In Christ Church cathedral in Dublin, within memory, two silver gilt candlesticks with large wax candles in them always stood on the holy table on Sundays and holy-days, and were lit when required at the evening service, then celebrated at a late hour.—Jebb.
In theHiereugia Anglicanathere are a great many detailed proofs adduced of the use of lights and candlesticks on the holy table in the English Church, from the Reformation downwards. The authorities are all given.
LINCOLN. (SeeUse.)
LITANY. The term “Litany” is used by ancient writers in many different senses. At first it seems to have been applied as a general appellation for all prayers and supplications, whether public or private. In the fourth century it was given more especially to those solemn offices which were formed with processions of the clergy and people.Publicsupplications and prayers toGod, on occasions of especial urgency, were certainly prevalent in the Church during the fourth and fifth centuries. (SeeRogation Days.) These supplications were calledLitaniesin the Eastern Church, from whence the name passed to the West. Here they were known asRogationsor supplications, until the name ofLitanybecame more prevalent than any other. The Church of England appears to have received the stated Rogation or Litany days of the Gallican Church at an early period; and, from that time to the present, she has reckoned them among her days of fasting. Formerly, in this Church, there were processions on all these days.
The Litany of the Church of England is not an exact transcript of any ancient form, though composed of materials of very ancient date. It differs essentially from the Romish Litanies by containing no invocations to angels and departed saints. Our invocations are made to the three persons of the sacredTrinity, and to them alone, while the office of Mediator and Intercessor is throughout ascribed only to ourLord Jesus Christ.
In the original arrangement, the Litany formed a distinct service, not used at the time of the other services. But by laterusage it has been united with the morning prayer, though still retaining its separate place in the Prayer Book. Formerly there was a rubric, requiring that, “after morning prayer, the people being called together by the ringing of a bell, and assembled in the church, the English Litany shall be said after the accustomed manner;” and it was also required by the 15th canon, that “every householder dwelling within half a mile of the church should come or send some one at the least of his household, fit to join with the minister in prayers.” The ordinary arrangement was to hold morning prayer at eight o’clock, the Litany and the Communion at ten. This practice is still observed in some of the English churches; and Bishop White, in his “Memoirs of the American Church,” remarks that when he was in England, being on a visit to the archbishop of Canterbury, he observed that on Wednesdays he, with the other bishops, retired to the chapel before dinner; and on accompanying them he found that their object was to use the Litany, in compliance with the original custom.
The Litany is usually considered as embracing four main divisions, viz. theInvocations,Deprecations,Intercessions, andSupplications.—SeeNicholls on the Common Prayer.
The word Litany is used by the most ancient Greek writers for “an earnest supplication to the gods, made in time of adverse fortune:” and in the same sense it is used in the Christian Church for “a supplication and common intercession to God, when his wrath lies upon us.” Such a kind of supplication was the fifty-first Psalm, which begins with “Have mercy upon me,” &c., and may be called David’s Litany. Such was that Litany ofGod’sappointing (Joel ii. 17); where, in a general assembly, the priests were to say with tears, “Spare thy people,O Lord,” &c. And such was that Litany of ourSaviour, (Luke xxii. 42,) which kneeling he often repeated with strong crying and tears (Heb. v. 7); and St. Paul reckons up “supplications” among the kinds of Christian offices, which he enjoins shall be daily used (1 Tim. ii. 1); which supplications are generally expounded Litanies for removal of some great evil. As for the form in which they are now made, namely, in short requests by the priests, to which the people all answer, St. Chrysostom saith it is derived from the primitive age. And not only the Western, but the Eastern Church also, have ever since retained this way of praying. This was the form of the Christians’ prayers in Tertullian’s time, on the days of their stations, Wednesdays and Fridays, by which he tells us they removed drought. Thus, in St. Cyprian’s time, they requested God for deliverance from enemies, for obtaining rain, and for removing or moderating his judgments. And St. Ambrose hath left a form of Litany, which bears his name, agreeing in many things with this of ours. For when miraculous gifts ceased, they began to write down divers of those primitive forms, which were the original of our modern office: and about the year 400 these Litanies began to be used in procession, the people walking barefoot, and saying them with great devotion. And Mamertus, bishop of Vienna, did collect a Litany to be so used, by which his country was delivered from dreadful calamities, in the year 460. And soon after, Sidonius, bishop of Arverne, [Clermont in Auvergne,] upon the Gothic invasion, made use of the same office; and about the year 500, [511,] the Council of Orleans enjoined they should be used at one certain time of the year, in this public way of procession; and in the next century, Gregory the Great did, out of all the Litanies extant, compose that famous sevenfold Litany, by which Rome was delivered from a grievous mortality, which hath been a pattern to all Western Churches ever since; and ours comes nearer to it than that in the present Roman missal, wherein later popes had put in the invocation of saints, which our reformers have justly expunged. But by the way we may note, that the use of Litanies in procession about the fields, came up but in the time of Theodosius in the East, and in the days of Mamertus of Vienna, and Honoratus of Marseilles, namely, in the year 460, in the West; and it was later councils which did enjoin the use of it in Rogation Week; but the forms of earnest supplications were far more ancient and truly primitive. As for our own Litany, it is now enjoined on Wednesdays and Fridays, the two ancient fasting days of the Christians, in which they had of old more solemn prayers; and on Sundays, when there is the fullest assembly: and no Church in the world hath so complete a form, as the curious and comprehensive method of it will declare.—Dean Comber.
Epiphanius referreth this order to the apostles. The Jews in their synagogues observed for their special days of assembling together those that dwelt in villages, Mondays and Thursdays besides the sabbath.The precedent of the Jews directed the Church not to do less than they did. They made choice of Mondays and Thursdays, in regard of some great calamities that befell their nation upon those days; and that they might not be three days together without doing some public service toGod. The Church had the like reason of Wednesdays and Fridays, whereon ourSaviourwas betrayed and crucified; the moral reason of once in three days, with a convenient distance from Sunday, concurring. The observance of these days for public assemblies was universal, and the practice of the oldest times.—Bp. Cosin.
Next to the Morning and Evening Service in our Prayer Book stands the Litany, or more earnest supplication for avertingGod’sjudgments, and procuring his mercy. This earnestness, it was thought, would be best excited and expressed by the people’s interposing frequently to repeat with their own mouths the solemn form of “beseeching”Godto “deliver” and to “hear” them: in which however the minister is understood to join equally; as the congregation are in every particular specified by him. Such Litanies have been used in the Church at least 1400 years. And they were appointed first for Wednesdays and Fridays, these being appropriated to penitence and humiliation, and for other fasts; but not long after for Sundays also, there being then the largest congregation, and most solemn worship: and our Litany is further directed to be used at such other times as the ordinary shall think proper. Originally it was intended for a distinct service, to come after the Morning Prayer, as the rubric of our liturgy still directs, and before the office for the Communion, at a proper distance of time from each: of which custom a few churches preserve still, or did lately, some remains. But, in the rest, convenience or inclination hath prevailed to join them all three together, excepting that in some places there is a psalm or anthem between the first and second; and between the second and third, almost everywhere: besides that the latter part of the Morning Prayer is, most of it, ordered to be omitted, when the Litany is said with it. But still by this close conjunction many things may appear improper repetitions, which, if the offices were separate, would not. However, as it is, they who use extempore prayers in public have small right to reproach us on this head. For doth it not frequently happen that, during one assembly of theirs, different ministers praying successively, or the same minister in several prayers, or perhaps in one only, shall fall into as many repetitions, as are in the different parts of our liturgy, or more? But, be that as it will, to these last all persons would easily be reconciled, if an interval were placed, in their minds at least, between the services; and they would consider each, when it begins, as a new and independent one, just as if it were a fresh time of meeting together.
