was greatly abused. Patrons made use of it to enrich their own families
or political partisans; and the cathedral clergy, instead of giving
themselves up to learned labours, dwelt chiefly on their livings, coming
merely for a short time to their cathedrals: as their estates advanced
in value, they expended the income on themselves, instead of increasing
the cathedral libraries, and rendering the choirs more efficient, by
raising the salaries of the choristers, and doubling or trebling their
number: finally, being forgetful of the command of the Church, that, “in
cathedral and collegiate churches and colleges, where there are many
priests and deacons, they shall all receive the communion with the
priest, _every Sunday at the least_,” many deans and chapters have, most
unjustifiably, discontinued the weekly communion. Whether individual
members of chapters consider these observances superstitious or not, it
is on these conditions they enjoy their property; and if they cannot
conscientiously keep the conditions, they ought conscientiously to
resign their places. These things required reform; and forecasting men,
seeing no symptoms of improvement, expected that the arm of the LORD
would be made bare for vengeance; and the LORD made use of the secular
government of England as his instrument of chastisement. The British
legislature, acting on the precedent of Cardinal Wolsey and Henry VIII.,
has seized a large portion of the property belonging to the deans and
chapters, and has reduced the number of canons. May this be a warning to
the deans and chapters as they now exist! May patrons make the cathedral
close the abode of men of learning, and may the members of chapters
sacrifice even their private property to render their cathedral choirs
what they ought to be! May they have strength of mind to sacrifice all
they have in the world, rather than elect as a bishop an unworthy
nominee of the Crown, if, peradventure, the Crown nominate a Sabellian,
or an Arian, or a Socinian heretic. (See _Chapters_, _Canons_, and
_Prebendaries_.)
DECALOGUE. The _ten_ precepts, or _commandments_, delivered by GOD to
Moses, and by him written on two tables of stone, and delivered to the
Hebrews, as the basis and foundation of their religion. The history of
this great event, together with the ten commandments themselves, are
recited at large in the 19th and 20th chapters of the book of Exodus.
The Jews called these commandments, by way of excellence, the _ten
words_, from whence they had afterwards the name of Decalogue. But it is
to be observed, that they joined the first and second into one, and
divided the last into two. They understand that against stealing to
relate to the stealing of men, or kidnapping, alleging, that the
stealing of another’s goods or property is forbidden in the last
commandment.—_De Legib. Hebr._ lib. i. c. 2.
“Most divines,” says the learned Spencer, “seem to have been of opinion,
that GOD gave the Decalogue, to be a general rule of life and manners,
and as it were a summary, to which all other precepts, either of the law
or the gospel, may be reduced. Hence they rack their brains, to fix so
large and extensive a meaning on all these commands, that all duties,
respecting GOD or our neighbour, may be understood to be contained in
them. But no one, who duly considers the matter, can think it probable,
that the Decalogue was therefore given, that it might be a kind of
compendium of all the other laws of the Pentateuch; since those eminent
precepts of the law, ‘Thou shalt love the LORD thy GOD with all thy
heart,’ and ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,’ cannot be found
in the Decalogue, without affixing a meaning to some commands quite
foreign to the natural sense of the words, and subjecting them to an
arbitrary interpretation. To give my opinion in a few words; the chief
scope and intent of the Decalogue was to root out idolatry and its more
immediate effects, and to add force and authority to the other laws
contained in the Pentateuch. For who can persuade himself, that _God_
would have collected together, into the one little system of the
Decalogue, those ten precepts, which have scarce any connexion with each
other, had they not all naturally tended to destroy idolatry and its
primary effects?” The author then proceeds to confirm the truth of this
assertion by a distinct consideration of each precept of the two tables.
It has been a question, and even matter of admiration, why _God_, in
delivering laws to the Hebrews, kept precisely to the number ten. This
question is answered by the above-cited author, (Id. ib. § 2,) who
assigns the following reasons for this proceeding. “First, the number
ten exceeds all others in perfection and capacity: for in it are
comprehended all the diversities of numbers and their analogies, and all
the geometrical figures which have any relation to numbers. Secondly, A
_Decad_ seems to have been in most esteem and use, among all nations,
from the earliest times. Thirdly, As the number ten comprehends in it
all others, so the Decalogue was to be a kind of representative of all
the other laws of Moses, which were too numerous to be distinctly and
separately rehearsed from Mount Sinai. Lastly, The number ten was a
sacred number, and most frequently applied to the things mentioned in
the Law: as will be evident to those, who carefully read over the
institutes of Moses.”
