2. OurSaviour’ssoul was united to theWord, before his conception, and before he was born of the Holy Virgin.
3. The body of ourSaviour Jesus Christwas first formed entire in the Virgin’s womb; and afterwards his soul, which long before had been united to theWord, came and was joined to it.
4. TheWordofGodhas been successively united with all the angelical natures; insomuch that it has been a cherub, seraph, and all the celestial virtues, one after another.
5. After the resurrection, the bodies of men will be of a spherical figure, and not of their present erect stature.
6. The heavens, sun, moon, and stars, are animated bodies, and have an intelligent soul.
7. In future ages, ourSaviour Jesus Christwill be crucified for the salvation of the devils, as he has already been for that of men.
8. The power ofGodis not infinite, and was so exhausted in the creation of things, that he has no more left.
9. The punishment of the devils, and of the damned, will continue only for a certain limited time.
These nine errors are distinctly recited by the second Council of Constantinople, at the end of a letter of the emperor Justinian against Origen. The recital of them is immediately followed by an anathema against Origen, and all who maintainedhis opinions: in which it is remarkable, that the council excommunicated Origen near three hundred years after his death.
The heresy of the Origenists spread widely in Egypt, and especially among the monks. Several eminent bishops opposed them, particularly Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, who, in the year 399, assembled a council in that city, in which the monks inhabiting the mountain of Nitria were condemned as Origenists.
Avitus, a Spanish priest, revived the errors of the Origenists in Spain, about the year 415; and probably it was against the followers of this Avitus, that the Council of Toledo was held in 633.
ORNAMENTS OF THE CHURCH. The common feelings of our nature would suggest the decent adornment of the house of ourGod: “Shall we,” in the words of our homily, “be so mindful of our common base houses, deputed to so low occupying, and be forgetful toward that house ofGodwherein be administered the words of our eternal salvation; wherein are entreated the sacraments and mysteries of our redemption;the fountain of the regenerationis there presented unto us; the partaking of the body and blood of ourSaviour Christis there offered unto us; and shall we not esteem the place where so heavenly things are handled?”
The following are the chief enactments of the Church and the State, with reference to the ornaments of the church. By the rubric before the Common Prayer, as also by the 1st of Elizabeth, c. 2, “Such ornaments of the church, and of the ministers thereof, at all times of their ministration, shall be retained and be in use as were in this Church of England, by authority of parliament, in the second year of the reign of King Edward the Sixth.”
Reynolds.“The archdeacons shall take care that the clothes of the altar be decent and in good order; that the church have fit books both for singing and reading; and at least two sacerdotal vestments.”
By the statute ofCircumspecte agatis, 13 Edward I. st. iv. “The king to his judges sendeth greeting:—Use yourselves circumspectly in all matters concerning the prelates, where they do punish for that the church is not conveniently decked: in which case the spiritual judge shall have power to take knowledge, notwithstanding the king’s prohibition.”
“Not conveniently decked.” For the law allows the ecclesiastical court to have cognizance in this case, of providing decent ornaments for the celebration of Divine service.
Canon 85. “The churchwardens or questmen shall take care that all things in the church be kept in such an orderly and decent sort, without dust, or anything that may be either noisome or unseemly, as best becometh the house ofGod, and is prescribed in a homily to that effect.”
Canon 82. “Whereas we have no doubt but that in all churches within the realm of England, convenient and decent tables are provided and placed for the celebration of the holy communion; we appoint that the same tables shall from time to time be kept and repaired in sufficient and seemly manner, and covered in time of Divine service with a carpet of silk or other decent stuff, thought meet by the ordinary of the place, (if any question be made of it,) and with a fair linen cloth at the time of the ministration, as becometh that table, and so stand, saving when the said holy communion is to be administered.”
In ancient times, the bishops preached standing upon the steps of the altar. Afterwards it was found more convenient to have pulpits erected for that purpose.
And by Canon 83. “The churchwardens or questmen, at the common charge of the parishioners, in every church, shall provide a comely and decent pulpit, to be set in a convenient place within the same, by the discretion of the ordinary of the place (if any question do arise); and to be there seemly kept for the preaching ofGod’sword.”
Canon 82. “And likewise a convenient seat shall be made at the charge of the parish, for the minister to read service in.”
Canon 58. “Every minister saying the public prayers, or ministering the sacraments or other rites of the Church, shall wear a decent and comely surplice with sleeves, to be provided at the charge of the parish. And if any question arise touching the matter, decency, or comeliness thereof, the same shall be decided by the discretion of the ordinary.”
Canon 81. “According to a former constitution, (viz. among the constitutions of 1570,) too much neglected in many places, we appoint, that there shall be a font of stone in every church and chapel where baptism is to be ministered: the same to be set in the ancient usual places. In which only font the minister shall baptize publicly.”
In an act in the 27 Henry VIII. it was enacted, that money collected for the poor should be kept in the common cofferor box standing in the church of every parish.
And by Canon 84. “The churchwardens shall provide and have, within three months after the publishing of these constitutions, a strong chest, with a hole in the upper part thereof, to be provided at the charge of the parish, (if there be none such already provided,) having three keys; of which one shall remain in the custody of the parson, vicar, or curate, and the other two in the custody of the churchwardens for the time being; which chest they shall set and fasten in the most convenient place, to the intent the parishioners may put into it their alms for their poor neighbours. And the parson, vicar, or curate shall diligently, from time to time, and especially when men make their testaments, call upon, exhort, and move their neighbours, to confer and give as they may well spare to the said chest: declaring unto them, that whereas heretofore they have been diligent to bestow much substance otherwise thanGodcommanded, upon superstitious uses, now they ought at this time to be much more ready to help the poor and needy, knowing that to relieve the poor is a sacrifice which pleasethGod: and that also, whatsoever is given for their comfort, is given toChristhimself, and is so accepted of Him, that He will mercifully reward the same. The which alms and devotion of the people, the keepers of the keys shall yearly, quarterly, or oftener, (as need requireth,) take out of the chest, and distribute the same in the presence of most of the parish, or of six of the chief of them, to be truly and faithfully delivered to their most poor and needy neighbours.”
Rubric. “Whilst the sentences of the offertory are reading, the deacons, churchwardens, or other fit persons appointed for that purpose, shall receive the alms for the poor, and other devotions of the people, in a decent basin, to be provided by the parish for that purpose.”
This offertory was anciently an oblation for the use of the priest; but at the Reformation it was changed into alms for the poor.
Canon 20. “The churchwardens against the time of every communion shall, at the charge of the parish, with the advice and direction of the minister, provide a sufficient quantity of fine white bread, and of good and wholesome wine: which wine we require to be brought to the communion table in a clean and sweet standing pot, or stoop of pewter, if not of purer metal.”
Winchelsea.“The parishioners shall find at their own charge, thechalice, orcup, for the wine.”
Which, says Lyndwood, “although expressed in the singular number, yet is not intended to exclude more than one, where more are necessary.”
Winchelsea.The parishioners, at their own charge, shall findbellswithropes.