The Litany of our Church is not quite the same with any other, but differs very little from those of the Lutherans in Germany and Denmark. It is larger than the Greek, but shorter than the Roman, which is half filled up with the names of saints invoked; whereas we invoke, first, the three persons of the holyTrinity, separately and jointly; then, in a more particular manner, our Redeemer and Mediator, “to whom all power is given in heaven and earth.” (Matt. xxviii. 18.)—Abp. Secker..
The posture in which the minister is to repeat the Litany, is not prescribed in any present rubric, except that, as it is now a part of the Morning Service for the days above mentioned, it is included in the rubric at the end of the suffrages after the secondLord’sPrayer, which orders “all to kneel” in that place, after which there is no direction for “standing.” And the injunctions of King Edward and Queen Elizabeth both appoint, that “the priests, with others of the choir, shall kneel in the midst of the church, and sing or say plainly and distinctly the Litany, which is set forth in English, with all the suffrages following, to the intent the people may hear and answer,” &c. As to the posture of the people, nothing needs to be said in relation to that, because, whenever the priest kneels, they are always to do the same.—Wheatly.
If the Litany be, as certainly it is, our most fervent address toGod, fit is it that it should be made in the most significant, that is, in the lowest, posture of supplication.—L’Estrange.
The Litany hath been lately brought into that absolute perfection, both for matter and form, as not any Church besides can show the like, so complete and full;... so that needs must they be upbraided, either with error, or somewhat worse, whom in all parts this principal and excellent prayer doth not fully satisfy.—Bishop Cosin.
The Litanies in the Roman and the English unreformed Church were said on Easter eve, St. Mark’s day, the three Rogation days, and Wednesdays and Fridays in Lent.The Litany of the Church of England is used on Wednesdays and Fridays, as was the Lenten practice of the West, and its Sunday use is in conformity to the prayers resembling it, which are found at the beginning of the directed communion offices.
In many choirs now, formerly in all, (as would appear from direct notice,) the Litany was sung, since the Reformation, by two ministers, (sometimes deacons,) at other times by laymen, at the faldstool in the centre of the choir. The singing by two laymen is a manifest abuse, reprehended by most of our ritualists; and seems to have arisen from a misconstruction of the ancient rules, which directed it to be sung by two of the choir: but the choir included priests and deacons, and clergy in orders, though of thesecond form.
As to the latter part of the Litany however, the rubric, added at the last review, is confirmatory of the ancient practice of the Church, which assigned the performance of this part to the priest, or superior minister. This is observed in many choirs. And at Oxford and Cambridge, on those days when the Litany is performed before the university, the vice-chancellor, if in orders, reads theLord’sPrayer, and the remaining part.—Jebb.
The Latin Litany is performed on certain days before the university at Oxford and Cambridge. Its musical arrangement, as retained at Oxford, contains the most solemn harmonies known to the Church.
LITERÆ FORMATÆ. According to the rules and practice of the ancient Church, no Christian could travel without taking letters of credence with him from his own bishop, if he meant to communicate with the Church in a foreign country. These letters were of several kinds, according to the different occasions, or quality of the person who carried them. They are generally reduced to three kinds,commendatory,communicatory, anddimissory. The first were such as were granted only to persons of quality, or to persons whose reputation had been called in question, or to the clergy who had occasion to travel in foreign countries. The second sort were granted to all who were in peace and communion of the Church, whence they were also calledpacificalandecclesiastical, and sometimescanonical. The third sort were given only to the clergy, when they were removing from one church to settle in another, and they were to testify that the bearer had the bishop’s leave to depart, whence they were calleddimissory. All these went under the general name offormed letters, because they were written in a particular form, with particular marks and characters, whereby they might be distinguished from counterfeits.—Bingham.
LITURGIUM. (Gr.) The name of a book, in the Greek Church, containing the three liturgies of St. Basil, St. Chrysostom, and that of thePresanctified, said to be composed by Pope Gregory, calledDialogus.
In celebrating these three liturgies, the Greeks observe the following order. The liturgy of St. Basil, as appears by the introduction, is sung over ten times in the year; namely, on the eve of Christmas day, on the feast of St. Basil, on the eve of the feast of Lights, on the Sundays of Lent, excepting Palm Sunday, on the festival of the Virgin, and on the Great Sabbath. The liturgy of thePresanctifiedis repeated every day in Lent, the forementioned days excepted. The rest of the year is appropriated to the liturgy of St. Chrysostom. (SeeLiturgy.)
LITURGY. (SeeCommon Prayer,Formulary, andPublic Worship.) From the Greek wordλειτουργία,a public actorduty. This term was originally used to denote the service or form employed in the celebration of the eucharist. In the Eastern Churches, that service was frequently called the “Divine” or “mystical” liturgy; while in the West, though the term “liturgy” was used, yet the name of “missa” was more common. At the present day, the word is employed to designate the ordinary prescribed service of the Church, either with or without the Communion Office. (See article onFormularies, where the general question of forms of prayer is treated.) The history of liturgies may thus be briefly stated.
When the Christians were no longer in fear of the violence and persecutions of the heathens, and in that age when the Church came to be settled, (that is, from the time of Constantine to that of St. Augustine,) we find there was a liturgy in the Eastern Church.
The first Cyril of Jerusalem mentions some parts of an ancient liturgy used in that place, both in respect to the form of baptism, and the celebration of the eucharist.
St. Basil composed a liturgy himself, which is to be seen in theBibliotheca Patrum, and in his bookDeSpiritu Sancto; and he tells us how the service of the Church was directed by rules and rubrics.
In St. Chrysostom’s time,Omnes unam eandemque precem concipiēbant, and thiswas not only a public prayer, but a public form; for in that collection of his works set forth by Sir Henry Saville, we find a liturgy of his own making, which was translated out of the Syriac by Masius, and used generally throughout all the Greek churches.
Now, if it should be granted that premeditated prayers are not required byGodin our private addresses to him, yet it is plain from those instances already mentioned, such prayers were always held necessary in the public services of the Church; and this further appears by the form prescribed by ourSaviourhimself, who, when we pray, commanded us to say, “OurFather,” &c.; and St. Matthew tells us, that he went away again, and prayed the third time, saying thesame words.
The Apostolical Canons mention some set forms of prayer, both before and after the communion; and St. Basil and St. Chrysostom, before mentioned, not only composed set forms themselves, but they describe set liturgies as having been composed by St. Mark and St. James; and the adversaries to such forms have no other plausible pretence to deny these authorities than by alleging these liturgies to be supposititious, which is an answer that may serve upon any occasion to evade an argument, which cannot otherwise be answered.
St. Ambrose and Prosper tell us, there were set forms of prayers used in the Church in their time; and they give the reason for it,ne in diversum intellectum nostro evagemur arbitrio: and St. Hilary hath this expression on the 66th Psalm, viz. Let those without the Church hear the voice of the people praying within. Now the wordpraying of the peoplemust signify something more than the bare suffrageAmen; it must import their joint concurrence in the actual performance of the whole duty, which cannot be done but where the prayers are in a set form.