The Samaritans, to raise and maintain the credit of their temple on
Mount Gerizim, forged an _eleventh_ command or precept, which in their
Pentateuch they added at the end of the Decalogue, both in Exodus and
Deuteronomy. It was this: “When the LORD thy GOD shall have brought thee
into the land of Canaan, whither thou goest to possess it, thou shalt
erect to thyself large stones, and shalt write on them all the words of
this Law. And, after thou shalt have passed over Jordan, thou shalt
place those stones, which I command thee this day, on Mount Gerizim, and
shalt build there an altar to the _Lord_ thy GOD, an altar of stone,”
&c.
DECLARATION. (See _Conformity_.)
DECORATED. The style of architecture which succeeded the Geometrical
about 1315, and gave place to the Perpendicular about 1360.
The most obvious characteristic of this style is the window tracery (see
_Tracery_); but all the parts and details have also their appropriate
features. The doorway is no longer divided by a central shaft. The
windows are larger than in the former style, and their mullions have in
general fewer subordinations of mouldings. The corner buttresses are
usually set diagonally instead of in pairs, and the buttresses generally
are of considerable projection, and much enriched with pediments and
niches. The piers consist generally of four shafts with intervening
hollows, set lozengewise; and the detached shaft is wholly discontinued.
The triforium, which had begun to lose its relative importance in the
Geometrical, is in this style generally treated as a mere course of
panelling at the base of the clerestory windows, which are
proportionally enlarged. Arcading begins to be superseded by panelling.
Foliage, and other carving, is treated with less force and nature than
in the preceding style; and heraldry begins to appear. The vaulting (see
_Vaulting_) is more intricate. One or two mouldings and decorations are
almost peculiar to this style, especially the ogee in all its forms and
in every position. The ball-flower and the scroll moulding, it has in
common with the Geometrical, but far more frequently. (See _Moulding_.)
The broach spire is still used, but begins to give way to the parapet
and spire.
DECRETALS. The name given to the letters of popes, being in answer to
questions proposed to them by some bishop or ecclesiastical judge, or
even particular person, in which they determined business, as they
thought fit. In the ninth century there appeared a collection of
decretal letters ascribed to more than thirty popes, succeeding each
other in the first three centuries. The author is unknown, but they are
generally ascribed to a certain Isidore Mercator, and pass usually under
his name. Their uniform tendency is to exalt papal power, and exactly on
those points for which no sanction can be alleged from Scripture, or
from the early periods of any genuine Church history; such as supreme
authority over bishops, the receiving appeals from all parts of the
world, and the reservation of causes for the hearing of the Roman see.
In the words of Fleury, “They inflicted an irreparable wound on the
discipline of the Church, by the new maxims which they introduced in
regard to the judgment of bishops and the authority of the pope.” Dr.
Barrow mentions them among the chief causes by which the power of the
bishop of Rome has been advanced: “The forgery of the decretal epistles
(wherein the ancient popes are made expressly to speak and act according
to some of his highest pretences, devised long after their times, and
which they never thought of, good men) did hugely conduce to his
purpose; authorizing his encroachments by the suffrage of ancient
doctrine and practice.” “Upon these spurious decretals,” (writes the
historian of the middle ages,) “was built the great fabric of papal
supremacy over the different national Churches: a fabric which has stood
after its foundation crumbled beneath it; for no one has pretended to
deny, during the last two centuries, that the imposture is too palpable
for any but the most ignorant ages to credit.” Their effect was, to
diminish the authority of metropolitans and provincial synods, by
allowing to an accused bishop, not only the right of appeal, but the
power also of removing any process into the supreme court at Rome. And
on this account it has been supposed that the decrees were forged by
some bishop who desired to reduce the power of his immediate superior.
But whoever may have been the author, and whatever the origin, there is
no doubt that the popes became, from the first, their most strenuous
defenders.
The best account of these forgeries is to be found in the posthumous
work of Van Espen, Commentarius in Jus Novum Canonicum, part ii. diss.