Winchelsea.The parishioners shall find, at their own charge, abierfor the dead.
“If any parishes be yet unfurnished of theBibleof the largest volume, the churchwardens shall, within convenient time, provide the same at the charge of the parish.”
By Canon 80. “The churchwardens or questmen of every church and chapel shall, at the charge of the parish, provide the Book of Common Prayer, lately explained in some few points, by his Majesty’s authority according to the laws and his Highness’s prerogative in that behalf; and that, with all convenient speed, but, at the furthest, within two months after the publishing of these our constitutions.”
By the 1Eliz. c. 2.The Book of Common Prayershall be provided at the charge of the parishioners of every parish and cathedral church. (s. 19.)
By the 13 & 14Charles II.c. 4. “A true printed copy of the (present)Book of Common Prayershall, at the costs and charges of the parishioners of every parish church and chapelry, cathedral, church, college, and hall, be provided before the feast of St. Bartholomew, 1662, on pain of £3 a month for so long time as they shall be unprovided thereof.” (s. 2.)
Canon 80. “If any parishes be yet unfurnished of theBook of Homiliesallowed by authority, the churchwardens shall, within convenient time, provide the same at the charge of the parish.”
By Canon 17. “In every parish church and chapel shall be provided oneparchment bookat the charge of the parish, wherein shall be written the day and year of every christening, wedding, and burial within the parish; and for the safe keeping thereof, the churchwardens, at the charge of the parish, shall provide one surecoffer, with three locks and keys, whereof one to remain with the minister, and the other two with the churchwardens severally.”
Canon 99. “Thetable of degrees of marriages prohibitedshall be, in every church, publicly set up at the charge of the parish.”
Canon 82. “TheTen Commandmentsshall be set, at the charge of the parish, upon the east end of every church andchapel, where the people may best see and read the same.”
Canon 82. “And other chosensentencesshall, at the like charge, be written upon the walls of the said churches and chapels in places convenient.”
Lord Coke says, “Concerning the building or erecting oftombs,sepulchres, ormonumentsfor the deceased in church, chancel, common chapel, or churchyard, in convenient manner, it is lawful; for it is the last work of charity that can be done for the deceased; who, whilst he lived, was a living temple of theHoly Ghost, with a reverent regard and Christian hope of a joyful resurrection. And the defacing of them is punishable by the common law, and those who build or erect the same shall have the action during their lives, and, after their decease, the heir of the deceased shall have the action. But the building or erecting the sepulchre, tomb, or other monument, ought not to be to the hinderance of the celebration of Divine service.”
Ofgrave-stones, (he says,)winding-sheets,coats of arms,penons, or otherensigns of honour, hung up, laid, or placed in memory of the dead, the property remains in the executors; and they may have actions against such as break, deface, or carry them away, or an appeal of felony.
But Sir Simon Degge says, he conceives that this must be intended, by licence of the bishop, or consent of the parson and churchwardens.
Dr. Watson says, this is to be understood of such monuments only as are set up in the aisles belonging to particular persons; or if they be set up in any other part of the church, he supposes it is to be understood that they were placed there with the incumbent’s consent.
And Dr. Gibson observing thereupon says thus:—“Monuments, coat armour, and other ensigns of honour, set up in memory of the deceased, may not be removed at the pleasure of the ordinary or incumbent. On the contrary, if either they or any other person shall take away or deface them, the person who set them up shall have an action against them during his life, and after his death the heir of the deceased shall have the same, who (as they say) is inheritable to arms, and the like, as to heir-looms: and it avails not that they are annexed to the freehold, though that is in the parson. But this, as he conceives, is to be understood with one limitation; if they were set up with consent of the ordinary; for though (as my Lord Coke says) tombs, sepulchres, or monuments may be erected for the deceased, in church or chancel, in convenient manner, the ordinary must be allowed the proper judge of that conveniency; inasmuch as such erecting, he adds, ought not to be to the hinderance of the celebration of Divine service. And if they are erected without consent, and upon inquiry and inspection be found to the hinderance of Divine service, he thinks it will not be denied that in such case the ordinary has sufficient authority to decree a removal, without any danger of an action at law.”
If anysuperstitious picturesare in a window of a church or aisle, it is not lawful for any to break them without licence of the ordinary: and inPricket’s case, Wray, chief justice, bound the offender to good behaviour.
Besides what has been observed in particular, there are many other articles for which no provision is made by any special law, and therefore must be referred to the general power of the churchwardens, with the consent of the major part of the parishioners as aforesaid, and under the direction of the ordinary; such as the erectinggalleries, adding newbells, (and of consequence, as it seems, salaries for the ringers,)organs,clock,chimes,king’s arms,pulpit cloths,hearse cloth,rushes or mats,vestry furniture, and such like. The soil and freehold of the church and churchyard is in the parson; but the fee simple of the glebe is in abeyance. And if the walls, windows, or doors of the church be broken by any person, or the trees in the churchyard be cut down, or grass there be eaten up by a stranger; the incumbent of the rectory (or his tenant, if they be let) may have his actions for the damages. But the goods of the church do not belong to the incumbent, but to the parishioners; and if they be taken away or broken, the churchwardens shall have their action of trespass at the common law.
The magnificence of the first Jewish temple was acceptable toGod; and the too sparing contributions of the people towards the second, was severely reproved; and therefore no one can justly complain, that the ornaments now made use of in our churches are too many, or expensive. Far from us be all ornaments unbecoming the worship of a spirit, or the gravity of a church; but it has an ill aspect when men think that well enough inGod’shouse, which they would not endure in the meanest offices of their own. It is not enough barely to devote churches to the public services of religion, unless they are setapart with the solemn rites of a formal dedication. By these solemnities the founders were accustomed to surrender all the right they had in them, and makeGodhimself the sole owner. And whoever gave any lands or endowments to the service ofGod, gave it in a formal writing, sealed and witnessed, (as is now usual in common transactions,) the tender of the gift being made upon the altar, by the donor on his knees. At the consecration of both the tabernacle and the temple of the Jews, it pleased the Almighty to give a manifest sign that he then took possession of them. (Ex. xl. 34; 1 Kings viii. 10, 11.)—Wheatly.
Temples, and other utensils designed byGodhimself, are holy as related to him by that designation. Temples, utensils, lands, &c. devoted and lawfully separated by man, for holy uses, are holy as justly related toGodby that lawful separation. To say, as some do, that they are indeed consecrated and separated, but not holy, is to be ridiculously wise by self-contradiction, and the masterly use of the word holy contrary to custom and terms. Ministers are more holy than temples, lands, or utensils, as being more nearly related to holy things. And things separated byGodhimself are more holy than those justly separated by man. And so of days.—Baxter.
