MYSTERIES. (SeeMoralities.)
MYSTIC. Sacredly obscure.
MYSTIC RECITATION. Several parts of the Greek liturgy are ordered to be saidμυστικῶς, that is, in a low voice, or whisper, like thesecretoof the Roman offices.—Jebb.
MYSTICAL. Having a hidden, allegorical, or secret meaning. In the baptismal offices we read, “Sanctify this water to the mystical washing away of sin:” from which it would be absurd to infer that the mere physical application of water can remove sin; and yet, on the other hand, the fact that the remission of sin is associated with baptism, rests on Scriptural authority. There is, therefore, a secret operation ofGod’sgrace in cleansing the soul linked to the sacramental application of water to the body; and the concurrence or co-existence of these the Church regards as a “mystical washing away of sin.”
Again: in the Communion Office, the faithful recipients are said to be “very [true] members incorporate of the mystical body ofChrist.” Now,howthe Church can constitute “the body ofChrist,” will appear to any one an inscrutablemystery, if he will but divest himself of the familiarity of the terms. As to the fact, it is indisputable; but the manner is beyond our full comprehension, partaking in some measure of the nature of allegory, and being strictlymystical. It is worth while to add, that the Church does not recognise the notion of an invisible Church, as constituting this “mystical body,” composed of those only who shall be finally saved; for she goes on to pray for the assistance ofGod’sgrace, “that wemay continuein that holy fellowship,” &c., a petition somewhat irrelevant if such an hypothesis be adopted.
MYSTICS. A party which arose towards the close of the third century, distinguished by their professing pure, sublime, and perfect devotion. They excuse their fanatical ecstasies by alleging the passage of St. Paul, “TheSpiritprays in us with sighs and groans which cannot be uttered.” They contend that, if theSpiritprays within us, we must resign ourselves to its motions, and be guided and swayed through its impulse by remaining in a state of mere inaction. The principles proceeded from the known doctrine of the Platonic school, which was also adopted by Origen and his disciples, that the Divine nature was diffused through all human souls; or that the faculty of reason, from which proceed the health and vigour of the mind, was an emanation fromGodinto the human soul, and comprehended in it the principles and elements of all truth, human and divine. They denied that men could, by labour or study, excite this celestial flame in their breasts; and therefore they disapproved highly of the attempts of those who, by definitions, abstract theorems, and profound speculations, endeavoured to form distinct notions of truth, and to discover its hidden nature. On the contrary, they maintained that silence, tranquillity, repose, and solitude, accompanied with such acts as might tend to extenuate and exhaust the body, were the means by which the hidden and internal word was excited to produce its latent virtues, and to instruct them in the knowledge of Divine things. For thus they reasoned: Those who behold with a noble contempt all human affairs; who turn away their eyes from terrestrial vanities, and shut all the avenues of the outward senses against the contagious influences of a material world, must necessarily return toGodwhen the spirit is thus disengaged from the impediments that prevented that happy union; and in this blessed frame they not only enjoy inexpressible raptures from their communion with the Supreme Being, but are also invested with the inestimable privilege of contemplating truth undisguised and uncorrupted in its native purity, while others behold it in a vitiated and delusive form.
The number of the Mystics increased in the fourth century, under the influence of the Grecian fanatic, who gave himself out for Dionysius the Areopagite, disciple of St. Paul, and probably lived about this period; and by pretending to higher degrees of perfection than other Christians, and practising greater austerity, their cause gained ground, especially in the Eastern provinces, in the fifth century. A copy of the pretended works of Dionysius was sent by Balbus to Louis the Meek, in theyear 824, which kindled the holy flame of mysticism in the Western provinces, and filled the Latins with the most enthusiastic admiration of this new religion. In the twelfth century, these Mystics took the lead in their method of expounding the Scriptures. In the thirteenth century they were the most formidable antagonists of the Schoolmen; and, towards the close of the fourteenth, many of them resided and propagated their tenets in almost every part of Europe.
Among the Mystics of that time we may notice the Dominican John Tauler, of Strasburg,A. D.1361; Henry Suso of Ulm,A. D.1365; and especially John Ruysbroock, called Doctor Ecstaticus,A. D.1381, who of all the Mystics was the most dreamy and enthusiastic. Among Protestants there have been and are many Mystics, but they have not formed a sect.—Mosheim.Gieseler.
NAG’S HEAD FABLE. (SeeConsecration of Bishops.)
NAHUM, THE PROPHECY OF. A canonical book of the Old Testament. Nahum is the seventh of the twelve lesser prophets; a native of Elkoshai, a little village of Galilee, the ruins of which were still to be seen in the time of St. Jerome. The particular circumstances of this prophet’s life are altogether unknown.
Authors are divided as to the time when Nahum prophesied, some fixing it to the reign of Ahaz, others to that of Manasseh, and others to the times of the captivity. St. Jerome places it in the reign of Hezekiah, after the war of Sennacherib in Egypt, which the prophet speaks of as a thing passed.
The subject of Nahum’s prophecy is the destruction of Nineveh, which he describes in the most lively and pathetic manner; and this prophecy was verified in the siege of that city by Astyages in the year of the world 3378, before Christ 622.
NAME. (SeeChristian Name.) The Christian name is given us in baptism. All things being prepared for the baptism of the child, the minister is now to “take it into his hands,” and to ask the godfathers and godmothers to “name” it. For the “Christian name” being given as a badge that we belong toChrist, we cannot more properly take it upon us, than when we are enlisted under his banner. We bring one name into the world with us, which we derive from our parents, and which serves to remind us of our original guilt, and that we are born in sin: but this new name is given us at our baptism, to remind us of our new birth, when, being washed in the laver of regeneration, we are thereby cleansed from our natural impurities, and become in a manner new creatures, and solemnly dedicate ourselves toGod. So that the naming of children at this time hath been thought by many to import something more than ordinary, and to carry with it a mysterious signification. We find something like it even among the heathens; for the Romans had a custom of naming their children on the day of their lustration, (that is, when they were cleansed and washed from their natural pollution,) which was therefore called “Dies Nominalis.” And the Greeks also, when they carried their infants, a little after their birth, about the fire, (which was their ceremony of dedicating or consecrating them to their gods,) were used at the same time to give them their names.
And that the Jews named their children at the time of circumcision, the Holy Scriptures, (Gen. xxi. 3, 4; Luke i. 59, 60; ii. 21,) as well as their own writers, expressly tell us. And though the rite itself of circumcision was changed into that of baptism by ourSaviour, yet he made no alteration as to the time and custom of giving the name, but left that to continue under the new, as he had found it under the old dispensation. Accordingly we find this time assigned and used to this purpose ever since; the Christians continuing from the earliest ages to name their children at the time of baptism.—Wheatly.
NANTES, EDICT OF. An edict of toleration, promulgated by Henry IV. of France in 1598, which restored the Protestants to all the favours which had been granted them in former reigns, and gave them the liberty of servingGodaccording to their conscience, and a full participation in all civil rights and privileges. This edict was, at the instigation of the Jesuits, revoked by Louis XIV. in the year 1685.