1, p. 451–475. See also De Marca, De Concord. iii. c. 4, 5, p. 242;
Natalis Alexandri Hist. Eccles. sæc. i. diss. 13, p. 213; Coci Censura
quorundam Scriptorum, &c., passim.—_Sanderson._ _Robins, Evidence of
Scripture against the Roman Church._
DEDICATION, FEAST OF. The _wake_ or customary festival for the
dedication of churches signifies the same as _vigil_ or _eve_. The
reason of the name is thus assigned in an old manuscript: “Ye shall
understand and know how the evens were first founded in old times. In
the beginning of Holy Church it was so, that the people came to the
church with candles burning, and would wake and come with lights towards
night to the church in their devotions: and after, they fell to lechery,
and songs, and dances, harping and piping, and also to gluttony and sin;
and so turned the holiness to cursedness. Wherefore the holy Fathers
ordained the people to leave that waking, and to fast the even. But it
is still called _vigil_, that is, _waking_ in English: and it is also
called the _even_, for at even they were wont to come to church.” It was
in imitation of the primitive ἀγάπαι, or love feasts, (see _Agapæ_,)
that such public assemblies, accompanied with friendly entertainments,
were first held upon each return of the day of consecration, though not
in the body of churches, yet in the churchyards, and most nearly
adjoining places. This practice was established in England by Gregory
the Great; who, in an epistle to Mellitus the abbot, gives injunctions
to be delivered to Augustine the monk, a missionary to England; amongst
which he allows the solemn anniversary of dedication to be celebrated in
those churches which were made out of heathen temples, with religious
feasts kept in sheds or arbours, made up with branches and boughs of
trees round the said church. But as the love feasts held in the place of
worship were soon liable to such great disorders, that they were not
only condemned at Corinth by St. Paul, but prohibited to be kept in the
house of GOD by the 20th canon of the Council of Laodicea, and the 30th
of the third Council of Carthage: so, from a sense of the same
inconveniences, this custom did not long continue of feasting in the
churches or churchyards; but strangers and inhabitants paid the devotion
of prayers and offerings in the church, and then adjourned their eating
and drinking to the more proper place of public and private houses. The
institution of these church encœnia, or wakes, was, without question,
for good and laudable designs: at first, thankfully to commemorate the
bounty and munificence of those who had founded and endowed the church;
next, to incite others to the like generous acts of piety; and, chiefly,
to maintain a Christian spirit of unity and charity, by such sociable
and friendly meetings. And therefore care was taken to keep up the
laudable custom. The laws of Edward the Confessor gave peace and
protection in all parishes during the solemnity of the day of
dedication, and the same privilege to all that were going to or
returning from such solemnity. In a council held at Oxford, in the year
1222, it was ordained, that among other festivals should be observed the
day of dedication of every church within the proper parish. And in a
synod under Archbishop Islip, (who was promoted to the see of Canterbury
in the year 1349,) the dedication feast is mentioned with particular
respect. This solemnity was at first celebrated on the very day of
dedication, as it annually returned. But the bishops sometimes gave
authority for transposing the observance to some other day, and
especially to Sunday, whereon the people could best attend the devotions
and rites intended in this ceremony. Henry VIII. enjoined that all wakes
should be kept the first Sunday in October.
This laudable custom of wakes prevailed for many ages, till the Puritans
began to exclaim against it as a remnant of Popery. By degrees the
humour grew so popular, that at the summer assizes held at Exeter, in
the year 1627, the Lord Chief Baron Walter and Baron Denham made an
order for suppression of all wakes. And a like order was made by Judge
Richardson for the county of Somerset, in the year 1631. But on Bishop
Laud’s complaint of these innovations, the king commanded the last order
to be reversed; which Judge Richardson refusing to do, an account was
required from the Bishop of Bath and Wells, how the said feast days,
church ales, wakes, and revels, were for the most part celebrated and
observed in his diocese. On the receipt of these instructions, the
bishop sent for and advised with seventy-two of the most orthodox and
able of his clergy; who certified under their hands, that, on these
feast days, (which generally fell on Sundays,) the service of GOD was
more solemnly performed, and the church much better frequented, both in
the forenoon and afternoon, than on any other Sunday in the year; that
the people very much desired the continuance of them; that the ministers
did in most places the like, for these reasons, viz. for preserving the
memorial of the dedication of their several churches, for civilizing the
people, for composing differences by the mediation and meeting of
friends, for increase of love and unity by these feasts of charity, and
for relief and comfort of the poor. On the return of this certificate,
Judge Richardson was again cited to the council table, and peremptorily
commanded to reverse his former order. After which it was thought fit to
reinforce the declaration of King James, when perhaps this was the only
good reason assigned for that unnecessary and unhappy licence of sports:
“We do ratify and publish this our blessed father’s decree, the rather
because of late, in some counties of our kingdom, we find, that, under
pretence of taking away abuses, there hath been a general forbidding not
only of ordinary meetings, but of the feasts of the dedication of
churches, commonly called wakes.” However, by such a popular prejudice
against wakes, and by the intermission of them in the confusions that
followed, they are now discontinued in many counties, especially in the
east and some western parts of England, but are commonly observed in the
north and in the midland counties.