And these are the prayers which Isidore tells us were used in the ancient congregations of the Christians; and it is most certain that such were in use in that great apostate Julian’s time; for Nazianzen informs us, that he endeavoured to establish the heathen ceremonies in imitation of the Christian services, by appointing, not only certain times, but set forms of prayer.
It is true, that many of the ancient liturgies were destroyed by the persecuting heathens, yet some fragments of them still remain in the writings of the Fathers, and are such as are used in our Church at this day; as the words before and after the consecration of the sacrament are to be found in St. Ambrose: the question demanded of the godfathers in the sacrament of baptism, viz. “Whether they do, in the name of the infant, renounce the devil and all his works, and the pomps and vanities of this wicked world,” are to be found in the same St. Ambrose, and in Tertullian; theGloria Patri, of which more hereafter, is in Sozomen; and the supplement to that doxology, viz. “As it was in the beginning,” &c., is to be found in Irenæus.
In the sacrament of theLord’ssupper, the words pronounced by the priest, viz. “Lift up your hearts,” and the answer, “We lift them up; it is meet and right for us so to do,” are to be found in St. Augustine and St. Chrysostom; and so are these words, viz. “TheLordbe with you, And with thy spirit;” and, lastly, Isidore mentions the usual conclusion of all our collects, viz. “ThroughJesus ChristourLord,” &c.
In the Western Church, St. Cyprian tells us there was a liturgy, viz. in the Church of Africa, which is usually accounted amongst the Churches of the West; and we find some pieces of such liturgies in St. Augustine; and not only approved by him, but by all the Fathers of that Church assembled in a synod, as it appears by the canons which they made, and which are mentioned both by Balsamon and Zonaras, viz. that prayers be performed by all, and not any to be said in public, but only such as have been composed by wise and understanding men, lest anything should be vented against the faith, either through ignorance or want of meditation.
Tertullian mentions a liturgy used in Rome, which was probably begun by St. Peter, for it bears his name; and Platina tells us, that several additions were made to it by St. Basil in his time; and in some things this author is very particular, as that Celestine added theIntroitus, Gregory added theKyrie Eleison, Telesphorus theGloria in Excelsis, Sixtus the First added “Holy, holy, holy,Lord Godof Hosts,” which is called theTrisagion; Gelasius the Collects, St. Jerome the Epistles and Gospels.
TheGloria Patri, which has been mentioned before, was not only appointed by the Council of Nice to encounter the Arian heresy, but it was used long before that council, even by the apostles themselves, who were commanded by their Master to baptize in the name of theFather, and of theSon, and of theHoly Ghost.
This is found in the writings of all those ancient fathers who lived near the time of the apostles, as in Clemens, who was their scholar, and in Dionysius of Alexandria; but the following words, which make up the whole form of the doxology, viz. “As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end,” were not brought into the Church till the Arian heresy began to spread, and this was about the time of the Council of Nice.
It is true this began first in the Eastern Church, and from thence it came to the West, where Pope Damasus [A. D.366–384] was the first who appointed it to be used at the end of the psalms, which made up the greatest part of the public liturgy of that Church. The Churches of France, Spain, and England had the like liturgies, though not exactly the same.
Although we have no certain account what rites or forms were used here among the Britons, yet Bede, in his ecclesiastical history, tells us, that as soon as the gospel was planted here, there was a liturgy formed out of the rituals of the most flourishing Churches then in the world. For Pope Gregory advised St. Augustine not to follow the Roman office strictly, but to take what he should approve in any Church, and prescribe the same to the English, which he did; and this liturgy of St. Augustine continued for some ages, till Osmond, bishop of Sarum, [A. D.1078,] finding that new prayers and offices abounded everywhere, reduced them all to one form, and from thence it was calledsecundum usum Sarum.
The liturgy of the Irish Church, according to Mr. Palmer, was, during the first ages, probably the same as that of Britain. The ancient Irish liturgy still extant differs considerably from the Roman. It seems, he adds, that in later times there were great varieties in the mode of celebrating Divine worship in Ireland, which were mentioned by Gillebert, bishop of Limerick,A. D.1090. And which appear to have been removed by the Synod of Arles,A. D.1152, when the Roman rites were established.
By the seventh statute of the Synod, or rather Council, of Cashel, 1172, the regulations of the Irish Church were assimilated to those of England. The use of Sarum was adopted; though it has been supposed that the Irish use lingered for a considerable time in parts of the more distant provinces.
As to the liturgy now used amongst us, it was reformed at the time of the Reformation: for the offices of the Church before that time consisting in missals, breviaries, psalteries, graduals, and pontificals, and every religious order having peculiar rites observed among themselves, it was thought proper that the worship ofGodshould be brought under a set form; and moreover, that nothing should be changed merely out of an affectation of novelty, or because it had been used in times of Popery, so as it had been practised in the primitive times. (See next article.)
LITURGY OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. (SeeCommon PrayerandFormulary.) This book is entitledThe Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the United Church of England and Ireland.
Before the Reformation, our liturgy was only in Latin, being a collection of prayers, made up partly of some ancient forms used in the primitive Church, and partly of some others of later original. But when the nation, in King Henry VIII.’s time, was disposed to a reformation, it was thought necessary both to have the service in the English or vulgar tongue, and to correct and amend the liturgy, by purging it of those gross corruptions which had gradually crept into it.
And, first, the convocation appointed a committee,A. D.1537, to compose a book, which was entitled “The godly and pious Institution of a Christian Man, containing a declaration of theLord’s Prayer, theAve Maria, theCreed, theTen Commandments, and theSeven Sacraments, &c.” This book was again published in 1539, with corrections and alterations. In 1543 appeared another Primer, in substance the same as the former, under the title of “A necessary doctrine and Erudition for any Chrysten Man.” In the same year, a committee of bishops and other divines was appointed by King Henry VIII., to reform the rituals and offices of the Church; and the next year the king and clergy ordered the prayers for processions and litanies to be put into English, and to be publicly used. The English Litany accordingly, not much differing from that now in use, was publicly adopted in 1544. Afterwards, in 1545, came out the King’s Primer, containing the whole Morning and Evening Prayer in English, not very different from what is in our present Common Prayer. Thus far the reformation of our liturgy was carried in the reign of Henry VIII.
In the year 1547, the first of King Edward VI., the convocation unanimously declared, that the communion ought to beadministered in both kinds; whereupon an act of parliament was made, ordering it to be administered. Then a committee of bishops and other learned divines was appointed, to composeAn uniform order of communion, according to the rules of Scripture, and the use of the primitive Church. The committee accordingly met in Windsor Castle, and drew up such a form. This order of the communion was appointed for general use, by royal proclamation, in 1548. This made way for a new commission, empowering the same persons to finish the whole liturgy, by drawing up public offices for Sundays and holy-days, for baptism, confirmation, matrimony, burial, and other special occasions.