Can we judge it a thing seemly for any man to go about the building of an house to theGodof heaven, with no other appearance than if his end were to rear up a kitchen, or a parlour, for his own use? or when a work of such a nature is finished, remaineth there nothing but presently to use it, and so an end? Albeit the true worship ofGodbe toGodin itself acceptable, who respecteth not so much in what place, as with what affection he is served; and therefore Moses in the midst of the sea, Job on the dunghill, Ezekiah in bed, Jeremy in mire, Jonas in the whale, Daniel in the den, the Children in the furnace, the Thief on the cross, Peter and Paul in prison, calling untoGodwere heard, as St. Basil noteth, manifest notwithstanding it is, that the very majesty and holiness of the place whereGodis worshipped hath in regard of us great virtue, force, and efficacy, for that it serveth as a sensible help to stir up devotion.—Hooker.
The reader who desires to possess a perfect knowledge on this head, is referred to Bingham’s “Origines Ecclesiasticæ,” orAntiquities of the Christian Church, b. viii.
ORTHODOXY. (Ὀρθὸςandδοκέω.) Soundness of doctrine.
Of course the question here to be decided is, Whatissoundness of doctrine? If two men take Scripture for their guide, and professing to have no other guide, come to opposite conclusions, it is quite clear that neither has a right to decide that the other is not orthodox. On this principle it is as uncharitable and illogical for the Trinitarian to call the Socinian not orthodox, as it is for the Socinian to predicate the same of the Trinitarian. But if we interpret Scripture by the sense of the Church, then we may consistently call those orthodox who hold the doctrines which she deduces from Scripture, and those heterodox who do not hold those doctrines. So that orthodoxy means soundness of doctrine, the doctrine being proved to be sound by reference to the consentient testimony of Scripture and the Church. Hence perhaps it is, that as those low-churchmen, who repudiate Socinian notions, are by some called evangelicals, so high-churchmen are designated orthodox. Both titles, if intended to be appliedexclusively, are applied incorrectly.
ORTLIBENSES. (Lat.) A sect, or branch, of the ancient Vaudois or Waldenses.
The Ortlibenses denied there was a Trinity before the nativity ofJesus Christ, who, according to them, was not till that time theSonofGod. To these two persons of theGodheadthey added a third, during the preaching ofJesus Christ; namely, St. Peter, whom they acknowledged to be theHoly Ghost. They held the eternity of the world; but had no notion of the resurrection of the body, or the immortality of the soul. Notwithstanding which, they maintained (perhaps by way of irony) that there would be a final judgment, at which time the pope and the emperor would become proselytes to their sect.
They denied the death and resurrection ofJesus Christ. His cross, they pretended, was penance and their own abstemious way of life: this, they said, was the cross ourSaviourbore. They ascribed all the virtue of baptism to the merit of him who administered it. They were of opinion, that Jews might be saved without baptism, provided they embraced their sect. They boldly asserted, that they themselves were the only true mystical body, that is to say, the Church ofChrist.
PACIFICATION, EDICTS OF, were decrees or edicts, granted by the kings of France to the Protestants, for appeasing the troubles occasioned by their persecution.
The first edict of pacification was granted by Charles IX., in January, 1562, permitting the free exercise of the reformed religion near all the cities and towns of the realm. March 19, 1563, the same king granted a second edict of pacification, at Amboise, permitting the free exercise of the reformed religion in the houses of gentlemen and lords high-justiciaries (or those that had the power of life and death) to their families and dependants only; and allowing other Protestants to have their sermons in such towns as they had them in before the seventh of March; obliging them withal to quit the churches they had possessed themselves of during the troubles. Another, called the edict of Lonjumeau, ordering the execution of that of Amboise, was published March 27, 1558, after a treaty of peace. This pacification was of but short continuance; for Charles, perceiving a general insurrection of the Huguenots, revoked the said edicts in September, 1568, forbidding the exercise of the Protestant religion, and commanding all the ministers to depart the kingdom in fifteen days. But, on the eighth of August, 1570, he made peace with them again, and published an edict on the eleventh, allowing the lords high-justiciaries to have sermons in their houses for all comers, and granting other Protestants two public exercises in each government. He likewise gave them four cautionary towns, viz. Rochelle, Montauban, Cognac, and La Charité, to be places of security for them during the space of two years. Nevertheless, in August, 1572, he authorized the Bartholomew massacre, and at the same time issued a declaration, forbidding the exercise of the Protestant religion.
Henry III., in April, 1576, made peace with the Protestants, and the edict of pacification was published in parliament, May 14, permitting them to build churches, and have sermons where they pleased. The Guisian faction, enraged at this general liberty, began the famous league for defence of the Catholic religion, which became so formidable, that it obliged the king to assemble the states of the kingdom at Blois, in December, 1576; where it was enacted, that there should be but one religion in France, and that the Protestant ministers should be all banished. In 1577, the king, to pacify the troubles, published an edict in parliament, October 8th, granting the same liberty to the reformed which they had before. However, in July, 1585, the league obliged him to publish another edict, revoking all former concessions to the Protestants, and ordering them to depart the kingdom in six months, or turn Papists. This edict was followed by more to the same purpose.
Henry IV. coming to the crown, published a declaration, July 4, 1591, abolishing the edicts against the Protestants. This edict was verified in the parliament of Chalons; but the troubles prevented the verification of it in the parliaments of the other provinces; so that the Protestants had not the free exercise of their religion in any place but where they were masters, and had banished the Romish religion. In April, 1598, the king published a new edict of pacification at Nantes, granting the Protestants the free exercise of their religion in all places where they had the same in 1596 and 1597, and one exercise in each bailiwick.
This edict of Nantes was confirmed by Louis XIII. in 1610, and by Louis XIV. in 1652. But his letter, in 1685, abolished it entirely; since which time the Protestants ceased to be tolerated in France till the Revolution.—Broughton.
PÆDO-BAPTISM. (Fromπαῖς,a child, andβαπτίζω,to baptize.) The baptism of children. (SeeBaptism of Infants.)
PALL, or PALLIUM. The word pallium properly signifies a cloak, thrown over the shoulders: afterwards it came to denote a sort of cape or tippet, and hence the ecclesiastical designation in the Western Church.
The origin of the pall, which has been generally worn by the Western metropolitans, is disputed; but whoever considers the ancient figures of it which are found in manuscripts, &c., will see that it was originally only a stole wound round the neck, with the ends hanging down behind and before. In the East the pall is calledomophorion, and has been used, at least, since the time of Chrysostom. It is used by all the Eastern bishops, above the phenolion or vestment, during the eucharist; and, as used by them, resembles the ancient pall much more nearly than that worn by the Western metropolitans.—Palmer.
The pall was part of the imperial habit, and originally granted by the emperors to the patriarchs. Thus Constantine gave the use of the pall to the bishop of Rome; and Anthimus, patriarch of Constantinople, being expelled his see, is said to have returned the pall to the emperor Justinian; which implies his having received it from him. And the reason of the royal consent in this manner seems to be, because it was high treason to wear any part of the imperial habit without licence.