NARTHEX. (Gr.andLat.) This name is given by ancient writers to a part of the fabric of the Christian church. There was the exterior or outward, and the interior or inward,Narthex.
The exterior narthex, which we may call the ante-temple, consisted of the whole circumference of the outward courts, including the vestibulum or porch, and the atrium or area before the church.
The interior narthex, or ante-temple within the church, (the only part properly so called,) was the first section or division of the fabric, after entering into the church, and was peculiarly allotted to the monksand women, and used for the offices of rogations, supplications, and night watches. Here likewise they placed the dead corpses, whilst the funeral rites were performing. This lower part of the church was the place of theEnergumensand theAudientes; and hither Jews, heathens, heretics, and schismatics were sometimes allowed to come, in hopes of their conversion by hearing the Scriptures read and sermons preached.
Dr. Beveridge and others seem to place here the font or baptistery, as in our modern churches. But it is certain that, for many ages, the baptistery was a distinct place from the body of the church, and reckoned among theExedræ, or buildings adjoining to the church.
This part of the church was calledNarthex, because being long, but narrow, and running across the front of the church, it was supposed to resemble aferula, that is, a rod or staff; for any oblong figure was by the Greeks calledνάρθηξ,Narthex.
NATIONAL COVENANT. (SeeConfessions of Faith.)
NAVE. The central passage of the church, extending from the west end to the transept or choir. The derivation of this word has been a matter of dispute. Some very plausibly derive it fromνάος, others fromnavis, a ship, since the nave resembles the hull of a ship turned upside down; and refer both this term andνάοςalso to the ancient Phœnicians, whose original temples were said to be their vessels thus reversed. At all events it is remarkable that both the old Frenchnef, the Italian and Spanishnave, and the Latinnavis, all signify a ship as well as the nave of a church. (SeeChurchesandCathedral.)
NAVICULA;ship, orark. A vessel formed “like the keel of a boat,” out of which the frankincense was poured in Bishop Andrewes’ chapel, and Queen Elizabeth’s chapel.Canterbury’s Doom, 1646. SeeHiereugia Anglicana, pp. 4, 5, and 9.
NAZARENES. Christian heretics, so called. This name was originally given to all Christians in general, becauseJesus Christwas of the city of Nazareth. But afterwards it was restrained to a sect of heretics, who affected to assume it rather than that of Christians. Their religion was a strange jumble of Judaism and Christianity: for they were Jews by birth, were circumcised, kept the sabbath, and other observances of the Mosaical law; and at the same time received the New Testament as well as the Old, acknowledgedJesus Christto be theMessiah, and practised the Christian baptism. Theodoret indeed pretends they honouredJesus Christonly as a just and good man; and he places the beginning of their heresy about the time of Domitian. St. Augustine makes them the successors of those whose obstinacy in the like opinions was condemned by the apostolical Council of Jerusalem.
The Nazarenes (as well as the Ebionites) were descended from those Christians, who left Jerusalem a little before the siege, and retired to the country about Jordan, called Perea; whence they are sometimes called Peratics. There were some of them remaining in the time of St. Augustine. They dwelt about Pella in Decapolis, near the river Jordan, and at Berea, a city of Lower Syria. They perfectly understood the Hebrew tongue, in which they read the books of the Old Testament.
These heretics, keeping the mean between the Jews and the Christians, pretended to be friends alike to both: nevertheless, the Christians treated them as abominable heretics, and the Jews detested them more than the other Christians, because they acknowledgedJesus Christto be theMessiah. Epiphanius says, they cursed and anathematized them three times a day in their synagogues.—Broughton.
NEHEMIAH, THE BOOK OF. A canonical book of the Old Testament. Nehemiah was born at Babylon during the captivity, and succeeded Ezra in the government of Judah and Jerusalem; whither he came with a commission from Artaxerxes Longimanus, authorizing him to repair and fortify the city in the same manner as it was before its destruction by the Babylonians.
Nehemiah was a Jew, and was promoted to the office of cup-bearer to the Persian king; and the opportunities he had of being daily in the king’s presence, together with the favour of Esther the queen, procured him the privileges he obtained for building the city, and the settlement of his country. When he came to Jerusalem, he finished the rebuilding of the walls in fifty-two days, and dedicated the gates of the city with great solemnity. Then he reformed some abuses, which had crept in among his countrymen, particularly the extortion of the usurers, by which the poor were so oppressed, as to be forced to sell their lands and children to support themselves and their families. Then he returned to Persia, and came back again with a new commission, by virtue of which he regulated everything relating both to the state and religion of the Jews. The history of these transactions is the subject matter of this Book of Nehemiah.
Nehemiah died at Jerusalem, having governed the people of Judah for about thirty years.
NEOLOGIANS. German Rationalists are so designated; fromνέος,new, andλόγος,doctrine. They are distinguished from mere deists and pantheists, by admitting the principal facts of the Bible, though they attempt to explain away what is miraculous, while they treat the Scriptures with no more of reverence than they would show to any other ancient book, and regard ourLordhimself as they would regard any good and wise philosopher.
NESTORIANS. (SeeMother of God.) The followers of Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, who lived in the fifth century. They believed that inChristthere were not only two natures, but two persons; of which the one wasDivine, even theEternal Word, and the other, which washuman, was the manJesus; that these two persons had only oneaspect; that the union between theSonofGodand theSonof man was formed in the moment of the Virgin’s conception, and was never to be dissolved; that it was not, however, an union of nature or of person, but only of will and affection; thatChristwas therefore to be carefully distinguished fromGod, who dwelt in him as in his temple; and that Mary was to be called the mother ofChrist, and not the mother ofGod.
This heresy was condemned by the fourth general council, that of Ephesus,A. D.431; in which all are anathematized who refuse to call the Virgin Mary the mother ofGod. For a full account of this people, see Mr. Badger’sNestorians and their Rituals.
NEWEL. The central column round which the steps of a winding stair are disposed. They are sometimes designed with considerable taste, and carefully executed.
NICENE CREED; sometimes called theConstantinopolitan Creed. This creed was chiefly composed by the orthodox fathers of the first general Council of Nice,A. D.325, to define the Christian faith, in opposition to the heresy of Arius. As sanctioned by this assembly it ended with “I believe in theHoly Ghost.” The remainder was added by the second general council, held at Constantinople,A. D.381, in which the heresy of Macedonius, with regard to the Divinity of theHoly Spirit, was condemned. In the fifth century, the Western churches added to this creed the wordsfilioque, in conformity with the doctrine, that theHoly Spiritproceeds from theSon, as well as from theFather.
The Church for three hundred years had been content to profess in her creed, thatChristwas theLord; comprehending, under this title, the highest appellations given to him in Scripture, without stating minutely, or scrutinizing too narrowly, a doctrine proposed rather to us as an object of faith than of understanding. Happy had it been for the Christian world, if this moderation of the Church had been suffered to continue; but Arius, a discontented priest of Alexandria in Egypt, either having conceived a different opinion, or wishing to bring himself into notice by the assertion of a novelty, took upon him to maintain thatChristwas not a Divine person, in the highest sense, but a creature, superior indeed to human nature, but not a partaker of the supremeGodhead.