The committee appointed to compose this liturgy were—
1. Thomas Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury.
2. Thomas Goodrich, bishop of Ely.
3. Henry Holbech, bishop of Lincoln.
4. George Day, bishop of Chichester.
5. John Skip, bishop of Hereford.
6. Thomas Thirlby, bishop of Westminster.
7. Nicholas Ridley, bishop of Rochester, and afterwards of London.
8. Dr. William May, dean of St. Paul’s.
9. Dr. John Taylor, dean, afterwards bishop, of Lincoln.
10. Dr. Simon Haynes, dean of Exeter, and master of Queen’s College, Cambridge.
11. Dr. John Redman, prebendary of Westminster, and master of Trinity College, Cambridge.
12. Dr. Richard Cox, dean of Christ Church, Oxon., and Westminster; afterwards bishop of Ely.
13. Mr. Thomas Robertson, archdeacon of Leicester; afterwards dean of Durham.
Our excellent liturgy, thus compiled, was revised and approved by the archbishops, bishops, and clergy of both provinces of Canterbury and York, and then confirmed by the king and three estates in parliament,A. D.1548, second and third of Edward VI. ch. 1. In 1549, an act passed for appointing six bishops and six other learned men, to draw up a form for consecrating bishops, priests, and deacons. Heylin conjectures that these were the same as those above mentioned, with the exception of Bishop Day, who had refused to subscribe the liturgy.
But, about the end of the year 1550, exceptions were taken against some parts of this book, and Archbishop Cranmer proposed a new review. The principal alterations occasioned by this second review were the addition of theSentences,Exhortation,Confession, andAbsolution, at the beginning of the morning and evening services, which in the first Common Prayer Book began with theLord’sPrayer; the addition of theCommandmentsat the beginning of the Communion Office; the removing of some rites and ceremonies retained in the former book, such as the use of oil in confirmation, the unction of the sick, prayers for departed souls, the invocation of theHoly Ghostat the consecration of the eucharist, and the prayer of oblation that used to follow it; the omitting the rubric that ordered water to be mixed with the wine, with several other less material variations, The habits, likewise, which were prescribed in the former book were in this laid aside; and, lastly, a rubric was added at the end of the Communion Office, to explain the reason of kneeling at the sacrament. The liturgy, thus revised and altered, was again confirmed by parliament,A. D.1551, with this declaration, that the alterations made in it proceeded fromcuriosity rather that any worthy cause. But both this and the former act in 1548 were repealed in the first year of Queen Mary.
Upon the accession of Queen Elizabeth, the act of repeal was set aside, and several learned divines appointed to take another review of King Edward’s liturgies. These (according to Camden and Strype) were—
1. Dr. Matthew Parker, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury.
2. Dr. Richard Cox, afterwards bishop of Ely; one of the original compilers.
3. Dr. William May; one of the original compilers.
4. Dr. William Bill, afterwards dean of Westminster.
5. Dr. James Pilkington, afterwards bishop of Durham.
6. Sir Thomas Smith.
7. Mr. David Whitehead.
8. Mr. Edmund Grindal, afterwards bishop of London, and archbishop of York and Canterbury.
To these were afterwards added,
9. Dr. Edwyn Sandys, afterwards bishop of Worcester.
10. Mr. Edmund Guest, afterwards bishop of Rochester and Salisbury.
It was debated, at first, which of the two books of King Edward should be received. At length the second was pitched upon, and confirmed by parliament, which commanded it to be used, with one alteration or addition of certain lessons to be used on every Sunday in the year, andthe form of the Litany altered and corrected, and two sentences added in the delivery of the sacrament to the communicants, and none other or otherwise.
The alteration in the Litany here mentioned was the leaving out the deprecation, “from the tyranny of the bishop of Rome and all his detestable enormities,” and adding these words to the petition for the sovereign, “strengthen in the true worshipping of thee, in righteousness and holiness of life.” The two sentences added in the delivery of the sacrament, were, “The body of ourLord Jesus Christ,” &c., and “The blood of ourLord Jesus Christ,” &c., which were taken out of King Edward’s First Book; whereas, in the Second Book, these sentences were left out, and in the room of them were used, “Take, eat, or drink, this,” with what follows; but now, in Queen Elizabeth’s book, both these forms were united.
There are some other variations in this book from the Second of King Edward. The first rubric, concerning the situation of the chancel, and the proper place of reading Divine service, was altered; the habits, enjoined by the First Book of King Edward, and forbidden by the Second, were now restored; at the end of the Litany was added a prayer for the sovereign, and another for the clergy. Lastly, the rubric, that was added at the end of the Communion Office, in King Edward’s Second Book, against ourSaviour’scorporeal presence in the sacrament, was left out in this. This was done, that the aforesaid notion might remain as a speculative opinion, not determined; it being the queen’s design to unite the nation, as near as possible, in one faith.
In this state the liturgy continued, without further alteration, till the first year of King James I.; when a conference was held at Hampton Court between that prince, with Archbishop Whitgift and other bishops and divines, on the one side, and Dr. Reynolds, with some other Puritans, on the other: the result of which was, the adding some forms of thanksgiving at the end of the Litany, and an addition to the catechism in relation to the sacraments. Likewise, in the rubric at the beginning of the Office for Private Baptism, the words “lawful minister” were inserted to prevent midwives and laymen from presuming to baptize, with one or two more small alterations.
But, immediately after the Restoration, King Charles II., at the request of several of the Presbyterian ministers, issued out a commission for a new review of the liturgy, empowering twelve of the bishops and twelve Presbyterian divines to make such reasonable and necessary alterations as they should jointly agree upon. Nine coadjutors were added on each side, to supply the place of any of the twelve principal who should happen to be absent. Their names are these:
On the Episcopalian side.Principals.
On the Episcopalian side.Principals.
On the Episcopalian side.
Principals.
Coadjutors.
Coadjutors.
Coadjutors.
On the Presbyterian side.Principals.
On the Presbyterian side.Principals.
On the Presbyterian side.
Principals.
Coadjutors.
Coadjutors.
Coadjutors.
These commissioners had several meetings at the Savoy, but to very little purpose; the Presbyterians reviving all the old scruples of the Puritans against the liturgy, and adding several new ones of their own. Baxter had the assurance to affirm, that our liturgy was too bad to be mended, and confidently proposed to compose a new one, which he had the insolence to offer to the bishops. Upon this the conference broke up, without anything being done, except that some particular alterations were proposed by the episcopal divines; which, the May following, were considered and agreed to by the whole clergy in convocation. The principal of these alterations were, that several lessons in the calendar were changed for others more proper for the days; the prayers for particular occasions were disjoined from the Litany, and the two prayers to be used in the Ember weeks, the prayer for the parliament, that for all conditions of men, and the general thanksgiving, were added. Several of the collects were altered; the Epistles and Gospels were taken out of the last translation of the Bible, being read before according to the old translation. The Office for Baptism of those of Riper Years, and the Forms of Prayer to be used at Sea, were added. In a word, the whole liturgy was then brought to the state in which it now stands, and was unanimously subscribed by both houses of convocation of both provinces, on Friday, Dec. 20, 1661. And being brought to the House of Lords the March following, both Houses very readily passed an act for its establishment; and the Earl of Clarendon, then lord chancellor, was ordered to return the thanks of the lords to the bishops and clergy, for their care and industry shown in the review of it.
The English liturgy was adopted in Ireland shortly after the Reformation in England. In 1551, Edward VI. issued an injunction to Sir Anthony St. Leger, the lord deputy there, to have the English Common Prayer Book read in the Irish churches. The lord deputy accordingly summoned the whole clergy, and after opposition from the primate and some of the bishops, a proclamation was issued, and the English Prayer Book publicly used in Christ Church, on Easter Sunday that year: having been printed in Dublin, with these words on the title page,After the use of the Church of England. No order is extant for the adoption of King Edward’s Second Book; nor does it appear that any act was passed in Queen Mary’s reign prohibiting the use of the First. In 1560, an Act of Uniformity, copied from the English act, was passed, enjoining the Book of Common Prayer as then revised in England: this act was passed with the consent of seventeen out of nineteen prelates, that is, of the spiritual estate, as the Irish Church was then constituted. In 1662 the English revised liturgy was referred for consideration to the Irish bishops; on their approval it was passed by convocation; and nearly four years after, the Act of Uniformity was enacted by parliament.—SeeStephens’s Introduction to the Irish Book of Common Prayer.
