A discourse concerning liturgies

As to the second, the general Prayer, that this was not made in a set and invariable form, appears by the Epistle of Epiphanius to John Bishop of Jerusalem, in Jeromes the 60. p. 466. There was some clashing betwixt these two Bishops; he of Cyprus being a great zealot against Origen; (as another John of Constantinople found by troublesome experience). And he of Jerusalem being an admirer of Origen, and under suspicion to be tainted with his erroneous Opinions. John had heard, that Epiphanius should intimate, in the Eucharistical Prayers, that he by name was warped from the Faith; he complains of it; and that Epistle is Epiphanius's Answer and Apology, in reference to this and other particulars he was charged with. As to this, he admires, that any should report, quod in oratione quando offerimus sacrificia Deo, soleamus pro te dicere, Domine praesta Johanni ut recte credat. This is the occasion. And hereby it evidently appears, they used occasional Petitions in this Prayer; for such a Petition is that complained of; and the occasion a suspicion, that John was inclined to Origens errors. If such liberty had never been used, to pray in this place as occasion required, who would have been so impudent, as to raise such a report; or so foolish as to affirm what none would believe, as being against the constant and unvariable custom of those that celebrated? Who can think, that the Bishop of Jerusalem would have brought such a charge against Epiphanius, as would have appeared false to the World at first sight, and might have been convicted of impudent slander, by the known unalterable usage of Christians? And why does not he, who designed to burden his Adversary as much as might be, charge him with transgressing ⟨p. 63⟩the orders of the Church, to vent his particular spleen at a Christian Bishop? Is it not evident upon the whole, that there were no such orders, confining them to any unvariable form, in that administration; but that they might, and did, vary in their expressions, as there was occasion.

As to the second, the general Prayer, that this was not made in a set and invariable form, appears by the Epistle of Epiphanius to John Bishop of Jerusalem, in Jeromes the 60. p. 466. There was some clashing betwixt these two Bishops; he of Cyprus being a great zealot against Origen; (as another John of Constantinople found by troublesome experience). And he of Jerusalem being an admirer of Origen, and under suspicion to be tainted with his erroneous Opinions. John had heard, that Epiphanius should intimate, in the Eucharistical Prayers, that he by name was warped from the Faith; he complains of it; and that Epistle is Epiphanius's Answer and Apology, in reference to this and other particulars he was charged with. As to this, he admires, that any should report, quod in oratione quando offerimus sacrificia Deo, soleamus pro te dicere, Domine praesta Johanni ut recte credat. This is the occasion. And hereby it evidently appears, they used occasional Petitions in this Prayer; for such a Petition is that complained of; and the occasion a suspicion, that John was inclined to Origens errours. If such liberty had never been used, to pray in this place as occasion required, who would have been so impudent, as to raise such a report; or so foolish as to affirm what none would believe, as being against the constant and unvariable custom of those that celebrated? Who can think, that the Bishop of Jerusalem would have brought such a charge against Epiphanius, as would have appeared false to the World at first sight, and might have been convicted of impudent slander, by the known unalterable usage of Christians? And why does not he, who designed to burthen his Adversary as much as might be, charge him with transgressing