In after ages, when the see of Rome had carried its authority to the highest pitch, under Pope Innocent III., that pontiff, in the Lateran Council,A. D.1215, decreed the pall to be a mark and distinction, intimating the plenitude of the apostolic power, and that neither the function nor title of archbishop should be assumed without it; and this, not only when a bishop was preferred to the degree of archbishop, but likewise in case of translations, when an archbishop was removed from one see to another. It was decreed, likewise, that every archbishop should be buried in his pall, that his successor might make no use of it, but be obliged to apply to the pope for another. By these means the court of Rome brought vast sums of money into its exchequer.
In the Romish Church the following is the description of the pall as given by Romish writers. The pallium is a part of the pontifical dress worn only by the pope, archbishops, and patriarchs. It is a white woollen band of about three fingers’ breadth, made round, and worn over the shoulders, crossed in front with one end hanging down over the breast; the other behind it is ornamented with purple crosses, and fastened by three golden needles or pins. It is made of the wool of perfectly white sheep, which are yearly, on the festival of St. Agnes, offered and blessed at the celebration of the holy eucharist, in the church dedicated to her in the Nomentan Way in Rome. The sheep are received by two canons of the church of St. John Lateran, who deliver them into the charge of the subdeacons of the Apostolic College, and they then are kept and fed by them until the time for shearing them arrives. The palliums are always made of this wool, and when made they are brought to the church of St. Peter and St. Paul, and are placed upon the altar over their tomb on the eve of their festival, and are left there the whole night, and on the following day are delivered to the subdeacons, whose office it is to take charge of them. The pope alonealwayswears the pallium, and wherever he officiates, to signify his assumed authority over all other particular churches. Archbishops and patriarchs receive it from him, and cannot wear it, except in their own churches, and only on certain great festivals when they celebrate the mass.
An archbishop in the Romish Church, although he be consecrated as bishop, and have taken possession, cannot before he has petitioned for, and received and paid for the pallium, either call himself archbishop, or perform such acts as belong to the “greater jurisdiction;” those, namely, which he exercises not as a bishop, but as archbishop, such as to summon a council, or to visit his province, &c. He can, however, when his election has been confirmed, and before he receives the pallium, depute his functions, in the matter of ordaining bishops, to his suffragans, who may lawfully exercise them by his command. If, however, any archbishop in the Romish Church, before he receives the pallium, perform those offices which result immediately from the possession of it, such as, for instance, those relating to orders and to the chrism, &c., the acts themselves are valid, but the archbishop offends against the canons and laws of the Church.
The pall is still retained as an heraldic ensign, in the arms of the archbishops of Canterbury, Armagh, and Dublin, and formerly constituted those of the archbishop of York also.
Pallis also used for a covering; as the black cloth which covers the coffin at funerals, and sometimes for analtar cloth. Thus at the coronation, the sovereign makes an oblation of apall, oraltar cloth of gold.
PALM SUNDAY. The Sunday next before Easter, so called from palm branches being strewed on the road by the multitude, when ourSaviourmade his triumphal entry into Jerusalem.
This week, immediately preceding the feast of Easter, is more especially designed to fit us for that great solemnity; and, to that end, is to be spent in more than ordinary piety and devotion. It was anciently called sometimes the Great Week, sometimes the Holy Week, because it hath a larger service than any other week, every day having a second service appointed for it, in which are rehearsed at large the sufferings ofChrist, as they are described by the four evangelists; that by hearing and reading the history of his passion, we may be better prepared for the mystery of his resurrection; that, by his rising from the dead, we may be quickened to newness of life. This day, which begins this holy week, is called by the name of Palm Sunday, being the day on which ourSaviourentered Jerusalem with great joy; some spreading their garments, others cutting down branches of palm, carrying them in their hands, and strewing them in the way, which hath been remembered with great solemnity.—Dr. Hole.
In the missals this Sunday is called Palm Sunday; and in many parts of England it still retains its ancient name. On this day, till the æra of the Reformation,the people in solemn procession carried in their hands palms, or branches of some other tree, in commemoration ofChrist’striumphal entry into Jerusalem five days before his death. The palms were then placed on the altar by the clerks, before the time of the celebration of the eucharist; and numerous benedictory collects were pronounced over them by the priest.—Shepherd.
The collect for the day puts us in mind of the tender love ofGodtowards mankind, in sending hisSon, not only to take upon him our flesh, but to suffer in it the death of the cross for our sins; to the intent, “that all mankind should follow the example of his great humility;” and thence teaches us to pray, “that we may both follow the example of his patience, and also be made partakers of his resurrection.”
The Epistle for the day presents us to this purpose with the highest and best pattern for our imitation, even theSonofGod, who hath done and suffered all these great things for us.
This Gospel, with the rest that follow on each day of this holy week, gives us an ample account of the death and passion of our blessedSaviour, together with the many circumstances that went before and came after it.—Dr. Hole.
PANTHEISM. (Πᾶν,all;Θεὸς,God.) A subtle kind of atheism, which makesGodand the universe the same, and so denies the existence and sovereignty of anyGodover the universe. It is to be feared that much of the mere natural religion of the present day partakes of the character of Pantheism.
PAPA. (Πάππας, Greek.) A name originally given to the bishops of the Christian Church, though now it is become in the West the pretended prerogative and sole privilege of the pope, or bishop of Rome. The word signifies no more thanfather.
Tertullian, speaking indefinitely of any Christian bishop who absolves penitents, gives him the name ofBenedictus Papa. Heraclas, bishop of Alexandria, has the same title given him. St. Jerome gives the title ofPapato Athanasius, Epiphanius, and Paulinus; and, writing often to St. Augustine, he always inscribes his epistlesBeatissimo Papæ Augustino.
The namePapawas sometimes given to the inferior clergy, who were calledPapæ Pisinni, that is,little fathers; in comparison of whom Balsamon calls presbytersProtopapæ, i.e.chief fathers.
The Greek Christians have continued to give the namePapato their priests. And there is, in all Oriental cathedrals, and at Messina in Sicily, (where Oriental customs are largely retained,) there was formerly an ecclesiastical dignitary styledProtopapa, who, besides a jurisdiction over several churches, had a particular respect paid him by the cathedral. For, upon Whitsunday, the prebendaries went in procession to theProtopapa’schurch, (called theCatholic,) and attended him to the cathedral, where he sang solemnVespers, according to the Greek rituals, and was afterwards waited upon back to his own church with the same pompous respect. The Vespers, and the Epistle and Gospel, at Pentecost, are still sung by Greek priests.—Pirri-Sicilia Sacra.(SeePops.)
PAPISTS. (SeePoperyandRoman Catholics. For the form of reconciling Papists to the Church of England, seeAbjuration.)
PARABLE. The parabolical, enigmatical, figurative, and sententious way of speaking was the language of the Eastern sages and learned men; and nothing was more insupportable than to hear a fool utter parables: “The legs of the lame are not equal; so is a parable in the mouth of fools.” (Prov. xxvi. 7.)
It is generally applied, as in the New Testament, to a figurative discourse, or a story with a typical meaning; but in the Old Testament, it sometimes signifies a mere discourse: asJob’s parable, which occupies many chapters of the book of Job (xxvi.——xxxi. inclusive). The same title is applied by its inspired composer to the seventy-eighth Psalm, (ver. 2,) which is historical, not deeply mystical, like the forty-ninth.
