and Vulgata, and Communis, because it was the most common and vulgar translation used in all the Latin and Italic Churches. The present Vulgar Latin translation is supposed by learned men neither to be the ancient Vulgar, nor yet St. Jerom's new one, but a mixture of both together. The Psalms in the present Vulgar, are not from the Hebrew, but are of St. Jerom's translation from the Septuagint of Lucian's emendation. The other books come nearer the Hebrew, than they do to the Septuagint, which shews that they have something of St. Jerom's translation. But the Psalms were always read at Rome according to the old version, and continued so to be used till Pope Pius V. ordered St. Jerom's version with emendations from the Septuagint to be put in its place. And so the old translation of the Psalms came to be called the Roman Psalter; and St. Jerom's new translation, the Gallican Psalter, because it was immediately received in the Gallican Church. This is observed both by Mabillon and Bona out of Berno

Aug. Ep. xix. ad Hieron.

2 Aug. Ep. x. ad Hieron.

3 Greg. M. Ep. ad Leandr. ante Moral. in Job. et lib. xx. Moral. cap. 3. * Vide Walton, Prolegom. x. n. 9. Mabil, de Cursu Gallicano, p. 396. 6 Bona Rer. Liturg. lib. ii. cap. iii. n. 4.

Augiensis and Strabo, who say, the French and Germans took the new translation of the Psalms corrected from the Septuagint by St. Jerom, whilst the Romans, continued to use the old vulgar corrupt edition: which is still read in the Vatican Church at Rome, and the Ambrosian Church at Milan, and St. Mark's at Venice: and Bona is so free as to say, he thinks it had been more for the honour and benefit of the Church to have kept still to the old version of the Psalter, since now there is a great disagreement between the Breviary and the Missal, whilst the same Psalms are sung different ways,' in the Missal according to the old translation, and in the Breviary according to the new one, which he speaks of as a mistake, but tenderly, because though it was a deviation from the old rule observed in Gregory's Sacramentarium, and the Missa Mosarabica, and the Ambrosian Liturgy, yet it was Pope Pius's order that made the correction.

I might here have added several other things relating to the ancient way of dividing the several books of Scripture into chapters, and verses, and canons, and sections and sub-sections, very much differing from the present way of dividing them into chapter and verse: but because observations of this kind are very intricate of themselves, and have no relation to the service of the Church, which is the subject in hand, I shall omit them here with many other miscellany rites of the same nature, which will be more proper to be explained in a critical discourse by themselves; and now proceed to the next part of the service of the Church in the Missa Catechumenorum, which was the sermon or homily, immediately after the reading of the Psalms and other Scriptures, before any prayers were made either for particular orders of men, such as catechumens, energumens, penitents, &c. or for the general state of Christ's Church.

1 Bona Rer. Liturg. lib. ii. cap. iii. n. 5. Hæc autem dissonantia, ablato nunc veteri Psalterio sæpe occurrit. Cæterum ista hoc loco notare libuit, non ut quenquam carperem, sed ne prisca Ecclesiæ disciplina ig

noraretur.

CHAP. IV.

Of Preaching, and the Usages relating to it, in the Ancient

Church.

SECT. 1.-All Sermons anciently called Homilies, Disputations, Allocutions, Tractatus, &c.

IMMEDIATELY after the reading of the Psalms and lessons out of the Scriptures, before the catechumens were dismissed, followed the sermon, which the bishop or some other appointed by him, made to the people. This being done in the presence of the catechumens, was therefore usually reckoned a part of the Missa Catechumenorum, or ante-communion-service. Such discourses were commonly termed Homilies, from the Greek 'Oudía, which signifies indifferently any discourse of instruction to the people, whether composed by the preacher himself, or read out of a book composed by another; though we now generally restrain it to the latter sense in our modern way of speaking. Among the Latins, they were frequently called Tractatus, as appears from many passages of Cyprian, Optatus, St. Ambrose, St. Austin, St. Jerom, Gaudentius, Chrysologus, and many others collected by Ferrarius,' which I think it needless to recite. Only I shall observe one thing, that this word signifies any exposition or handling of Scripture, as well by way of writing, as preaching: and in both senses the Tractatores, the preachers and expositors of Scripture, were opposed to the Canonici and Authentici, the Prophets, Evangelists and Apostles, who wrote by inspiration, and whose authority was absolutely infallible and authentic: which could not be said of any expositors, however excellent or learned who dictated their thoughts without any such peculiar assistance. This distinction is often inculcated by St. Austin:

Ferrar. de Ritu Concion. lib. i. cap. I.