The publishing of this opinion raised a violent ferment and schism in the Church. Constantine the Roman emperor summoned a council at Nice, in Bithynia, to settle this dispute; and there, in the year 325, Arius’s doctrine was condemned in an assembly of 300 bishops, and that creed framed, which from the name of the city was called the Nicene Creed. And here it is necessary to observe, that the meaning of the three creeds of our Church, and all creeds that can be composed on gospel principles, is nothing more than a declaration of the sense in which we accept the profession made in our baptism. By baptism we are admitted into the Church ofChrist; by the command ofChristwe are baptized “in the name of theFather, and of theSon, and of theHoly Ghost.” This is the condition, by which alone we can partake of the Christian covenant; this is the mark by which alone we are distinguished from the professors of every other religion upon earth.
When we repeat a creed, therefore, we do no more than declare our repeated assent to the conditions of the baptismal covenant; and it would be sufficient to do this in the very words thatChristenjoins, “I believe in theFather, theSon, and theHoly Ghost,” if explanations had not been demanded, to show what we mean by this declaration. Creeds then do not, properly speaking, contain articles of faith, but an explanation of the sense in which we understand the primary position of our religion. And this view of the matter will show us the reason, why no creed is prescribed in Scripture; why all creeds ever have been, and ever must be, the composition of men.—Dean Vincent.
The three creeds, which are the three barriers of the faith of our Church, extracted from the Holy Scripture in thepurer ages of Christianity, though variously expressed, are yet the same in substance; agreeable to each other; and all agreeable to the word ofGod, and approved all along by the Catholic Church. In these forms she calls upon her members to declare their belief to be consonant to that of the Church universal. The Apostles’ Creed, as the plainest and shortest form, is appointed for common and daily use. The Athanasian, for festivals which relate more immediately to ourSaviour; or which are placed at such convenient distances from each other, as that none may be wholly ignorant of the mysteries therein contained. And the Nicene Creed is to be repeated whenever the eucharist is administered according to the institution of ourLord, whose eternal generation,Godhead, incarnation, sufferings, and exaltation, are therein summarily contained and acknowledged.—Archdeacon Yardley.
It is called “the Nicene Creed,” because it was for the most part framed at the great Council of Nice. But because the great Council of Constantinople added the latter part, and brought it to the frame which we now use, therefore it is called also “the Constantinopolitan Creed.” This creed began to be used in churches at the Communion Service immediately after the Gospel, in the year of ourLord339. [The introduction of it in this place is, however, more commonly referred to Peter the Fuller, bishop of Antioch, aboutA. D.471.] Afterwards it was established in the churches of Spain and France, after the custom of the Eastern Church, by the Council of Toledo, and continued down to our times. The reason why this creed follows immediately after the Epistle and Gospel, is the same that was given for the Apostles’ Creed following next after the lessons at morning and evening prayer. To which the canon of Toledo hath added another reason for saying it here, before the people draw near to the holy communion; namely, that the breasts of those who approach to those dreadful mysteries, may be purified by a true and right faith.—Bp. Sparrow.
The creed is a summary of the doctrine of the gospel, and here is placed next to it, because it is grounded upon it. In the gospel we “believe with our heart unto righteousness;” in the creed we “confess with our mouth unto salvation” (Rom. x. 10); for all the people ought to repeat the creed after the minister. It doth more largely condemn all heresies than the Apostles’ Creed: wherefore it is fitly enjoined to be recited by all before the sacrament, to show that all the communicants are free from heresy, and in the strictest league of union with the Catholic Church; as also to prepare themselves for worthy receiving, by exercising that faith, of which they have so much use at theLord’stable, as the Council of Toledo ordained in the year 600 [589]. So that every one must openly profess and firmly embrace all these articles, before he can be fit to receive; yea, and while he repeats them with his lips, he must resolve to show forth in his life, that he doth sincerely believe them, by strictly living according to them.—Dean Comber.
As in the Morning Prayer, so in the Communion Service, for the same reason, after reading the Scripture, we recite the creed: only then we have that of the ancient Latin Church; here that of the ancient Greek.—Abp. Secker.
Besides the general reasons for repeating the creed, the rehearsal of our faith before the receiving of the holy communion is founded on these two special grounds:—1. It is meet that all should first profess the same faith, who partake of the same mysteries; for surely, if “no stranger, nor uncircumcised person,” could eat of the passover, that typical sacrament, (Exod. xii. 43, 48,) much more no stranger to the Christian faith, nor unbeliever, should partake of the real sacrament of theLord’ssupper. 2. As the acknowledgment of the articles of our Christian faith is part of the vow made at our baptism, so ought the same acknowledgment to be repeated at theLord’ssupper, wherein we renew that vow.—Dr. Bisse.
Add to this, that every solemn confession of our faith must be looked upon as giving glory and honour toGod, in recognising his essence and attributes, and the blessings which flow from those sources on mankind: and hence it, in a peculiar manner, befits this holy service of thanks and praise. In this we imitate the most ancient liturgies of the Church; which, when this holy sacrament was celebrated, had an eucharistical form, whereinGod’spower and goodness were acknowledged in the creation, preservation, and redemption of the world. Thus we, though in a shorter form of undoubted authority, confess to the holy and undividedTrinity, and distinctly own the Divinity of each person. We commemorate the creation of the world by “GodtheFatherAlmighty.” We acknowledgeJesus Christto be our “Lord;” to have been “begotten” from all eternity, to be “of one substance with theFather,” and with him Creator of allthings: that “for our salvation he came down from heaven, was made man, suffered, and died” for us. We commemorate his resurrection, ascension, and sitting atGod’sright hand: express our expectation of his second coming; and declare that “his kingdom shall have no end.” We confess toGod, that he hath inspired the prophets; that he hath built a Church on the foundation of the apostles; that he hath appointed baptism for the remission of sins; and given us leave to “look for the resurrection of the dead” and an happy eternity.
What more glorious hymn than this can we sing to the honour ofGod? Is it possible to mention anything else that can so much redound to his glory? May not this our service be well styled the eucharist, when we thus give praise and glory to AlmightyGodfor the wonderful manifestation of his attributes, and the inestimable blessings he hath bestowed upon us? Let not any one therefore think, that repeating the creed is barely a declaration of his faith to the rest of the congregation: for, besides that, it is a most solemn act of worship, in which we honour and magnifyGod, both for what he is in himself, and for what he hath done for us. And let us all, sensible of this, repeat it with reverential voice and gesture; and lift up our hearts with faith, thankfulness, and humble devotion, whenever we say, “I believe,” &c.—Archdeacon Yardley.
The Nicene Creed is properly sung in all choirs. Bishop Beveridge says, “We stand at the creeds; for they being confessions of our faith inGod, as such they come under the proper notion of hymns or songs of praise to him.” The rubric sanctions, that is, enjoins in choirs, the custom: and such has been the usage of most choirs since the Reformation; an usage kept up throughout the Western Church, according to Mr. Palmer, since the year 1012. It is not adapted to chanting, like the Psalms. In our Prayer Book it is divided, like the Apostles’ Creed and the Gloria in excelsis, into three paragraphs, of which the central one has special reference toGodtheSon.—Jebb.