The peculiar excellencies of our Church of England service are to be traced to a variety of causes. One prominent cause is obvious and important; namely, that our reformers most closely adhered to the model of primitive devotion.... To approach, as near as possible, to the Church of the apostles, and to that of the old Catholic bishops and fathers, so long as they deemed it pure and unadulterated, was the paramount direction of their tastes, their judgments, and their hearts.... In the formation of our liturgy, it has been happily, and doubtless providentially, guarded alike from excess and deficiency. It possesses a peculiar temperament, equally remote from all extremes, and harmoniously blending all excellencies: it is not superstitious, it is not fanatical, it is not cold and formal, it is not rapturous and violent; but it unites, perhaps beyond any other human composition, sublime truth and pure spirit; the calmest wisdom and the most energetic devotion. Under various trying circumstances it has been so signally and repeatedly preserved, that we cannot doubt it is continued to us for some greater purpose than it has hitherto effected. While the very memory of many contending parties, that threatened its destruction, has nearly passed away, it remains uninjured and unaltered; giving us to conjecture, that it is reserved for still nobler, more extended, and more enduring triumphs.—Bishop Jebb.
As for the English liturgy’s symbolizing with the Popish Missal, as some have odiously and falsely calumniated, it doth no more than our communion, orLord’ssupper celebrated in England, doth with the mass at Rome; or our doctrine about the eucharist doth with theirs about transubstantiation; or our humble veneration of ourGodandSaviourin that mystery doth with their strange gesticulations and superstitions. In all which particulars, how much the Church of England differed both in doctrine and devotion from that ofRome, no man that is intelligent and honest can either deny or dissemble.—Gauden’s Tears of the Church of England.
The Nonconformists say, the liturgy is in great part picked and culled out of the mass-book; but it followeth not thence, that either it is, or was esteemed by them, a devised or false worship; for many things contained in the mass-book itself are good and holy. A pearl may be found upon a dunghill. We cannot more credit the man of sin than to say, that everything in the mass-book is devilish and antichristian, for then it would be antichristian to pray untoGodin the mediation ofJesus Christ—to read the Scriptures—to profess many fundamental truths necessary to salvation. Our service might be picked and culled out of the mass-book, and yet be free from all fault and tincture, from all show and appearance of evil; though the mass-book itself was fraught with all manner of abominations. It is more proper to say the mass was added to our Common Prayer, than that our Common Prayer was taken out of the mass-book; for most things in our Common Prayer were to be found in the liturgies of the Church long before the mass was heard of in the world.”—Stillingfleet on Separation.
A man would wonder how it is possible for those, who understand wherein the iniquity of Popery consists, to make this objection against the Book of Common Prayer.
The Papists have corrupted Christianity by adding many unwarrantable particulars; whereas the Protestants have rejected those unwarrantable particulars, and retained pure Christianity. Wherefore, as the Protestant religion is very good, although it is in some sense the same with that of the Papists; so also may an English reformed Prayer Book be very good, although it be in some sense the same with the Popish liturgies. Upon supposition that the matter of fact were never so certainly true, and that the Book of Common Prayer were taken word for word out of the Popish liturgies, yet this is no just objection against it. For as the Popish religion is a mixture of things good and bad; so their liturgies are of the same kind. They contain many excellent prayers addressed to the true and onlyGod; which every good Christian cannot but heartily approve of; though at the same time there are other prayers addressed to angels and saints, and containing unsound matter. So that it is possible for us to make a choice of admirable devotions out of the Popish liturgies, if we take care to separate the good from the bad; if we reject their superstitions, and retain what is truly Christian.—Bennet’s Paraph. Com. Prayer, Appendix I.
If it may be concluded that our liturgy is not good because it is comprehended in the mass-book, or in the breviary, we must, by the same reason, infer, that our doctrine is unsound, because it is all to be found in the councils, and in the writings of the doctors of the Romish Church. But so theLord’sPrayer, the Apostles’ Creed, and many sentences of Scripture which are used in that missal, or in that breviary, as also the doctrine of theTrinity, of the incarnation, passion, &c., which are comprehended in the councils, would all of them be but superstitions and heresies. Again, to say that our liturgy is naught, because it hath been extracted out of the mass-book or breviary, if that were true, yet it is just such an argument, as if men had hit Luther and Calvin in the teeth with this, that they were superstitious, Popish heretics, because they came the one out of a convent from among friars, and the other out of a cathedral from the midst of prebendaries, who were all infected with Popish heresies and superstitions. And would they not have had great cause to complain, if upon this pretence they had been always suspected, rejected, or condemned? Therefore, as they were reputed sound and orthodox in that respect, after their doctrine had been examined, and nothing was found therein of the leaven of Rome, although they came out of her communion, let our liturgy have but the same right done unto it; let it be examined, and that, if they please, with exactness and the greatest rigour; but in consequence let it be also declared innocent, if no harm be found therein, though that should prove true, that it had been wholly taken out of the mass-book, or breviary, which will never be found to be so. For I dare say that among one hundred of them who so confidently affirm it, there is not one that ever saw the missal or the breviary, or but knows so much as what the books are. And if we should put those books into their hands, that they might produce some proofs of this rash affirmation, which is so frequent in their mouths, they would be infinitely puzzled. They would not find, either in the missal, or in the breviary, that wise economy which our liturgy useth in the reading of the Holy Scriptures, nor those excellent passages which set before our eyes the greatness of our guilt towardsGod, and of his mercy in pardoning the same unto us; whichpassages are placed in the very beginning of it. They would not find there that godly exhortation to repentance, and to the confession of our sins in the presence ofGod, which followeth immediately the reading of those passages. Nor yet the confession of sins, nor the absolution which followeth the same, for there is not one line of all this in the mass-book. The ten commandments are not to be found there, nor that prayer which is made at the end of every commandment which the minister hath pronounced; nor the Commination, nor several prayers of the Litany, or of the other forms. But in it they will meet with theLord’sPrayer, the Creeds, the songs of Zachary, Simeon, of the Blessed Virgin, and of some others, which are word for word in the Scripture, or are extracted out of it, and are grounded upon the same, and were in use in the primitive Christian Church before ever the mass was hatched. Therefore it is manifest that to say that our liturgy is either the mass, or taken out of it, is a mere slander, proceeding from malice, or ignorance, or both.—Durel’s Government of the Reformed Churches—Sermon on the English Liturgy.
LOGOS. TheWord; from the Greekὁ Λόγος. A title given to our blessedLordandSaviour; so designated not only because theFatherfirst created and still governs all things by him, but because, as men discover their sentiments and designs to one another, by the intervention of words, speech, or discourse, soGodby hisSondiscovers his gracious designs to men. All the various manifestations of himself, whether in the works of creation, providence, or redemption, all the revelations he has been pleased to give of his will, are conveyed to us through him; and therefore he is, by way of eminence, called theWordofGod.—Tomline.