OurSaviourin the Gospel seldom speaks to the people but in parables: thereby verifying the prophecy of Isaiah, (vi. 9,) that the people should see without knowing, and hear without understanding, in the midst of instruction. Some parables in the New Testament are supposed to be true histories. In others ourSaviourseems to allude to some points of history in those times; as that describing a king who went into a far country to receive a kingdom. This may hint at the history of Archelaus, who, after the death of his father, Herod the Great, went to Rome, to receive from Augustus the confirmation of his father’s will, by which he had the kingdom of Judea left to him.
PARABOLANI. (Lat.) In the ancient Christian Church were certain officers, deputed to attend upon the sick, and to take care of them all the time of their weakness.
At Alexandria, the Parabolani were incorporated into a society, to the number of 500 or 600, elected by the bishop of the place, and under his direction. But that this was not an order peculiar to the Church of Alexandria is very evident, because there is mention made of Parabolani at Ephesus at the time of the second council held there. (A. D.449.)
They were calledParabolanifrom their undertaking a most dangerous and hazardous office, (παραβολον εργον,) in attending the sick, especially in infectious and pestilential diseases. The Greeks used to call thoseπαραβολοι, who hired themselves out to fight with wild beasts in the amphitheatre; for the wordπαραβαλλεινsignifies exposing a man’s life to danger. In this sense, the Christians were often called Parabolani by the heathens, because they were so ready to expose their lives to martyrdom. And, upon the like account, the nameParabolaniwas given to the officers we are speaking of.
These Parabolani, being men of a bold and daring spirit, were ready upon all occasions to engage in any quarrel that should happen in Church or State, as they seem to have done in the dispute between Cyril the bishop and Orestes the governor of Alexandria. Wherefore the emperor Theodosius put them under the inspection of the Præfectus Augustalis, and strictly prohibited them to appear at any public shows, or in the common council of the city, or in the courts of judicature, unless any of them had a cause of his own, or appeared as syndic for the whole body. Which shows that the civil government always looked upon the Parabolani as a formidable body of men, and kept a watchful eye over them, that, while they were serving the Church, they might not do any disservice to the State.—Bingham.
PARACLETE. A comforter and advocate; a title applied toGodtheHoly Ghost. (John xv. 26.)—SeeHoly Ghost.
PARACLETICE, (Gr.,) among the Greek Christians, is a book of anthems, or hymns, so called, because they chiefly tend to comfort the sinner, or because they are partly invocatory, consisting of pious addresses toGodand the saints.
The hymns or anthems in this book are not appropriated to particular days, but contain something proper to be recited every day, in the mass, vespers, matins, and other offices.
Allatius finds great fault with this book, and says there are many things in it disrespectful to the Virgin Mary, and many things ascribed to her against all reason and equity; that it affirms that John the Baptist, after his death, preachedChristin hell; and thatChristhimself, when he descended into hell, freed all mankind from the punishments of that place and the power of the devil.
PARAPET. A low wall protecting the gutter in the roof of churches or other buildings. Early parapets are universally plain, but, with the Decorated style, they begin to be panelled, and sometimes pierced with various patterns, and in the Perpendicular they are very frequently crenellated.
PARAPHRASE. (Chaldaic.) It is commonly believed that the first translation of the holy Bible was in Chaldee, and that the ignorance of the Jews in the Hebrew tongue, after the Babylonish captivity, was the occasion of that version, called the Targum, or Chaldee paraphrase, which was neither done by one author, nor at the same time, nor made upon all the books of the Old Testament. The first upon the Pentateuch was done by Onkelos, a proselyte, who lived about the time of ourSaviour, if we believe the Hebrew authors; the second upon the Pentateuch is attributed to Jonathan, the son of Uzziel, who is not the same with the Theodotion, which in Greek has the same signification as Jonathan in Hebrew; that is, the gift ofGod. The third upon the same book is called the Targum Hierosolymitanum, or the Jerusalem paraphrase; the author of which is not certainly known, nor the time when it was composed. Schikard believes it to bear the same date as the Targum of Jerusalem, which was written about 300 years after the last destruction of the temple, burnt in the seventieth year after ourLord’sincarnation. There are, besides these, three paraphrases upon the books of Moses; another upon the Psalms, Job, and Proverbs; there is also one upon the Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and Esther, but the author not known; and we have a Chaldee paraphrase upon Joshua, Judges, Kings, and the Prophets, by Jonathan, the son of Uzziel, who, according to the Jews, had before written the paraphrase upon the Pentateuch.
Several learned men believe that all the rabbins say concerning the Chaldee paraphrase is fabulous, and that the oldest of all the translations is that of the Septuagint: it is also added that they are later than St. Jerome, who, having great acquaintance with the most learned rabbins, and having written so much upon that subject, could not fail of speaking of theChaldee paraphrases, if there had been any such in his time. The Jews affirm they were composed in the time of the prophets, and they have them in so great veneration, that they are obliged to read in their synagogue a section of Onkelos’ paraphrase, when they have read a Hebrew text in the Bible.
PARCLOSE. Screens separating chapels, especially those at the east end of the aisles, from the body of the church, are calledparcloses.
PARDONS. (SeeIndulgences.) In the Romish Church,pardonsorindulgencesare releasement from the temporal punishment of sin; the power of granting which is supposed to be lodged in the pope, to be dispensed by him to the bishops and inferior clergy, for the benefit of penitents throughout the Church. In the theory of pardons, the point is assumed, that holy men may accomplish more than is strictly required of them by the Divine law; that there is a meritorious value in this overplus; that such value is transferable, and that it is deposited in the spiritual treasury of the Church, subject to the disposal of the pope, to be, on certain conditions, applied to the benefit of those whose deficiencies stand in need of such a compensation. A distinction is then drawn between the temporal and the eternal punishment of sin; the former of which not only embraces penances, and all satisfactions for sin in the present life, but also the pains of purgatory in the next. These are supposed to be within the control and jurisdiction of the Church; and, in the case of any individual, may be ameliorated or terminated by the imputation of so much of the overabundant merits of the saints, &c., as may be necessary to balance the deficiencies of the sufferer.
The privilege of selling pardons, it is well known, was frequently granted by the pope to monastic bodies in every part of the Church; and the scandals and disorders consequent upon them, was one of the first moving causes of the Reformation. Against these most pernicious and soul-destroying errors, the Church of England protests in her twenty-second Article: “The Romish doctrine concerning purgatory,pardons, worshipping, and adoration, as well of images as of relics, and also of invocation of saints, is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the word ofGod.”
In treating this subject we will first show what the Romish doctrine is, and then how repugnant it is to Scripture.
As for the first, what their doctrine concerning pardons is, it is difficult to determine; they have had so many crotchets about it, that one can scarce tell where to find them. We shall endeavour to explain it in these following propositions:—
First, They assert, as Bellarmine saith, that “many holy men have suffered more forGodand righteousness’ sake than the guilt of the temporal punishment, which they were obnoxious to for faults committed by them, could exact.”