NICOLAITANS. Heretics who arose in the Christian Church during the time of the apostles, (as appears from Rev. ii. 6, 15,) and are taken to be the fathers of the Gnostics. Some of the ancient fathers affirm that Nicolas, one of the seven first deacons, was the founder of this sect; that being blamed by the apostles for keeping company with his wife, whom he had left before to live in continence, he invented this brutal error to excuse his proceeding, and thought that impurity was a necessary means to attain to eternal happiness: others say that the holy apostles, reproaching him for being jealous of his wife, who was very handsome, he sent for her, and in a great assembly gave her leave to marry whom she pleased: upon which some libertines framed a heresy of their own, and unjustly called it by his name. They denied the Divinity ofChristby an hypostatical union, saying, the Divine inhabited, but was not united to, the human nature; they held that all pleasures were good, and that it was lawful to eat meats offered to idols. Becoming too much known by this name, they assumed that of the Gnostics, and divided themselves into other sects, called Phibionites, Stratiotics, Levitics, and Barborites.
NIPTER. (Gr.In Latin,pediluvium.) The ceremony ofwashing feet. This is performed by the Greek Christians on Good Friday, in imitation of ourSaviour, who on that day washed his disciples’ feet with his own hands.
In the monasteries, the abbot represents ourSaviour, and twelve of the monks the twelve apostles. Among these the steward and porter have always a place; the former acts the part of St. Peter, and imitates his refusal to letJesuswash his feet; the latter personates the traitor Judas, and is loaded with scoffs and derision. The office used on this occasion is extant in theEuchologium.
NOCTURNS. Services anciently held during the night. In the Breviary, the Psalter is divided into portions, the first of which consists of fourteen Psalms, the second of three, and the third of three. These all form a part of the Sunday office of matins, each of which portions is called a nocturn. These were designed to be read at these nightly assemblies, with other services appointed in order for the various nights.
NOETIANS. Christian heretics in the third century, followers of Noëtus, a philosopher of Ephesus, who pretended that he was another Moses sent byGod, and that his brother was a new Aaron. His heresy consisted in affirming that there was but one person in theGodhead, and that theWordand theHoly Spiritwere but external denominations given toGodin consequence of different operations: that as creator he is calledFather; as incarnate,Son; and as descending upon the apostles, theHoly Ghost.
This heresiarch, being summoned to appear before the assembly of the Church ofEphesus, to give an account of his doctrine, made a very catholic profession of faith; but he had no sooner gained a dozen followers, than he began publicly to teach and spread his opinions. He was excommunicated by the Church of Ephesus, and after his death denied ecclesiastical burial.
Being reprehended by his superiors, he is said to have replied, “What harm have I done? I adore one onlyGod; I own none but him. He was born, suffered, and is dead.”
NOMINALISTS. At the restoration of the study of logic in the eleventh century, many disputes took place, trivial in their origin, but important on account of the colour which they gave to religious controversy, concerning the objects of logic. Agreeing that the essential object of logic was the discussion ofuniversals, as distinguished fromparticularorindividualthings, two parties were formed on the question whether universals arewordsandnamesonly, orthingsandreal essences. Those who declared them to be only names and words, and who of course, therefore, determined that logic was only conversant with words, were calledNominalists, and basing their philosophy on that of Aristotle, were principally supported by the talent and authority of Roscellinus. Those who held thatuniversalswerereal existences, and so that logic was conversant withthingsandrealities, were calledRealists. They supported their hypothesis on the authority of Plato. Johannes Scotus Erigena, in the ninth century, had taught this doctrine, but without leaving behind him any school of avowed followers. The controversy with theNominalistswas commenced in the eleventh century, and in the thirteenth the greater part of the schoolmen wereRealists.
NOMINATION. This is the offering of a clerk to him who has the right of presentation, that he may present him to the ordinary. (For form of Nomination, seeCuracy.)
The nominator must appoint his clerk within six months after the avoidance, for, if he does not, and the patron presents his clerk before the bishop hath taken any benefit of the lapse, he is bound to admit that clerk.
But where one has the nomination, and another the presentation, if the right of presentation should afterwards come to the queen, it has been held, that he that has the nomination will be entitled to both, because the queen, who is to present, is only an instrument to him who nominates, and it is not becoming the dignity of a queen to be subservient to another; but the nominator should name one to the lord chancellor, who, in the name of the queen, should present to the ordinary.
And as the presentation, so the right of nomination, may be forfeited to the queen. It is true, if the patron, upon a corrupt agreement unknown to the nominator, presents his clerk, this shall not be prejudicial to the nominator within the statute of simony; but if the nominator corruptly agrees to nominate, his right of nomination shall be forfeited to the queen.
NONES. A term employed in the Roman calendar, inserted in all correct editions of the Prayer Book. The nones were the fifth day of each month, excepting in March, May, July, and October, when the nones fell on the 7th day. They were so called from their being the ninth day in each month before the ides.—Stephens’s Book of Common Prayer, notes on the Calendar, p. 270.
NONJURORS. Those conscientious men who refused to renounce their oath of allegiance to King James II., and to transfer it to the Prince of Orange. What was at first a necessary separation from the Church of England, degenerated, after a time, into a wilful schism. The history of the Nonjurors is written by Lathbury (London, 1845).
NORMAN. The highest development of Romanesque architecture in England, which succeeded the Saxon at the Conquest, and admitted the pointed arch which marks the Transition, about 1145. It must be observed, however, that many buildings, generally called Norman, and which agree with the Norman style in all essential particulars, except in the accident of their being built before 1066, must, architecturally, be classed with this style. The Norman is so absolutely distinguished from all Gothic orders by the round arch, that it is needless to enter into its differentials. Several of its peculiarities will be found under the headsButtress,Capital,Cathedral,Mouldings,Pier,Pillar.
NORTH SIDE. In the rubric immediately preceding the office for the Holy Communion, the priest is directed to stand at thenorth sideof the table. As this work is not a Dictionary of the English language, it might seem beside our purpose to offer any explanation of those words, which are sufficiently clear, though they have been perplexed by the unreasonable scruples of some of our generation. Johnson gives the following as one of the definitions ofside, “any part of any body opposed to any other part:” another is,“right or left.” The north side then is that which is opposed to the south; viz. the left side to those who look to the east, where the holy table is placed. By a side is meant that which islateral, as contradistinguished from that which isoppositeorvertical. A side is the short end of the table, and so the Scotch liturgy understood the word, “thenorth side, orend thereof.” The table usually in English churches stands at the end of the chancel: the exceptions are so few as clearly to prove a rule; and it must be obvious to common sense, that when placed differently, the priest’s position there should be the same relatively to the church as if the table stood at the east; that is, at theleft sideof those who look towards the chancel from the body of the church. Universal custom has been in conformity with the plain meaning of the rule; and the priest always has stood at that which formed the north or left side of thesquare table. Had the intention of the compilers of the liturgy been different, the rubric would have been worded in some such way as this, “the priest standing at thenorth-west corner, orangle,” or “left angle.” An angle, or corner, is not a side; and could never be so interpreted, unless the table were placed diagonally. The following authorities are explicit.