The word appears to be used as an abstract for the concrete, as St. John employsLightforenlightener,Lifeforgiver of life; so that the expression meansspeaker, orinterpreter. So, (John i. 18,) “No man hath seenGodat any time; the Only Begotten, who is in the bosom of theFather, he hathdeclaredhim.” In the first verse he is described as theWordwhich “was withGodin the beginning, and wasGod.” (SeeJesusandLord.)
As to the reason of this name or title ofthe Word, given by the evangelist to our blessedSaviour; he seems to have done it in compliance with the common way of speaking among the Jews, who frequently call the Messias by the name of theWordof theLord; of which I might give many instances; but there is one very remarkable, in the Targum of Jonathan, which renders the words of the psalmist, which the Jews acknowledged to be spoken of the Messias, viz.The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, &c., thus, “The Lord said unto his Word,” &c. And so likewise Philo the Jew calls him “by whomGodmade the world, theWordofGod, and theSonofGod:” and Plato probably had the same notion from the Jews, which made Amelius, the Platonist, when he read the beginning of St. John’s Gospel, to say, “This barbarian agrees with Plato, ranking theWordin the order of principles;” meaning, that he made theWordthe principle or efficient cause of the world, as Plato also hath done. And this title of theWordwas so famously known to be given to theMessias, that even the enemies of Christianity took notice of it. Julian the apostate callsChristby this name: and Mahomet in his Alcoran gives this name toJesustheSonof Mary. But St. John had probably no reference to Plato, any otherwise than as the Gnostics, against whom he wrote, made use of several of Philo’s words and notions. So that in all probability St. John gives our blessedSaviourthis title with regard to the Jews more especially, who anciently calledMessiasby this name.—Archbishop Tillotson.
See the very learned article on the wordΛόγος(under its 16th head) inRose’s edition of Parkhurst’s Greek Lexicon.
LOLLARDS. A religious sect, which arose in Germany about the beginning of the fourteenth century; so called, as many writers have imagined, from Walter Lollard, who began to dogmatize in 1315, and was burnt at Cologne; though others think that Lollard was no surname, but merely a term of reproach applied to all heretics, who concealed the poison of error under the appearance of piety. In England, the followers of Wickliff were called, by way of reproach,Lollards, from the supposition that there was some affinity between some of their tenets: though others are of opinion that the English Lollards came from Germany. (SeeWickliffites.)
LOMBARDICKS. Flat tombstones, generally of granite or alabaster, coffin-shaped, with a slightly raised cross in the centre, and a legend running round it.
LORD, OUR LORD. TheLord Jesus Christis such to us, as He is,
1. OurSaviour.
I will placesalvationin Zion. (Isa. xlvi. 13.) Behold thysalvationcometh. (Isa. lxii. 11.) I speak in righteousness,mightyto save. (Isa. lxiii. 1.) Thou shalt call his nameJesus, for he shallsavehis people from their sins. (Matt. i. 21.) TheFathersent theSonto bethe Saviour of the world. (1 John iv. 14.) To be a Prince and aSaviour. (Acts v. 31.) The author ofeternal salvation. (Heb. v. 9.)Godour Saviour. (Tit. ii. 10.) The greatGod, and evenour SaviourJesus Christ. (Tit. ii. 13.)Godhath not appointed us to wrath; but to obtainsalvationby ourLord Christ Jesus. (1 Thess. v. 9.) That the world through him mightbe saved. (John iii. 17.) This is a faithful saying, &c., thatJesus Christcame into the world tosavesinners. (1 Tim. i. 15.) Neither is theresalvationinany other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. (Acts iv. 12. See also Matt. i. 21; xviii. 11; Luke ii. 11; John iii. 17; iv. 42; xii. 47; Acts xv. 11; Rom. v. 9; x. 9; Eph. v. 23; Phil. iii. 20; 1 Thess. i. 10; Heb. ii. 3; vii. 25; Tit. iii. 5, 6.)
2. Our Sacrifice for sin.
The Spirit—testified beforehand thesufferingsofChrist. (1 Pet. i. 11.) Beholdthe Lamb ofGod, which taketh away (beareth) the sin of the world. (John i. 29.) TheLamb slainfrom the foundation of the world. (Rev. xiii. 8.)Christour passover issacrificed(slain) for us. (1 Cor. v. 7.)Christdied for our sinsaccording to the Scriptures. (1 Cor. xv. 3.) His own self bare our sins in hisown bodyon the tree. (1 Pet. ii. 24.) And hath given himself for us, an offering anda sacrificetoGod. (Eph. v. 2.) An offeringfor sin. (Isa. liii. 10.) Once offered to bear the sins of many. (Heb. ix. 28.) Thus it behovedChristtosuffer. (Luke xxiv. 46.) The just for the unjust, that he might bring us toGod. (1 Pet. iii. 18.) Hereby perceive we the love ofGod, because helaid down his life for us. (1 John iii. 16. See also Isa. liii. 6–12; Dan. ix. 26; Luke xxiv. 26; John iii. 14, 15; xv. 13; Acts iii. 18; xxvi. 23; Rom. iv. 25; 2 Cor. v. 21; Heb. ix. 26; x. 5; 1 John i. 7; ii. 2.)
3. Our Redeemer.
I know thatmy Redeemerliveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth. (Job xix. 25.)The redeemershall come to Zion. (Isa. lix. 20.)Christhathredeemedus from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us. (Gal. iii. 13.)Redeemedwith the precious blood ofChrist. (1 Pet. i. 18, 19.) Having obtainedeternal redemptionfor us. (Heb. ix. 12. See also Job xxxiii. 23, 24; Matt. xxvi. 28; Rom. iii. 24; 1 Cor. i. 30; Eph. i. 7; Rev. v. 9.)
4. Our Mediator.
There isone MediatorbetweenGodand man, the manChrist Jesus. (1 Tim. ii. 5.) He isthe Mediatorof a new—a better—covenant. (Heb. viii. 6; xii. 24.)The Mediatorof the New Testament. (Heb. ix. 15.) No man cometh to theFatherbutby me. (John xiv. 6. See also Job ix. 2; John xvi. 23; Heb. vii. 25; xi. 9; 1 Pet. ii. 5.)
5. Our Advocate.
We havean advocatewith theFather,Jesus Christthe righteous. (1 John ii. 1. See also Heb. ix. 24.)
6. Our Intercessor.
He saw that there was no man, and wondered that there wasno Intercessor; thereforehis armbrought salvation. (Isa. lix. 16.) He madeintercessionfor the transgressors. (Isa. liii. 12.) He ever liveth to makeintercessionfor them. (Heb. vii. 25. See also Rom. viii. 34.)
7. Our Propitiation.
He is thepropitiationfor our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 John ii. 2.) Whom God hath set forth to bea propitiation, through faith in his blood. (Rom. iii. 25.)
8. Our Ransom.
He is gracious unto him, and saith, Deliver him from going down to the pit, I have founda ransom. (Job xxxiii. 24.) The Son of man came—to give his lifea ransomfor many. (Matt. xx. 28.)A ransomfor all to be testified in due time. (1 Tim. ii. 6.)
9. Our Righteousness.
Their righteousnessis of me, saith theLord. (Isa. liv. 17.)The righteousness ofGodwhich is in faith byJesus Christto all. (Rom. iii. 22.) TheLordour righteousness. (Jer. xxiii. 6. See also Isa. lxi. 10; Dan. ix. 24; 1 John ii. 1, 29.)
10. Our Wisdom.
Christ Jesus, who ofGodis made unto uswisdom. (1 Cor. i. 17, 30. See also Isa. ix. 6; Eph. i. 17; iii. 4.)
