A discourse concerning liturgies

He instances in divers particulars, not known in the First times, and then adds, Multa sunt alia, quae redolent novitatem, There are many other things therein, that favour of Novelty.

All that Baronius hath to ^ssay for it, is, some passages in the Catechisms² called Cyril's, agreeable to somewhat in ⟨p. 147⟩the said Missal, as he will have it; (Quam verè ejus esse plane cognoscet, qui eam conferat cum iis, quae Cyrillus ejusdem Ecclesiae Hierosolymorum Episcopus in suis mystagogicis orationibus habet, quae quidem ipse non aliunde quam ex Jacobi Liturgia cognoscitur accepisse, ad An. 63. N. 17.) which is a very serviceable argument, and may happily prove as well, that Cyril was the Author of the Liturgy ascribed to James, or that James was the Writer of the Catechisms attributed to Cyril. How it is known, that Cyril could not have these passages any where else, but from James his Liturgy, I apprehend not; we must take the Cardinal's word, nor is it capable of better proof: But, that those particulars might be transferred out of the Catechisms into that Liturgy, we may well understand another way.

1. sThe Cardinal brings Five Instances, most he misrepresents; none serve his turn. 1st. is, Sursum corda, so in Cyril, [Greek or Hebrew], but in the Liturgy not so, but [Greek or Hebrew]: and the Answer in Cyril is [Greek or Hebrew], but in the Liturgy quite otherwise, viz. [Greek or Hebrew]. 2d. Orate pro vivis & defunctis, which words neither Priest nor Deacon useth, either in Cyril, or the Liturgy. 3d. is, Osculemini invicem in osculo sancto; in the Liturgy, [Greek or Hebrew], but in Cyril, [Greek or Hebrew]. 4th. is, Sancta Sanctis. Resp. Unus est Spiritus, &c. So in the Liturgy, but with the Addition of [Greek or Hebrew], which is not in Cyril. 5th. Gustate & videte, quoniam suavis est Dominus, is in other Liturgies (as some of the former are) and so may as well prove James to be the Author of them, as of this.