“The design is, that the priest may be the better seen and heard, which, as our altars are now placed, he cannot be, but at the north or south side. And as Bishop Beveridge has shown, that whenever in the ancient liturgies the minister is directed to stand before the table, the north side of it is always meant.”—Wheatly.
“This seems to have been ordered, for the purpose of avoiding the fashion of the priest’s standing with his face towards the east, as is the Popish practice.”—L’ Estrange.
As to the words in the rubric preceding the Collect for the Queen,the priest standing as before, Mr. Collis observes, that these mean “not standing as he rehearsed the Commandments; for if that were designed nothing would have been said here. Butstanding as before, namely, as he stood at the north side of the table, before he was ordered to turn to the people. When the Commandments are read by him, he directs himself to the people; when he comes to the collect, he directs himself to the Almighty by prayer.”
NOTES OF THE CHURCH. The necessity of devising some general notes of the Church, and of not entering at once on controversial debates concerning all points of doctrine and discipline, was early perceived by Christian theologians. Tertullian appeals, in refutation of the heresies of his age, to the antiquity of the Church derived from the apostles, and its priority to all heretical communities; Irenæus, to the unity of the Church’s doctrines, and the succession of her bishops from the apostles; St. Augustine, to the consent of nations; St. Jerome, to the continued duration of the Church from the apostles, and the very appellation of the Christian name. In modern times, Bellarmine the Romanist added several other notes, such as,—agreement with the primitive Church in doctrine; union of members among themselves and with their head; sanctity of doctrine and of founders; continuance of miracles and prophecy; confession of adversaries; the unhappy end of those who are opposed to the Church, and the temporal felicity conferred on it. Luther assigned as notes of the true Church, the true and uncorrupted preaching of the gospel; administration of baptism, of the eucharist, and of the keys; a legitimate ministry, public service in a known tongue, and tribulations internally and externally. Calvin reckons only truth of doctrine and right administration of the sacraments, and seems to reject succession. The learned theologians of the Church of England adopt a different view in some respects. Dr. Field admits the following notes of the Church: truth of doctrine; use of sacraments and means instituted byChrist; union under lawful ministers; antiquity without change of doctrine; lawful succession, i. e. with true doctrine; and universality in thesuccessivesense, i. e. the prevalence of the Church successively in all nations. Bishop Taylor admits, as notes of the Church, antiquity, duration, succession of bishops, union of members among themselves and withChrist, sanctity of doctrine.
Palmer, from whom this account is abridged, takes, as notes of the Church, what the Nicene, or Constantinopolitan, Creed gives, as the Church’s attributes, “One,Holy, Catholic and Apostolic.”
NOVATIANS. A Christian sect, which sprang up in the third century; occasioned by the jealousy which Novatian, a priest of Rome, conceived upon seeing Cornelius raised to the episcopate of the Roman Church, to which he himself aspired. Enraged at the disappointment, he endeavoured to blacken the character of Cornelius, by charging him with a criminal lenity towards those who had apostatized during the persecution of Decius. Hemaintained, that such persons ought indeed to be exhorted to repentance, but never to be absolved by the Church, reserving their absolution toGodalone, who had the power and authority to remit sins. Hence he was led to deny, in general, that the Church had the power of remitting mortal sins, upon the offender’s repentance. And at last he went so far as to deny that apostates could ever hope for pardon even fromGodhimself: a doctrine which so terrified some of those who had lapsed and repented, that, in despair, they quite abjured Christianity, and returned to Paganism.
The followers of Novatian added to this original heresy of their master another, which was the unlawfulness of second marriages; against which they were as severe as against apostates; denying communion for ever to such persons as married a second time after baptism, and treating widows who married again as adulteresses.
As these heretics pretended that the Church was corrupted by the communion it granted to sinners, it is no wonder they rebaptized those they gained over to their sect. In baptizing, they used the received forms of the Church, and had the same belief concerning theFather,Son, andHoly Ghost, in whose name they baptized. St. Cyprian rejected their baptism, as he did that of all heretics; but it was admitted by the eighth canon of the Council of Nice.
The Novatians put on the external appearance of great piety and purity; and though they did not refuse the title of Novatians, they assumed the proud appellation ofCatharii, that is, the Pure, or Puritans; and like the Pharisees among the Jews, they would not suffer other men to come near them, lest their purity should be defiled thereby.
The schism which Novatian had formed in the Roman Church was not confined to Rome, nor to Italy, nor even to the West. It made its way into the East, and subsisted a long time at Alexandria, in several provinces of Asia, at Constantinople, in Scythia, and in Africa. The Novatians abounded particularly in Phrygia and Paphlagonia. Constantine seems to have favoured them a little by a law of the year 326; which preserves to them their churches and burying-places, provided they never belonged to the Catholic Church. But in a famous edict about the year 331, he sets them at the head of the most detestable of all heretics, forbidding them to hold public or private assemblies, confiscating their oratories or churches, and condemning their leaders to banishment. It is pretended this edict had not the designed effect as to the Novatians, by means of Acesius their bishop, who resided at Constantinople, and was in great esteem with the emperor, on account of his virtuous and irreproachable life. The Novatian sect was entirely extinct, or at least reduced to a very inconsiderable party, about the middle of the fifth century.
NOVEMBER, FIFTH OF. (SeeForms of Prayer.)
NOVICES, in countries where monachism prevails, are those persons who are candidates, or probationers, for a religious life. The time of their probation is called the Noviciate; after which, if their behaviour is approved, they are professed, that is, admitted into the order, and allowed to make the vows, wear the habit, &c.
The novices among the Jesuits are disciplined in a very peculiar manner. To make them the better understand the nature and extent of the obedience they owe to their superiors, they have certain emblematical pictures in their chambers or studies. For example: in the middle of the canvass is a boy stooping down with a piece of timber on his shoulders, with this motto,fortiter, upon it. He has a harp in his hand, to intimate the cheerfulness of his submission. On the right hand is a little dog in a rising posture, to show that the novice is to obey with despatch and expedition. His breast is open, to show that his superiors have his heart as well as his limbs at their service. His mouth is represented shut, to show that there must be no grumbling or contesting the point with his superiors; and his ears are stopped, to intimate that he must submit to orders however unacceptable to that sense.
If a novice breaks through any part of this submission, he has a penance enjoined him according to the nature of his misbehaviour. For instance, if he discovers a haughty disposition, he is ordered to go into the infirmary and perform the coarsest offices to the sick and decrepit. If he refuses to do as he is bid, or murmurs at it, he is brought into the refectory at dinner or supper time, and obliged to confess his fault upon his knees before all the company.
NUMBERS, THE BOOK OF. A canonical book of the Old Testament. It is the fourth book of the Pentateuch or Five Books of Moses, and receives its denomination from the numbering of the families of Israel, by Moses and Aaron; who mustered the tribes, and marshalled the armyof the Hebrews, in their passage through the wilderness.