Secondly, Hence they say, as Johannes de Turrecremata, “That one can satisfy for another, or one can acceptably perform satisfactory punishment for another,” viz. “because they suffer more than is due to their own sins; and seeing all sufferings are satisfactory, what they undergo more than is due to their own is satisfactory for other men’s sins.”
Thirdly, “Seeing they who thus undergo satisfactory punishments for others do not appoint the fruit of this their satisfaction to any particular persons, it therefore,” as Roffensis saith, “becomes profitable to the whole Church in common, so that it is now called the common treasury of the Church, to wit, that from thence may be fetched whatsoever any others lack of due satisfaction.”
Fourthly, “This common treasure,” saith Bellarmine, “is the foundation of pardons.” So that, as he saith, “the Church hath power to apply this treasure of satisfaction, and by this to grant our pardons.”
By this, therefore, we may have some sight into this great mystery, and perceive what they mean by pardons. For as Laymanus the Jesuit saith, “A pardon or indulgence is the remission of a temporal punishment due toGodwithout the sacrament, by the application of the satisfaction ofChristand the saints.” Or, as Gregorius de Valentia saith, “An ecclesiastical pardon or indulgence is a relaxation of a temporal punishment byGod’sjudgment due to actual sins, after the remission of the fault made without the sacrament (of penance), by the application of the superabundant satisfaction ofChristand the saints, by him who hath lawful authority to do it.” But let us hear what a pope himself saith concerning these pardons. Leo X., in his decretal, ann. 1518, saith, “The pope of Rome may, for reasonable causes, grant to the same saints ofChristwho, charity uniting them, are members ofChrist, whether they be in this life or in purgatory, pardons out of the superabundancy of the merits ofChristand the saints; and that be used, for the living aswell as for the dead, by his apostolic power of granting pardons, to dispense or distribute the treasure of the merits ofChristand the saints, to confer the indulgence itself, after the manner of an absolution, or transfer it after the manner of a suffrage.” So that, as Durandus saith, “The Church can communicate from this treasure to any one, or several, for their sins, in part or in whole, according as it pleases the Church to communicate more or less from the treasure.” And hence it is that we find it said in the book of indulgences or pardons, that “Pope Sylvester and Gregory, that consecrated the Lateran Church, gave so many pardons, that none could number them butGod; Boniface being witness, who said, ‘if men knew the pardons of the Lateran Church, they would not need to go by sea to the holy sepulchre. In the chapel of the saints are twenty-eight stairs that stood before the house of Pilate in Jerusalem. Whosoever shall ascend those stairs with devotion hath, for every sin, nine years of pardons; but he that ascends them kneeling, he shall free one soul out of purgatory.’” So that it seems the pope can not only give me a pardon for sins past, but to come; yea, and not only give me a pardon for my own sins, but power to pardon other men’s sins, else I could not redeem a soul from purgatory.
We have been the larger in the opening of this great Romish mystery, because we need do no more than open it; for, being thus opened, it shows itself to be a ridiculous and impious doctrine, utterly repugnant to the Scriptures. For this doctrine, thus explained, is grounded upon works of supererogation; for it is from the treasury of these good works that the Romish Church fetches all her pardons. Now this is but a bad foundation, contrary to Scripture, reason, and Fathers; as we have seen in the fourteenth Article. And if the foundation be rotten, the superstructure cannot be sound. Again, this doctrine supposes one man may and doth satisfy for another; whereas the Scriptures hold forth “Christ[as] our propitiation,” (1 John ii. 2,) “Who trode the wine-press of his Father’s wrath alone” (Isaiah lxiii. 3). Lastly, this doctrine supposes that a pope, a priest, a finite creature, can pardon sins; whereas the Scripture holds forth this as the prerogative only of the trueGod. For “who is aGodlike unto thee,” saith the prophet Micah, “that pardoneth iniquities?” (Mic. vii. 18.) And therefore the scribes and Pharisees, when they said, “Who can forgive sins butGodalone?” (Luke v. 21,) what they said, though wickedly said by them, not acknowledgingChristto beGod, and so not to have that power, yet it was truly said in itself: for, had notChristbeenGod, he would have had no more power to forgive sins than the pope.
And whatsoever the doctors of the Romish Church now hold, we are sure the Fathers of old constantly affirmed that it wasGodonly could forgive sin. So Chrysostom saith, “For none can pardon sins but onlyGod.” Euthymius, “None can truly pardon sins, but he alone who beholds the thoughts of men.” Gregory, “Thou who alone sparest, who alone forgivest sins. For who can forgive sins butGodalone?” Ambrose, “For this cannot be common to any man withChristto forgive sins. This is his gift only who took away the sins of the world.” Certainly the Fathers never thought of the pope’s pardons, when they let such and the like sentences slip from them. Nay, and Athanasius was so confident that it wasGodonly could pardon sin, that he brings this as an argument against the Arians, to prove thatChristwasGod, because he could pardon sin. “But how,” saith he, “if theWordwas a creature, could he loose the sentence ofGod, and pardon sin?” It being written by the prophets that this belongs toGod; for “who is aGodlike to thee, pardoning sins, and passing by transgressions?” ForGodsaid, “Thou art earth, and unto earth thou shalt return.” So that men are mortal: and how then was it possible that sin should be pardoned or loosed by creatures? YetChristloosed and pardoned them. Certainly had the pope’s pardons been heard of in that age, this would have been but a weak argument. For Arius might easily have answered, “It doth not follow, that, becauseChristcould pardon sin, he was thereforeGod; for the pope is notGod, and yet he can pardon sin.” But thus we see the Fathers confidently averring, it isGodonly can pardon sins, and therefore that the pope cannot pardon them by any means whatsoever, unless he beGod, which as yet they do not assert. And so that the Romish doctrine concerning pardons is a fond thing, repugnant to the Scriptures.—Beveridge.
PARISH. A parish is that circuit of ground which is committed to the charge of one parson or vicar, or other minister having cure of souls therein. Areputed parishis where there is a parochial chapel, with all parochial rites entirely independent of the mother-church, as to sacraments,marriages, burials, repairs, &c. (SeeChapel.)
The wordparishis from the Greek wordπαροικία, (paroichia,) which signifiessojourning, or livingas a strangeror inmate; for so it is used among the classical Greek writers. The Septuagint translate the Hebrew wordגר, (Ger,)peregrinus, byπάροικος, (Gen. xv. 13, &c.,) and the wordמגור, (Magor,)peregrinatio, byπαροικία. (Ps. cxix. 54.)
