to the alterations of the latter under Gregory. These differences, at the greatest, were not of an essential char- acter. The question of the independence of the Mi- lanese and the supremacy of the Romans was probably the great issue upon which these differences turned. As nothing less than apostolicity could enable the lit- urgy of Milan to sustain itself in such a conflict, its ori- gin was traced to Barnabas; and miracles, it was be- lieved, had been wrought for its preservation against the efforts of Gregory and Hadrian to bring it to the form of that of Rome. The severest point of this con- flict was doubtless when Charlemagne abolished the Ambrosian Chant throughout the West by the estab- lishment of singing-schools under Roman instructors to teach the Gregorian. The attachment of the people and clergy of Milan, however, to their liturgy could not be overcome, and it is stiU in their possession. Alex- ander VI established it expressly as the " Ritus Ambro- sianus."
Of even greater interest than the Roman liturgy are the Galilean and the IMozarabic.
(2.) The former of these, the Gallican, claims, and it would seem justly, an antiquity greater than that of Rome. The connection of Gaulish Christianity with that of Asia, whether through the person of IreuKus or by earlier missionaries, would lead to a liturgical devel- opment of an independent character. It was displaced by the Roman liturgy during the Carolingian a?ra, and for a long time was almost lost sight of and forgotten. It does not seem to have been used or appealed to in the various conflicts of prerogative between the French monarchs and the pope, and no allusion to its existence is made in the Pragmatic Sanction. PubUc attention was again called to it during the controversies of the 16th century. Interest both of a literary and doctrinal character has been exhibited in connection with this liturgy. But there seems to be but little probability of its restoration to use. While unlike in certain spe- cialities, its differences from the Roman hturgy are not essential. Like the others preceding, it has been traced to the hand of an apostle — to the Church at Lyons, through that of Ephesus, from the apostle John ! The apex upon which this inverted historical pjTamid rests is the single fact, which has been questioned, that Chris- tianity was introduced into Gaul by missionaries from I the Church at Ephesus.
(3.) The JNIozarabic, that of the Spanish churches un- der Arabic dominion, has so many resemblances to the Gallic liturgy that it would seem probable they proceed- ed from the same source. It is described by Isidore His- palensis in the 6th century. During the INIiddle Ages, and in the time of the cardmal Ximenes, it received an addition of several rites. As Spanish territory was re- conquered from the IMoors, and came more fully under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the papacy in other re- spects, the effort was made, and eventually succeeded, although at times warmly resisted by the people, to displace the jMozarabic, and introduce the Roman lit- urgJ^ In the beginning of the IGth century cardi- nal Ximenes endowed a college and chapel at Toledo for the celebration of the ancient rites, and this is now, perhaps, the only i)lace in Spain where the primitive liturgy of that country and of Gaid is in some degree observed. The old P>ritish liturgy, which was displaced by the Gregorian alter the decision of Oswy in 664, seems, like the Mozarabic, to have been essentiaUy the same with the Gallican.
(4.) One other liturgical composition of some interest, dating from the close of the 4th century, is that of the Cathari, published by E. Kunitz (Jena, 1852). It is of interest as giving a more favorable view of the com- munity for which it was composed than had been pre- viouslv entertained. It is to be remembered in connec- tion w-ith all these liturgies of the W^est, as already re- marked of those of the East, that they are the names of manv subordinate offshoots in use and prevalence in different portions of the Church. The discretionary
LITURGY
4G0
LITURGY
power of the bishops, both at this and at earlier periods, to modii'y and adapt prevalent liturgies to peculiar exi- gencies of time and place, naturalh' produced after a time this kind of diversity. The ecclesiastical confusion of
mediteval times, and clerical ignorance and carelessness, would of course increase it. The traces, however, of the parent stock in any such case would not be difficidt of recotrnition.
TABLE SHOWING THE DESCENT OF THE PRINCIPAL LITURGIES NOW USED IN THE CHURCH.
OUR LORD'S WORDS OF INSTITUTION.
I Apostolic Nucleus of a Litur^'. [See Lord's Prayer, and Lord's Supper.]
I
III I
Liturgj' of St. John, St. Paul, or Ephesus.
Present Liturgy of Ambrosian Liturgy. Egypt. I
Liturgy of Lyons,
Liturgy of St. Chrysoston
Present Liturgy of OrienI and Russian Church.
[Monophysito Liturgies.]
. Liturgy of Dio- Sacrnmentary e of Milan. of (jlelasius.
Sacranientary of St. Gregory.
Present Liturgy o Church of Rome.
Mozarabic, or Spanish Liturgy.
Liturgy of = Liturgy of Britain. 1 Tours,
Augustine's revised Liturgy of Britain.
Salisbury, York, and other Missals of English Church.
Present LituTQj/ of the English cXurch,
Liturgy of Scottish Liturgy of Church. American
4. Structure of Liturgies. — The variations of detail which are found in the parent liturgies of the Christian world arc all ingrafted on a structural arrangement which they possess in common, much as four buildings might differ in the style and form of their decorations, and yet agree in their [)lans and elevation, in the posi- tion of their several chambers, and in the number of their principal columns,