A great part of this Book is historical, relating several remarkable events which happened in that journey; as, the sedition of Aaron and Miriam; the rebellion of Korah and his companions; the murmurings of the whole body of the people; Balaam’s prophecy; the miraculous budding of Aaron’s rod, &c. It gives likewise a distinct account of the several stages of journeyings through the wilderness. But the greatest part of this Book is spent in enumerating the several laws and ordinances, not mentioned in the preceding books; such as, the office and number of the Levites; the trial by the waters of jealousy; the rites to be observed by the Nazarites; the making of fringes on the borders of their garments; the law of inheritance; of vows; of the cities of refuge, &c.
The Book of Numbers comprehends the history of about thirty-eight years, thoughthe most part of the things related in it fell out in the first and last of these years, and it does not appear when those things were done which are related in the middle of the Book.
NUMERALS. The designation of twelve priests, in the cathedral of Nola (inferior to the canons).—Jebb.
NUNS. Those women who devote themselves, in a cloister or nunnery, to a religious life. (SeeMonks.)
There were women, in the ancient Christian Church, who made public and open profession of virginity, before the monastic life, or name, was known in the world; as appears from the writings of Cyprian and Tertullian. These, for distinction’s sake, are sometimes called ecclesiastical virgins, and were commonly enrolled in the canon ormatriculaof the Church. They differed from the monastic virgins chiefly in this—that they lived privately in their fathers’ houses, whereas the others lived in communities. But their profession of virginity was not so strict as to make it criminal in them to marry afterwards, if they thought fit.
In the following ages, the censures of the Church began to be inflicted upon professed virgins who should marry; and these censures seem to have grown more severe, in proportion to the esteem and value Christians set upon celibacy and the monastic life. Yet there never was any decree for rescinding or making null such marriages.
Some canons allowed virgins to be consecrated at twenty-five years of age, and others at sixteen or seventeen; but time quickly showed, that neither of these terms were so conveniently fixed as they might be. Other canons, therefore, required virgins to be forty years old, before they were veiled, as may be seen in the Councils of Agde and Saragossa. And the imperial laws decreed, that, if any virgin was veiled before that age, either by the violence or hatred of her parents, (which was a case that often happened,) she was at liberty to marry. Hence appears a wide difference between the practice of the ancient Christian Church in this matter, and that of the modern Church of Rome.
As to the consecration of virgins, it had some things peculiar in it. It was usually performed publicly in the church by the bishop. The virgin made a public profession of her resolution, and then the bishop put upon her the accustomed habit of sacred virgins. One part of this habit was a veil, called thesacrum velamen; another was a kind of mitre, or coronet, worn on the head. In some places the custom of shaving professed virgins prevailed; as it did in the monasteries of Syria and Egypt, in St. Jerome’s time: but the Council of Gangra strongly condemned this practice, accounting that a woman’s hair was given her byGodas a mark of subjection. Theodosius the Great added a civil sanction to this ecclesiastical decree: whence it appears that the tonsure of virgins was anciently no allowed custom of the Church, however it came to prevail in the contrary practice of later ages.
As the society of virgins was of great esteem in the Church, so they had some particular honours paid to them. Their persons were sacred, and severe laws were made against any that should presume to offer the least violence to them. The emperor Constantine charged his own revenues with the maintenance of them; and his mother Helena often entertained them and waited upon them at her own table. The Church gave them also a share of her own revenues, and assigned them an honourable station in the churches, whither the most noble and religious matrons used to resort with earnestness to receive their salutations and embraces.
The ancient names of these virgins wereNonnæ,Moniales,Sanctimoniales, andAscetriæ. The termNonnæ(from whence our English word nuns) is, according to Hospinian, an Egyptian name signifying a virgin.
In the Romish Church, when a young woman is to be professed, that is, to be made a nun, the habit, veil, and ring ofthe candidate are carried to the altar, and she herself, accompanied by her nearest relations, is conducted to the bishop. Two ancient venerable matrons attend upon her as bridewomen. When the bishop has said mass, the archpriest chants an anthem, the subject of which is, that she ought to have her lamp lighted, because the bridegroom is coming to meet her. Then the bishop calls her in a kind of recitative, to which she answers in the same manner. Being come before the prelate, and on her knees, she attends to the exhortation he makes to her with regard to a religious life, and in the mean time the choir chants the Litanies. Then the bishop, having the crosier in his left hand, pronounces the benediction. She then rises up, and the bishop consecrates the new habit, sprinkling it with holy water. When the candidate has put on her religious habit, she again presents herself before the bishop, and sings on her knees,Ancilla Christi sum, &c., i. e. “I am the servant ofChrist.” Then she receives the veil, and afterwards the ring, by which she is married toJesus Christ; and, lastly, the crown of virginity. When she is crowned, an anathema is denounced against all who shall attempt to break her vows. After the communion, the prelate gives her up to the conduct of the abbess, saying to her: “Take care to preserve pure and spotless this young woman, whomGodhas consecrated,” &c.—Broughton.
NUNC DIMITTIS. The first words in Latin of the Song of Simeon, “Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace,” appointed as one of the hymns to be used after the second lesson at even-song. It was used in this place in the most ancient times. It is found in the Apostolical Constitutions. And even at the present day this hymn is repeated at evening prayer in the patriarchate of Constantinople. The hymn occurs in the Latin office for compline, from which, and from the vesper service, our office of Evening Prayer was compiled.
After the second evening lesson out of the Epistles of the holy apostles, this hymn is most commonly used. The author of it is supposed to be that holy doctor whom the Jews call Simeon the Just, son of the famous Rabbi Hillel, a man of eminent integrity, and one who opposed the then common opinion of the Messiah’s temporal kingdom. The occasion of composing it was his meetingChristin the temple when he came to be offered there, whereinGodfulfilled his promise to him, that he should not die till he had seen the Messiah: takingJesustherefore in his arms, inspired with joy and theHoly Ghost, he sang this “Nunc dimittis:” and though we cannot see ourSaviourwith our bodily eyes as he did, yet he is, by the writings of the apostles, daily presented to the eyes of our faith; and if we were as much concerned for heaven, and as loose from the love of this world, as old Simeon was, and as we ought to be, we might, upon the view ofChristin His holy word by faith, be daily ready to sing this hymn; which was indited by theSpirit, recorded in holy writ, and is adopted into the public service of all Christian Churches, Greek and Latin, Reformed and Roman, and used to be sung in extraordinary by divers saints and martyrs a little before their death.—Dean Comber.
This hymn, called from the Latin beginning of it “Nunc dimittis,” expresses the gratitude of good old Simeon, “a just man and devout,” as we read in St. Luke ii. 25–32, “and waiting for the consolation of Israel; to whom it was revealed that he should not die till he had seen theLord’s Christ.” Accordingly, “he came by theSpiritinto the temple; and when the parents brought in the childJesus, he took him up in his arms, (image to yourselves the scene, I beg you,) and blessedGod, and said,Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace,” that is, in comfort, “according to thy word; for mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared” to set “before the face of all people.” And the following sentence hath a strong appearance of being designed by theHoly Ghostto intimate, (whether the speaker of it perceived the design or not,) that, contrary to the expected and natural order of things,Christshould first “be a light to lighten the Gentiles;” then, afterwards, “the glory ofGod’speople Israel.” To perceive the fitness of Simeon’s thanksgiving for our use, it needs only to be remembered, and ever should in repeating it, that we also “have seen theLord’ssalvation.” For though we have not yet beheld ourSaviourwith our bodily eyes, to that of faith he is exhibited continually in the gospel history and sacraments: we may meet him in his Church; we may converse with him in our private meditations. And this we should think happiness enough for us here, whatever else we want or suffer; and be always prepared, and always willing, to “blessGod,” and “depart in peace.”—Abp. Secker.