The primitive Christians received a great part of their customs, and also their phraseology from the Jews; who, when they travelled abroad, and many of them were settled in any town, either built them a synagogue, or else procured a large room, where they performed their public worship; and all that were strangers in that place met there at the times of public devotion. This brotherhood of Jews, which was mixed with the inhabitants of the place, they called theπαροικία, or thesociety of the sojourners. At the beginning of Christianity, the Christians were in the same condition with the Jews, they being themselves either Jews, or Jewish proselytes, or living in a retired condition, sequestered from the world, and little mixing with affairs. Upon which account St. Peter addresses themὡς παροικοὺς, &c.,as strangers and pilgrims. (1 Pet. ii. 11.) This number of strangers in the heathen cities was called theπαροικία, over which there was set, by apostolical authority, a bishop, aπροεσθώς, acazan, (an inspector,) or arhosh cohel(a head of the congregation); all which names denoted the episcopal authority, and which in little time centred in the one most usual name, ofἐπίσκοπος, or bishop, as is plainly seen by the Ignatian epistles. So that theἐπίσκοποςandπαροικίαbecame relative terms; he that had the superintendency of the congregation, whether one or more, was called the bishop, and the congregation under his care was called theπαροικία. Hence, in the most early time of the Greek Church, the wordπαροικίαwas used to signify, what we now call adiocese; and thus, in the apostolic canons, a bishop that leaves his dioceseπαροικίανfor another is to be reduced to lay-communion. Hence it is said, “The bishop of the dioceseπαροικιαςof Alexandria departed this life.” And again, “the gloryπαροικιαςof the diocese of Cæsarea.” The Latins took up the same way of expression, from the Greek, denoting a diocese by the wordparochia, which mode of expression lasted till after the time of Charlemagne.
But it is to be observed, that when the wordparochiasignified a diocese, the worddiocesissignified a parish. So in the Council of Agatha,presbyter dum diocesin tenet, “whilst the presbyter is in possession of his living.” And in the third Council of Orleans,diocesisis the same withbasilica, a parish church. But in the seventh or eighth century, when parish churches began frequently to be founded in villages, the old names shifted, anddiocesiswas used to denote the extent of the bishop’s jurisdiction; andparochia, the place where the presbyter’s care was limited.
That the wordπαροικίαwas not exclusively applied to aparish, and that a bishop’s diocese was not anciently confined to asingleparish, as it has been asserted by the advocates for Presbyterianism, see Maurice’s “Defence of Diocesan Episcopacy,” and Scater’s “Original Draught of the Primitive Church.”
How ancient the division of parishes is, may at present be difficult to ascertain; for it seems to be agreed on all hands, that, in the early ages of Christianity in this island, parishes were unknown, or at least signified the same that adiocesedoes now. There was then no appropriation of ecclesiastical dues to any particular Church; but every man was at liberty to contribute his tithes to whatever priest or church he pleased, provided only that he did it to some; or if he made no special appointment or appropriation thereof, they were paid into the hands of the bishop, whose duty it was to distribute them among the clergy, and for other pious purposes, according to his own discretion. Mr. Camden says, England was divided into parishes by Archbishop Honorius, about the year 630. Sir Henry Hobart lays it down, that parishes were first erected by the Council of Lateran, which was heldA. D.1179. Each widely differing from the other, and both of them perhaps from the truth; which will probably be found in the medium between the two extremes: for Mr. Selden has clearly shown, that the clergy lived in common without any division of parishes, long after the time mentioned by Camden; and it appears from the Saxon laws, that parishes were in being long before the date of that Council of Lateran, to which they are ascribed by Hobart.
Many parish churches were founded in great towns and villages in Italy, Spain, and France, during the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries, under the cathedral church of the bishop; and though they were later in England, yet there are some instances as early as the year 700: for about that timeBede relates, that the bishop of Hexham consecrated a parish church in the manor of one Pach, a Saxon earl, and not long after for one Addi. Nay, before this he relates of Birinus, first bishop of the West Saxons, that he built and dedicated several churches in his diocese of Dorchester. When Egbert, archbishop of York, made his constitutions, about the year 750, they seem to be growing up apace. By that canon, “Unusquisque sacerdos ecclesiam suam cum omni diligentia ædificet.”—Spelman.And he forbids that the tithes formerly paid to the mother-church should be paid to the new-built oratories. By the time of Edward the Confessor these parishes were grown so numerous, that complaint was made that the clergy were impoverished thereby. After which time the division of parishes was not much altered; for the survey of England in Doomsday Book is not very different from our later ones.—Nicholls.
Before the establishment of parishes in England, the bishops sent out their clergy (who lived with them) to preach to the people as occasion required; but as Christianity extended, and the number of converts increased, this method became inconvenient, and a resident clergy was found expedient. Parishes were then formed, and churches were built, and endowed by lords of manors and others; and hence arose the patronage of laymen.
The cause of the great difference in the extent of different parishes is this: that churches were most of them built by lords of the manor for their tenants; and so the parish was of the size of the lord’s manor.
In 1520, according to a book made out by Cardinal Wolsey, the number of parish churches is reckoned 9407, but Chamberlain makes them 9913. Camden reckons 9284. The number of charity briefs issued was according to an account in Burns’ “Ecclesiastical Law,” 10,489. Formerly Archdeacon Plymley, in his charge to the clergy of Salop, 1793, says that, from the “Liber Regis,” there were in England and Wales 5098 rectories, 3687 vicarages, and 2970 churches, neither rectorial nor vicarial; in all 11,755 churches in the 10,000 parishes. It is scarcely necessary to add, that both churches and parishes have much increased since that period.
As to divisions and consolidations of parishes, see 58 Geo. III. c. 45; 59 Geo. III. c. 134; 8 & 9 Vic. c. 70. See also 3 & 4 Vic. c. 60, sec. 6.
PARSON. (Persona ecclesiæ.)Parsonproperly signifies the rector of a parish church, because, during the time of his incumbency, he represents the Church, and in the eye of the law sustains thepersonthereof, as well in suing as in being sued, in any action touching the same.Parson imparsonee(persona impersonata) is he that, as lawful incumbent, is in actual possession of a parish church, and with whom the church is full, whether it be presentative or impropriate. The word persona is however applied in ancient documents to others besides parochial incumbents, that is, to ecclesiastical officers who had a personal responsibility for the services and duties proper to their churches. (SeePersona.)
PARSONAGE. The parson’s residence. It is applicable both to rectories and to vicarages, and indeed to the official residences of all incumbents of parishes, parochial districts, or chapelries. As to giving of lands for parsonages, see 55 Geo. III. c. 147.
PARVISE. A chamber over a church porch. The parvise was most likely always a kind ofdomus inclusafor some officer of the church, as, for instance, the sacristan; and from the frequent occurrence of an altar in the east window, we may presume that it was sometimes a temporary lodging for a priest.
PASCH. The festival of Easter.
PASCHAL. Pertaining to the Passover. The lamb offered in this Jewish festival being a prominent type ofChrist, the termspaschaland paschal lamb are often used in application to theRedeemer. An example occurs in the proper preface for Easter Day, in the Communion Office, thus: “ThySon Jesus ChristourLord, for he is the veryPaschalLamb, which was offered for us, and hath taken away the sin of the world,” &c.
