lects of the individual missæ b. He inserted a short passage (which is known) into the canon. And he joined the Lord's Prayer to the canon, from which it had previously been separated by the breaking of the bread. All this amounts to positive proof that Gregory was the reviser and improver, not the author, of the Roman liturgy.

An attempt has been made to prove that the Roman liturgy was composed between the time of Vigilius and Gregorye. The former, who lived fifty years before the latter, speaking of the canon, said, "that they had received it from apostolical tradi"tion f." Gregory spoke of the canon extant in his time, as having been composed by a scholastic, or learned man 8. It is argued, that if the canon in Vigilius's time had been received from apostolical tradition, and if that in Gregory's time had been composed by a scholastic, the canons of Vigilius and Gregory must have been different, and the

b" Gelasianum codicem de missarum solemniis, multa subtrahens, pauca convertens, nonnulla vero superadjiciens-in unius libri volumine coarctavit." Joannes Diaconus in Vita Gregorii Magni.

C Sed et in ipsa missarum celebratione tria verba maximæ perfectionis plena superadjecit: Diesque nostros in tua pace disponas, atque ab æterna damnatione nos eripi, et in electorum tuorum jubeas grege numerari."" Ven. Bedæ Hist. Eccles. lib. ii. c. I. Compare Menard. Sacramentar. Gregorii p. 2.

d" Orationem vero Dominicam mor post precem dicimus,

quia mos apostolorum fuit, ut ad ipsam solummodo orationem oblationis hostiam consecrarent. Gregorii Mag. Epist. ad Joannem Syracusan. Epist. xii. lib. ix. edit. Benedict. (olim 64.)

e Brett's Collection of Liturgies, part ii. p. 331.

fQuapropter et ipsius canonicæ precis textum direximus subteradjectum, quem (Deo propitio) ex apostolica traditione suscepimus." Vigil. Romanens. Epist. ad Eucherium vel Profuturum Episcopum Bracarens.

g Gregor. Magnus, lib. vii. epist. 64.

Gregory. Such doubts and difficulties, however, do not extend to the number and order of the prayers in each missa, nor to the canon. On the contrary, we find in all, the same number of prayers, arranged in the same order, and designated by the same titles. The canon, or invariable part, preserves the same text in all MSS. The only difference that occurs is the introduction of some short prayer, or of the name of some person to be commemorated: but such interpolations are very rare, and when found are easily detected; and in no case is the canon itself either mutilated or altered. We can therefore ascertain both the invariable and the variable parts of the Roman liturgy. This agreement of MSS. in one common order and text derives strength from a consideration of the different ages and countries in which they were written. Manuscripts of Italy, of England, Germany, and Gaul, whether written at the same period or not, all furnish the same order of prayers and canon. To this evidence we may add the writings of various liturgical commentators in the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries; which, though composed in different countries, all concur in establishing the same facts as the manuscripts.

It appears, then, that there is no difficulty in ascertaining what the Roman liturgy was in the time of Gregory the Great. It may however be inquired, whether Gregory is to be considered the author of that liturgy. To answer this question, we must have recourse to ancient history. We are there informed with minuteness of the amount of Gregory's alterations and improvements. He collected, arranged, improved, abbreviated, the collects

lects of the individual missæ b. He inserted a short passage (which is known) into the canon c. And he joined the Lord's Prayer to the canon d, from which it had previously been separated by the breaking of the bread. All this amounts to positive proof that Gregory was the reviser and improver, not the author, of the Roman liturgy.

An attempt has been made to prove that the Roman liturgy was composed between the time of Vigilius and Gregorye. The former, who lived fifty years before the latter, speaking of the canon, said, "that they had received it from apostolical tradi"tion f." Gregory spoke of the canon extant in his time, as having been composed by a scholastic, or learned man 8. It is argued, that if the canon in Vigilius's time had been received from apostolical tradition, and if that in Gregory's time had been composed by a scholastic, the canons of Vigilius and Gregory must have been different, and the

quia mos apostolorum fuit, ut ad ipsam solummodo orationem oblationis hostiam consecrarent. Gregorii Mag. Epist. ad Joannem Syracusan. Epist. xii. lib. ix. edit. Benedict. (olim 64.)

e Brett's Collection of Liturgies, part ii. p. 331.

Quapropter et ipsius canonicæ precis textum direximus subteradjectum, quem (Deo propitio) ex apostolica traditione suscepimus."_Vigil. Romanens. Epist. ad Eucherium vel Profuturum Episcopum Bracarens.

g Gregor. Magnus, lib. vii. epist. 64.

Gregory. Such doubts and difficulties, however, do not extend to the number and order of the prayers in each missa, nor to the canon. On the contrary, we find in all, the same number of prayers, arranged in the same order, and designated by the same titles. The canon, or invariable part, preserves the same text in all MSS. The only difference that occurs is the introduction of some short prayer, or of the name of some person to be commemorated but such interpolations are very rare, and when found are easily detected; and in no case is the canon itself either mutilated or altered. We can therefore ascertain both the invariable and the variable parts of the Roman liturgy. This agreement of MSS. in one common order and text derives strength from a consideration of the different ages and cour tries in which they were written. Manuscripts Italy, of England, Germany, and Gaul, whe written at the same period or not, all furnis same order of prayers and canon. we may add the writings of var mentators in the eighth, ninth which, though composed in concur in establishing the scripts.

It appears, then, th ascertaining what the time of Gregory the inquired, whether G author of that liturg we must have recour there informed with Gregory's alterations lected, arranged, impr