This hymn comes very properly after the second lesson, which is always taken out of the New Testament, wherein iscontained and delivered to us that gospel, the enjoyment and participation of which is the ground and foundation of the whole hymn. It should be added, that this hymn is addressed toGod; and since it may be used as the personal address of every devout Christian, no one should repeat it after a careless manner; but consider to whom it is repeated, and utter the whole after a suitable manner.—Dr. Bennet.
NUNCIO. An ambassador from the pope to some prince or state; or a person who attends on the pope’s behalf at a congress, or at an assembly of several ambassadors. A nuncio, in fact, is the pope’s ambassador, as theinternunciois his envoy extraordinary. A nuncio has a jurisdiction, and may delegate judges in all the states where he resides, except in France, where he has no authority beyond that of a simple ambassador. Sometimes a nuncio is invested with the functions of alegatus natus. (SeeLegate.)
OATHS. “As we confess that vain and rash swearing is forbidden Christian men by ourLord Jesus Christ, and James his apostle, so we judge that the Christian religion doth not prohibit, but that a man may swear when the magistrate requireth, in a cause of faith and charity, so it be done according to the prophet’s teaching, in justice, judgment, and truth.”—Articlexxxix. The first oath mentioned in the Holy Scriptures is that of Abraham, Gen. xiv. 22, 23.
TheOath of Allegianceis as follows:—“I, A. B., do sincerely promise and swear, that I will be faithful, and bear true allegiance, to her Majesty, Queen Victoria. So help meGod.” This is taken by Protestant dissenting ministers, when licensed by the civil magistrates; as is also the following:
Oath of Supremacy:—“I, A. B., do swear, that I do from my heart abhor, detest, and abjure, as impious and heretical, that damnable doctrine and position, that princes excommunicated or deprived by the pope, or any authority of the see of Rome, may be deposed or murdered by their subjects, or any other whatsoever. And I do declare, that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate, hath or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm. So help meGod.”
OBADIAH, THE PROPHECY OF. A canonical book of the Old Testament. This prophecy is contained in one single chapter, and is partly an invective against the cruelty of the Edomites, who mocked and derided the children of Israel, as they passed into captivity, and, with other enemies their confederates, invaded and oppressed these poor strangers, and divided the spoil amongst them; and partly a prediction of the deliverance and salvation of Israel, and of the victory and triumph of the whole Church over her enemies.
The time when this prophecy was delivered is wholly uncertain. The Hebrews believe, that this prophet was the same with the governor of Ahab’s house, mentioned in the First Book of Kings, who hid and fed the hundred prophets, whom Jezebel would have destroyed. Some say he was that Obadiah whom Josiah made overseer of the works of the temple. But most writers make him contemporary with Hosea, Amos, and Joel.
OBIT. An office performed at funerals, when the corpse was in the church before it was buried; it afterwards came to be performed on the anniversary of the death of a benefactor. Thus, in many of our colleges, the obit or anniversary of the death of the founder is piously observed. (SeeCommemoration.) Theobiit Sundays(once a quarter) at St. George’s at Windsor, were celebrated formerly with great magnificence, and are to a certain degree still. In Kennet’s Register, p. 765, (as quoted in the Hiereugia Anglicana, p. 211,) there is the following notice. “1662, Sept. 10.—This day was published the service that is performed in the King’s Free Chapel of St. George, in the castle of Windsor, upon Obiit Sunday in the morning, (that is, the Sunday before every quarter day,) and at the offering up of the achievements of the deceased Knights of the Garter.
The Rubric.The service is the same that is appointed in the Book of Common Prayer, until you come to the Psalm for the day of the month, instead of which you have these proper Psalms, xxi., cxlvi., cxlvii. After the Psalm the junior canon upon the place cometh out of his stall with the verger before him, and readeth the lesson at the desk, which is taken out of the forty-fourth chapter of Ecclesiasticus. After the lesson Te Deum laudamus is sung. After the Te Deum is ended, they all depart out of the quire in the body of the church to sermon. After sermon is ended, the canons go to the altar, and the quire go to their stalls, and the communion service beginneth. The Epistle is taken out of the twenty-third chapter of Deuteronomy; the Gospel in the fifth of St. John, beginning at the twenty-fourth and ending at the thirtieth verse. Afterthe sacrament (which is always on the Obiit Sunday) is ended, and the blessing given at the altar, the canons go to their stalls, and these following prayers are read:
Priest.O Lord, save the king.
Quire.And mercifully hear us when we call upon thee.
Collect.O Lord, our heavenly Father and merciful Saviour, we praise and thank thee, O Lord, &c.
God save our gracious sovereign, and all the companions of the most honourable and noble Order of the Garter.
Here endeth the obiit service.
The verse and response, O Lord, save the queen, &c., are used daily after the anthem in St. George’s Chapel.—Jebb.
OBLATION. An offering toGod.
In the office for the holy communion we prayGodto “accept our alms and oblations.” The wordoblationswas added to this prayer for the Church militant here on earth, at the same time that the rubric enjoined, that, if there be a communion, “the priest is then,” just before this prayer, “to place upon the table so much bread and wine as he shall think sufficient.” Hence it is clearly evident that by that word we are to understand the elements of bread and wine, which the priest is to offer solemnly toGod, as an acknowledgment of his sovereignty over his creatures, and that from henceforth they may be peculiarly his. For in all the Jewish sacrifices, of which the people were partakers, the viands or materials of the feast were first madeGod’sby a solemn oblation, and then afterwards eaten by the communicants, not as man’s, but asGod’sprovision, who, by thus entertaining them at his own table, declared himself reconciled and again in covenant with them. And therefore our blessedSaviour, when he instituted the sacrament of his body and blood, first gave thanks, and blessed the elements, i. e. offered them up toGodas the Lord of the creatures, as the most ancient Fathers expound that passage; who for that reason, whenever they celebrated the eucharist, always offered the bread and wine for the communion toGodupon the altar, by this or some such short ejaculation, “Lord, we offer thine own out of what thou hast bountifully given us.” After which they received them, as it were, from him again, in order to convert them into the sacred banquet of the body and blood of his dearSon. Consonant to this, in the First Common Prayer of King Edward VI., the priest was ordered in this place to set the bread and wine upon the altar. But at the second review, to conciliate the ultra-Protestants, this ancient usage appears to have been thrown out. It was however restored at the last review of the Prayer Book in the reign of Charles II., when it was ordered that the bread and wine should be placed solemnly on the table by the priest himself. Whence it appears that the placing of the elements upon the altar before the beginning of the morning service, by the hands of a lay-clerk or sexton, as is sometimes the irreverent practice, is a profane breach of the aforesaid rubric.—Mede. Wheatly.