11. Our Sanctification.
Jesusalso, that he mightsanctify the peoplewith his own blood, suffered without the gate. (Heb. xiii. 12.)Wearesanctifiedthrough the offering of the body ofJesus Christ. (Heb. x. 10. See also Mal. iii. 3; Matt. iii. 12; John xvii. 19; 1 Cor. i. 2; vi. 11; Eph. v. 25, 26; Heb. x. 14; 1 John i. 7.)
(Of him are ye inChrist Jesus,whoofGodis made unto uswisdom, andrighteousness, andsanctification, 1 Cor. i. 30.)
12. OurLordand ourGod.
John xx. 28.
II. As He is,
1. TheMessiah.
Messiahthe prince. (Dan. ix. 25, 26.) We have foundthe Messias, which is, being interpreted, theChrist(the anointed). (John i. 41.) Anointed—to preach good tidings unto the meek. (Isa. lxi. 1.) To preach the gospel to the poor, &c. (Luke iv. 18.)
2. The Head of the Church.
Christ isthe Head of the Church. (Eph. v. 23.)God—gave him to bethe headover all things tothe Church, which is his body. (Eph. i. 22, 23. See also Ps. cxviii. 22; Matt. ii. 6; xxi. 42; John x. 14; Acts iv. 11; Rom. xii. 5; 1 Cor. vi. 15; xii. 27; Eph. ii. 20; iv. 12–15; v. 29; Col. i. 18, 24; Heb. iii. 1; xiii. 20; 1 Pet. ii. 6, 25.)
3. The Power ofGod.
Unto them which are called—Christthe power ofGod. (1 Cor. i. 24.) Declared to be theSonofGodwith power. (Rom. i. 4.) The brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by theword of his power. (Heb. i. 3.) For in him dwelleth allthe fulnessof theGodheadbodily. (Col. ii. 9. See also Matt. ix. 6; xi. 27; xxviii. 18; Luke iv. 32; Acts xx. 32; Eph. i. 20, 21; Col. ii. 10; 2 Tim. i. 12; 1 Pet. iii. 22; Rev. xi. 15.)
4. The Truth.
I am the truth.(John xiv. 6.) Grace andtruthcame byJesus Christ,—the only begotten of theFather,fullof grace andtruth. (John i. 17, 14.)The Amen, the faithful and true witness. (Rev. iii. 14. See also Isa. xlii. 3; John viii. 14, 32; xviii. 37; 2 Cor. xi. 10; Eph. iv. 21; 1 John v. 20; Rev. xix. 11; xxii. 6.)
5. TheKingof kings, andLordof lords.
Rev. xvii. 14; xix. 16. And see also Ps. lxxxix. 27; Dan. vii. 14, 27; Zech. xiv. 9; 1 Tim. vi. 15; Rev. i. 5; xi. 15.
6. TheLordof Glory.
1 Cor. ii. 8; Jas. ii. 1.
7. TheLordof All.
Jesus Christ, he isLordof all. (Acts x. 36.) To this endChristboth died, and rose, and revived, that he might beLordboth of thedead and living. (Rom. xiv. 9.) And that every tongue should confess thatJesus ChristisLord. (Phil. ii. 11. See also Josh. v. 14; Micah v. 2; John xiii. 13; xvi. 15; Acts ii. 36; Rom. x. 12; 1 Cor. viii. 6; xii. 5; xv. 47; 2 Thess. i. 7; 2 Tim. iv. 8; Col. iii. 24; Heb. i. 2; ii. 8; xiii. 20; Rev. i. 8; v. 5.)
III. Through Him we have,
1. Grace. (John i. 16; Acts xv. 11; Rom. i. 5; iii. 24; v. 2, 15–21; xvi. 20, and similar passages. 1 Cor. i. 4; xv. 10; 2 Cor. viii. 9; xii. 9; Eph. i. 7; ii. 7; iv. 7; vi. 24; 1 Tim. i. 2, 14; 2 Tim. i. 9; 2 Pet. iii. 18.)
2. Power. (1 Cor. i. 18; 2 Cor. xii. 9; Eph. vi. 8; Phil. iv. 13; Col. i. 29; 1 Tim. i. 12; 2 Tim. i. 9, 12; Heb. ii. 14, 18; xiii. 21.)
3. Faith. (Matt. ix. 2; John vi. 45; Acts xxvi. 18; iii. 16; Rom. iii. 22, 25; v. 2; 1 Cor. iii. 5; Gal. ii. 20; iii. 22; Eph. ii. 8; Phil. i. 29; iii. 9; Col. ii. 5, 7; 1 Tim. iii. 13; iv. 6; 1 Pet. ii. 6; 1 John v. 14.)
4. Forgiveness of sins. (Zech. xiii. 1; Matt. ix. 6; Luke xxiv. 47; John i. 29; Acts ii. 38; v. 31; x. 43; xiii. 38; Rom. viii. 1; 2 Cor. ii. 10; Eph. i. 7; iv. 32; Heb. ix. 26; 1 John ii. 12; Rev. i. 5.)
5. Justification. (Isa. liii. 11; Acts xiii. 39; Rom. iii. 24, 26; iv. 25; v. 1, 9, 16, 18; viii. 1; x. 4; 1 Cor. vi. 11; Gal. ii. 16, 21; iii. 8, 11, 24; Phil. iii. 9; Tit. iii. 7.)
6. Patience. (Ps. xxxvii. 7, with 2 Thess. iii. 5; 1 Thess. i. 3; 2 Thess. i. 4; 2 Tim. ii. 24; Heb. vi. 12; x. 36; xii. 1; James v. 7, 8; Rev. i. 9; ii. 2, 3, 19; iii. 10; xiv. 12.)
7. Light. (Isa. xlix. 6; Luke ii. 32; John i. 9; iii. 19; viii. 12; ix. 5; xii. 35, 36, 46; 2 Cor. iv. 4, 6; Eph. v. 14; 1 John ii. 8; Rev. xxi. 23.)
8. Life. (John i. 4; iii. 36; v. 21, 24; vi. 27, 33, 40; x. 10, 28; xi. 25; xiv. 6; xx. 31; Acts iii. 15; Rom. v. 15–21; vi. 8, 11, 23; viii. 2; xiv. 9; 1 Cor. xv. 22; 2 Cor. iv. 10; Phil. i. 21; Col. iii. 4; 1 Thess. v. 10; 2 Tim. i. 1, 10; 1 John i. 1; ii. 25; iv. 9; v. 11, 12, 20; Jude, ver. 21.)
9. Peace. (Isa. ix. 6; Ezek. xxxiv. 25; Zech. ix. 10; Luke i. 79; ii. 14; xix. 38; John xiv. 27; xvi. 33; Acts x. 36; Rom. i. 7, and the similar passages, and v. 1; x. 15; Eph. ii. 14–17; vi. 15; Phil. iv. 7; Col. i. 20; 1 Pet. v. 14.)
10. Blessing. (Gal. iii. 14; Eph. i. 3; 2 Tim. iv. 22.)
11. All we need. (Ps. xxiii. 1; John xv. 7, 16; 1 Cor. viii. 6; Phil. iv. 19.)
12. Joy and consolation. (Luke ii. 25; John xvi. 20; Rom. v. 11; xv. 13; 2 Cor. i. 5; Phil. ii. 1; iii. 1; iv. 4; 2 Thess. ii. 16.)