PASSALORYNCHITES, or PATTALORYNCHIANS. Certain heretics, the followers of Montanus, who made profession of never speaking, and for that purpose always held their fingers upon their mouths, grounding it upon certain words of the 140th Psalm. They began to appear in the second age; and St. Jerome testifies, that even in his time he found some of them in Galatia, as he travelled to Ancyra.
PASSING BELL. By the sixth canon it is enjoined, “When any is passing out of this life, a bell shall be tolled, and the minister shall not then slack to do his last duty. And after the party’s death (if so it fall out) there shall be rung no more but one short peal, and one other before the burial, and one other after the burial.”
PASSION WEEK. So we denominate the week immediately preceding the festivalofEaster, because in that week ourSaviour’spassionand death happened.
The primitive Christians called itHebdomas Magna, or theGreat Week. No one can better describe it to us than St. Chrysostom, who says, “It was called the Great Week, not because it consisted of longer days, or more in number, than other weeks, but because at this time great things were wrought for us by ourLord. For in this week the ancient tyranny of the devil was dissolved, death was extinct, the strong man was bound, his goods were spoiled, sin was abolished, the curse was destroyed, paradise was opened, heaven became accessible, men and angels were joined together, the middle wall of partition was broken down, the barriers were taken out of the way, theGodof peace made peace between things in heaven and things in earth; therefore it is called theGreat Week. And as this is the head of all other weeks, so the GreatSabbathis the head of this week. Therefore, in this week, many increase their labours; some adding to their fastings, others to their watchings; others give more liberal alms, testifying the greatness of the Divine goodness by their care of good works, and more intense piety and holy living. As the Jews went forth to meetChrist, when he had raised Lazarus from the dead, so now not only one city, but all the world, go forth to meet him, not with palm branches in their hands, but with alms-deeds, humanity, virtue, fastings, tears, prayers, watchings, and all kinds of piety, which they offer toChristtheirLord. And not only we, but the emperors of the world, honour this week, making it a time of vacation from all civil business. The imperial letters are sent abroad at this time, commanding all prisoners to be set at liberty from their chains. For, as ourLord, when he descended into hell, set free those that were detained by death; so the servants, according to their power, imitating the kindness of theirLord, loose men from their corporal bonds, when they have no power to relax the spiritual.”
It is plain from hence, that the ancient Christians paid an extraordinary regard to this Holy Week, and that this consisted in additional exercises of devotion, longer fastings, more liberal alms, vacation from all civil business, and a general release of prisoners, some particular cases of criminals only excepted.
TheThursdayin this week, which was the day on whichChristwas betrayed, was observed with some peculiar customs. In some churches, the communion was administered in the evening after supper, in imitation of the communion of the apostles at ourLord’slast supper. On this day theCompetentes, or candidates of baptism, publicly rehearsed the creed before the bishops or presbyters in the church. And on this day it was customary for servants to receive the communion. The modern ritualists call this dayMaundy Thursday. (SeeMaundy Thursday.)
TheFridaywas calledGood Friday, orPaschof theCross, in opposition toEaster, or thePaschof theResurrection. On this day, not only penitents were absolved, but a general absolution and indulgence was proclaimed to all the people, observing the day with fasting, prayers, and contrition.
The Saturday of this week was known by the name of theGreat Sabbath. It had many peculiarities belonging to it. For this was the only Sabbath throughout the year that the Greek churches, and some of the Western, kept as a fast; all other Saturdays, or Sabbaths, being observed as festivals. On this day they continued to fast, not only till evening, but till cock-crowing in the morning, which was the supposed time of ourSaviour’sresurrection. And the preceding time of the night was spent in Divine service, praying, preaching, and baptizing such of the catechumens as presented themselves. A remnant of which custom seems still to be kept up in the Latin offices, which prescribe the reading of numerous chapters from the Holy Scriptures, called prophecies, with prayers, &c. interspersed. Eusebius tells us that, in the time of Constantine, this vigil was kept with great pomp. For that emperor set up lofty pillars of wax, to burn as torches all over the city, so that the night seemed to outshine the sun at noonday. The fifth Sunday in Lent is called in the Roman office, Passion Sunday, that name being applied to it in reference to ourLord’sprediction on that day of his approaching passion. And some persons call the week, of which Passion Sunday is the first day, Passion Week; and the real Passion Week they call Holy Week. This is, however, a piece of pedantry, founded on a mistake.
PASSOVER. (Pesach, Heb., which signifiesa leap,a passage.) (Pascha, in the LXX.) The Passover was a solemn festival of the Jews, instituted in commemoration of their coming out of Egypt, because the night before their departure the destroying angel, that slew the first-born of the Egyptians, passed over the houses of the Hebrews without entering them, because they were marked with the bloodof the lamb, which for this reason was called the paschal lamb.
PASTOR. Literally, a shepherd; figuratively, the bishop of a diocese, or the priest of a parish, whose people are, likewise, figuratively called their flock. It is employed in this sense in one of the prayers for the Ember Week, and in the Ordination Services.
PASTORAL STAFF. (SeeCrosier.) It is mentioned in one of the rubrics of King Edward VI.’s First Prayer Book, which is still the law of the Church, according to the present rubric as to the “ornament of the Church,” which prescribes that the bishop shall in his public ministrations, besides his proper vestments, have “his pastoral staff in his hand, or else borne or holden by his chaplain.”
PATEN. The plate on which the sacred bread in the eucharist is laid. The original word signifies a wide open dish. It occurs in our Communion Office, at consecration, “here the priest is to take thepateninto his hands.”
PATRIARCHS. (From the Greekπατριὰ,family, andἄρχων,headorruler.) Patriarchs among Christians are ecclesiastical dignitaries, or bishops, so called from theirpaternal authorityin the Church.
In the ancient Christian Church, patriarchs were next in order to metropolitans or primates. They were originally styled archbishops, and exarchs of a diocese. For the name archbishop was anciently a more extensive title than now, and scarce given to any but those whose jurisdiction extended over a whole imperial diocese, as the bishops of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, &c. After the setting up the patriarchal power, the name archbishop was appropriated to the patriarchs.
The first time we meet with the name patriarch given to any bishop by public authority of the Church, is in the Council of Chalcedon, which mentions the most holypatriarchs, particularly Leo, patriarch of great Rome. Among private authors, the first who mentions patriarchs by name is Socrates, who wrote his history about the year 440, eleven years before the Council of Chalcedon. But though we cannot trace the name any higher, yet the power itself was much earlier. The Romanists carry it up to the time of the apostles. Others fix it to a little before the Council of Nice. Others ascribe its rise to that very council. In a matter so obscure, and so variously controverted among learned men, it is no easy matter to determine where the right lies. But, however it be, the fourth century affords pregnant proofs of the establishment and growth of the patriarchal power.
The power of patriarchs was not one and the same precisely in all churches, but differed according to the different customs of places and countries, or the pleasure of kings or councils. The patriarch of Constantinople grew to be a patriarch over the patriarchs of Ephesus and Cæsarea. And the patriarch of Alexandria had some prerogatives which no other patriarchs besides himself enjoyed. Such was the right of consecrating and approving every single bishop under his jurisdiction.