The English liturgy is not without a verbal oblation, which occurs at the beginning of the prayers and commemorations. After the elements have been placed on the table, and thus devoted to the service and honour ofGod, the priest prays toGodthus: “We humbly beseech thee most mercifully to accept our alms and oblations, and to receive these our prayers, which we offer unto thy Divine Majesty.” Here three species of sacrifice or oblation are verbally offered: first, the “alms,” which St. Paul describes as a sacrifice well-pleasing toGod; secondly, the “oblations,” namely, the creatures of bread and wine; thirdly, the “prayers,” which, according to St. John, are offered with incense on the heavenly altar, and of which the holy Fathers speak as a sacrifice and oblation toGod.—Palmer.
In a more extended sense of the word, we mean byoblationswhatever religious Christians offer toGodand the Church, whether in lands or goods. It is probable that the example of St. Paul might incite the primitive Christians to offer these gifts to the Church; for he appointed every one of the Corinthians and Galatians to yield something toGodfor the saints everyLord’sday: but this being thought too often, therefore Tertullian tells us it was afterwards done every month, and thenad libitum: but it was always the custom for communicants to offer something at receiving the sacrament, as well for holy uses, as for relief of the poor, which custom is, or ought to be, observed at this day.
In the first ages of the Church, thosedeposita pietatis, which are mentioned by Tertullian, were all voluntary oblations, and they were received in lieu of tithes; for the Christians at that time lived chiefly in cities, and gave out of their common stock, both to maintain the Church, and those who served at the altar.
But when their numbers increased, and they were spread abroad in the countries, then a more fixed maintenance was necessary for the clergy; but still oblationswere made by the people, which, if in the mother Church, then the bishop had half, and the other was divided amongst the clergy; but if offered in a parish church, then the bishop had a third part, and no more.
These oblations, which at first were voluntary, became afterwards, by a continual payment, due by custom.
It is true there are canons which require every one who approaches the altar to make some oblation to it, as a thing convenient to be done.
And it is probable that, in obedience to the canons, it became customary for every man who made a will before the Reformation, to devise something to the high altar of the church where he lived, and something likewise to the mother church or cathedral; and those who were to be buried in the church usually gave something towards its reparations.
But at the great festivals all people were obliged to offer something, not only as convenient, but as a duty; but the proportion was left to the discretion of the giver; and we think, with great reason, for the bounty of the Christians in those ages was so great, that men would build churches on their own lands, on purpose that they might have an equal share of those oblations with the clergy.
And this might be the occasion that the emperors Constantine and Valentinian made laws to prohibit such excessive gifts, which in those days were kept in store-houses built for that very purpose.
But in succeeding ages there was little occasion for such laws, for the zeal of the people was so considerably abated, that, instead of those repositories, the clergy had little chests to contain those gifts, till at last they dwindled into so small a portion, that now, as a quaint writer observes, they can scarce be felt in the parson’s pocket.
We have the authority of Bishop Patrick to show that, in the prayer after the Offertory, the elements are specially intended by the wordoblations. “We humbly beseechGod,” he says, “to accept not only our alms, but also our oblations. These are things distinct; and the former,alms, signifying that which was given for the relief of the poor, the latter,oblations, can signify nothing else but (according to the style of the ancient Church) the bread and wine presented untoGod.”—Christian Sacrifice, p. 77. But it is no less unquestionable, (adds a note in Stephens’s edition of the Common Prayer Book, vol. i. p. 1175,) that this term was also employed to signify money, intended for the maintenance of the clergy, for the service of God, for merciful works of the more spiritual kind, and that it sometimes even denotes the alms for relief of temporal necessities; and numerous authorities exist to prove that, ecclesiastically speaking, “oblations” were not to be confined to the sacred elementsexclusively: although oblations are expressly distinguished from alms.
The ecclesiastical meanings of the word oblation may be illustrated from the coronation service of Queen Victoria. Her “first oblation” was a pall or altar cloth of gold, and an ingot of gold: the next a sword: and afterwards at the Offertory were two “oblations;” the first beingbread and winefor the communion, which were “by the archbishop received from the queen, (who was kneeling,) and reverently placed upon the altar, and decently covered with a fine linen cloth:” with a prayer, “Bless, OLord, we beseech thee, these thy gifts, and sanctify them unto their holy use,” &c. “Then the queen, kneeling as before, makes her second oblation, a purse of gold;” and then follows a prayer to God “to receivethese oblations.”
OCTAVE. The octave is theeighth dayafter any principal festival of the Church. In ancient times it was customary to observe these days with much devotion, including the whole period also from the festival to the octave. It was thought that the subject and occasion of these high festivals called for their being lengthened out in this manner; and the period of eight days was chosen because the Jews celebrated their greater feasts, some for seven days, and the feast of Tabernacles for eight days. Such Jewish institutions being only types and shadows, the Christians thought it fit not to have their commemorations of shorter duration.
In our Prayer Book we retain the observance of the octaves of Christmas, Easter, Ascension, and Whitsunday, by using, for seven days after each of these festivals, an appropriate “Preface,” in the Communion Service, if that sacrament is administered on any of these days. The preface for Whitsunday is, however, only to be used forsixdays after, because the seventh (or octave of Whitsunday) would be Trinity Sunday, which has a preface of its own.
The first two days of the octaves of Easter and Whitsunday have special services, and in some cathedrals are observed with nearly the same solemnity as the festival itself. It appears by thePietas Londinensis, published in 1714, that in the church of St. Dunstan in the West, theholy communion was administered on every day during the octaves of Christmas, Easter, and Whitsuntide.—Jebb.
OFFERING DAYS. “The four general offering days,” Bishop Cosin says, “in the Church of England enjoined by convocation in 1536, [ought to be 1537,] were Christmas Day, St. John Baptist’s Day, St. Michael’s Day, [Easter Day.] Which order is in some places still observed, and the king and queen in their chapel royal, or wherever they be at church on those days, never omit it, but arise from their seat and go in solemn manner to present their offering upon their knees at God’s altar. And then is read by the priest or bishop attending, the sentence here prescribed, 1 Cor. ix.”—Jebb.
OFFERTORY. So called, because it is that part of the Communion Service in which theofferingsare made. The custom of making oblations at the communion is certainly apostolical, as appears from 1 Cor. xvi. 2: “On the first day of the week let every one lay by him in store asGodhath prospered him.” Which custom continued down to the following ages, as appears from different passages in Justin Martyr, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, St. Ambrose, and other ancient writers. Out of those offerings, which were not always in money, but in bread, wine, corn, &c., were taken as much bread and wine as served for the celebration of the communion at the time; but if any persons were under public infamy, by reason of any ill actions by them committed, their offerings were not to be received. These offerings in the primitive times were so considerable, that they were divided into four portions; one for the relief of the poor; the second the bishop retained for his maintenance; the third was for the maintenance of the church and its ornaments; and the fourth for the clergy. The office of the Offertory was used in Walafrid Strabo’s time, who lived in the middle of the ninth century; and it was so long before his time, that he could not tell to whom to ascribe its original.—Dr. Nicholls.