13. Victory. (Rom. viii. 37; 1 Cor. xv. 57; 2 Cor. ii. 14; 1 John iv. 4; v. 4, 5; Rev. xii. 11.)
14. The kingdom of heaven. (Luke xxii. 28, 29; John xiv. 3; Eph. ii. 6; v.5; 1 Thess. iv. 17; 2 Tim. ii. 12; iv. 8; 2 Pet. i. 11; Rev. iii. 21; xxi. 22.)
IV. Through Him we are,
1. Reconciled toGod. (Dan. ix. 24; John xi. 52; Rom. v. 1, 10; xi. 15; 2 Cor. v. 18, 19; Eph. i. 10; ii. 13, 16; iii. 6; Col. i. 20, 21; Heb. ii. 17; 1 John iv. 10.)
2. Made sons ofGod. (Isa. lvi. 5; Luke xii. 32; John i. 12; Gal. iii. 26; iv. 5–7; Eph. i. 5; 1 John iii. 1.)
V. Through Him we must,
1. Offer thanks. (Rom. i. 8; vii. 25; Eph. i. 6; v. 20; Col. iii. 17; 1 Thess. v. 18; Heb. xiii. 15; 1 Pet. ii. 5.)
2. Give glory toGod. (John xiv. 13; Rom. xvi. 27; 2 Cor. viii. 23; Eph. iii. 21; 1 Pet. iv. 11.)
3. Be accepted. (Eph. i. 6.)
VI. In Him we must,
1. Have faith. (Isa. xxviii. 16; John i. 12; iii. 16; vi. 29, 47; xx. 31; Acts xvi. 31; xviii. 8; xx. 21; xxiv. 24; Rom. ix. 33; x. 9; Gal. ii. 16; Eph. ii. 8; Phil. i. 29; 2 Tim. i. 13; 1 John ii. 22; iii. 23; v. 1, 10.)
2. Hope. (Acts xxviii. 20; 1 Cor. xv. 19; Col. i. 27; 1 Tim. i. 1.)
3. Trust. (2 Cor. i. 20; iii. 4; xi. 10; Eph. i. 12.)
4. Die. (Rom. vii. 4; viii. 10, 36; 1 Cor. iv. 9; ix. 15; xv. 31; 2 Cor. i. 5; iv. 10, 11; vi. 9; Phil. ii. 30.)
5. Become new creatures. (2 Cor. iv. 16; v. 17; Gal. vi. 15.)
6. Have our conversation. (John xv. 16, 22; Rom. vi. 4; viii. 9; xiii. 14; 1 Cor. iii. 23; 2 Cor. iv. 10; xiii. 5; Gal. i. 10; ii. 17; v. 24; Eph. iii. 19; iv. 15; vi. 6; Phil. i. 10, 11, 27; ii. 5, 21; iii. 18; Col. i. 10; ii. 6; iii. 1, 16; 1 Thess. ii. 11, 12; iv. 1; 2 Tim. ii. 1–3, 19; Tit. ii. 10; Heb. ix. 14; 1 Pet. iii. 16; Rev. vii. 14.)
VII. In His name,
1. We are exhorted. (1 Cor. i. 10; iii. 1; v. 4; 1 Thess. iv. 1, 2; 1 Tim. v. 21; vi. 13; 2 Tim. iv. 1.)
2. We must speak. (Rom. ix. 1, 2; 2 Cor. ii. 17; xii. 19; 1 Tim. ii. 7.)
3. We must ask. (Matt. xviii. 19, 20; John xiv. 13; xv. 7; xvi. 23, 24; 2 Cor. xii. 8, 9; 1 John v. 14, 15.)
VIII. We must,
1. Acknowledge His power. (Isa. lxiii. 1–6; John v. 23; Rom. xiv. 11; Phil. ii. 10, 11; Rev. v. 13.)
2. Confess His name. (Matt. x. 32; Luke xii. 8, 9; Acts viii. 37; Phil. ii. 11; 1 John iv. 15; 2 John, ver. 7; Rev. ii. 13; iii. 8.)
3. And in His name do all things. (Eph. vi. 7; Col. iii. 17, 23.)
IX. In Him we are united.
Rom. viii. 17, 39; xii. 5; xvi. 7, 9–13; 1 Cor. i. 13; iii. 1; vi. 15; vii. 22; x. 17; xii. 13, 20, 27; 2 Cor. xii. 2; Gal. i. 22; iii. 27, 28; Eph. i. 10, 22, 23; ii. 14, 16, 21; iii. 6; iv. 12, 16, 20, 25; v. 30; Col. i. 18, 24; 1 Thess. iv. 16; Heb. iii. 14; 1 John i. 3; v. 20.
X. For Him we must suffer.
Matt. v. 11, 12; xvi. 24; Acts xiv. 22; Rom. v. 3; viii. 17; 1 Cor. iv. 9; 2 Cor. i. 5; iv. 10; vi. 10; vii. 4; xii. 10; Gal. ii. 20; Phil. i. 12; iii. 8; Col i. 24; 1 Thess. iii. 3; 2 Tim. ii. 11, 12; iii. 12; Heb. x. 34; xi. 26; xiii. 13; James i. 2; 1 Pet. i. 6; ii. 21; iv. 13, 14, 16; Rev. i. 9; ii. 3.
XI. He judgeth all things.
John v. 22; Acts xvii. 31; Rom. ii. 16; xiv. 10; 1 Cor. iv. 5; 2 Cor. v. 10; 2 Tim. iv. 1; 1 Pet. iv. 5; Jude, ver. 14, 15; Rev. xx. 12.
LORD’S DAY. The first day of the week is so designated in the Christian Church;—it is theκυριακὴ ἡμέραof St. John and Ignatius (seeSchleusnerin voc.);—and as Friday is appointed as the weekly fast, in commemoration of ourLord’scrucifixion, so is Sunday the weekly feast, in commemoration of his resurrection.
Godhas commanded us to dedicateat leasta seventh portion of our time to him. We read in Genesis, (ii. 3,) thatGodblessed the seventh day and sanctified it. Here we are told that the seventh day, or as we shall presently show, one day in seven, was not only blessed, but sanctified byGod. Now, by sanctifying a thing or person, we understand their being separated or set apart for a religious purpose. When therefore theAlmightyis said to sanctify a portion of time, it cannot be in reference to himself, to whom all days, times, and seasons are alike—equally pure, equally holy,—but in reference to man; and the sanctifying a day must, consequently, imply a command to man to keep it holy. That one day in seven was from the beginning dedicated to the service of theAlmighty, will receive confirmation by reference to the chapter which immediately follows that from which the quotation just made is taken. For there we are told that Cain and his brother Abel made a sacrifice,—not “in the process of time” merely,—but, as it is given in the margin of our Bibles, “at the end of the days.” The latter reading we prefer, because,while the former conveys but an indistinct idea to the mind, the latter is confirmed by one of the oldest versions of Scripture, called the Septuagint. But if to this expression,—“at the end of the days,” we attach any meaning at all, it must surely signify at the end of the six days of labour, that is, on the seventh day, previously sanctified by theAlmighty. When, in addition to this, we take into consideration the evil character of Cain, it seems less probable that he should have come voluntarily forward, with a grateful heart, to worship his Maker, than that he carelessly complied with a custom to which he had been habituated from his childhood: he came tosacrifice, as some come now toChurch, after each interval of six days, from habit rather than piety.