DEFENDER OF THE FAITH. (_Fidei Defensor._) A peculiar title belonging to
the sovereign of England; as _Catholic_ to the king of Spain, and _Most
Christian_ to the king of France. These titles were given by the popes
of Rome. That of _Fidei Defensor_ was first conferred by Pope Leo X. on
King Henry VIII., for writing against Martin Luther; and the bull for it
bears date _quinto idus Octobris, 1521_. It was afterwards confirmed by
Clement VII. On Henry’s suppression of the monasteries, the pope of Rome
deprived him of this title, and had the presumption and absurdity to
depose him from his crown. Therefore the title was conferred by a higher
authority than the pope, the parliament of England, in the thirty-fifth
year of Henry’s reign. By some antiquarians it is maintained that the
bull of Leo only revived a title long sustained by the English kings.
DEGRADATION is an ecclesiastical censure, whereby a clergyman is
deprived of the holy orders which formerly he had, as of a priest or
deacon; and by the canon law this may be done two ways, either summarily
or by word only, or solemnly, as by divesting the party degraded of
those ornaments and rights which were the ensigns and order of his
degree.
Collier thus describes the form of degradation of a priest, in the case
of Fawke, burnt for heresy in the reign of Henry IV. After being
pronounced a heretic relapsed, he was solemnly degraded in the following
manner:
From the order of │ To be taken from him,
──────────────────────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────
1 Priest. │1 The paten, chalice, and pulling
│ off his chasuble.
2 Deacon. │2 The New Testament and the stole.
3 Sub-deacon. │3 The albe and the maniple.
4 Acolyth. │4 The candlestick, taper,
│ urceolum.
5 Exorcist. │5 The office for exorcisms.
6 Reader. │6 The lectionarium, or legend
│ book.
7 Ostiarius, or Sexton. │7 The keys of the church-doors,
│ and surplice.
After this, his ecclesiastical tonsure was obliterated, and the form of
his degradation pronounced by the archbishop; and being thus deprived of
his sacerdotal character, and dressed in a lay habit, he was put into
the hands of the secular court, with the significant request, that he
might be favourably received.
The ancient law for degradation is set forth in the sixth book of the
Decretals; and the causes for degradation and deprivation are enumerated
by Bishop Gibson.—See _Gibson’s Codex_, p. 1066–1068.
By Canon 122, Sentence against a minister, of deposition from the
ministry, “shall be pronounced by the bishop only, with the assistance
of his chancellor and the dean, (if they may conveniently be had,) and
some of the prebendaries, if the court be kept near the cathedral
church; or of the archdeacon, if he may be had conveniently, and two
other at the least grave ministers and preachers to be called by the
bishop, when the court is kept in other places.”
DEGREE. _Psalms or Songs of Degrees_ is a title given to fifteen psalms,
which are the 120th and all that follow to the 134th inclusive. The
Hebrew text calls them a _song of ascents_. Junius and Tremellius
translate the Hebrew, by _a song of excellencies_, or _an excellent
song_, because of the excellent matter of them, as eminent persons are
called _men of high degree_. (1 Chr. xvii. 17.) Some call them _psalms
of elevation_, because, say they, they were sung with an exalted voice;
or because at every psalm the voice was raised: but the translation of
_psalms of degrees_ has more generally obtained. Some interpreters
think, that they were so called because they were sung upon the fifteen
steps of the temple; but they are not agreed about the place where these
fifteen steps were. Others think they were so called, because they were
sung in a gallery, which they say was in the court of Israel, where
sometimes the Levites read the law. But others think, that the most
probable reason why they are called songs of degrees, or of ascent, is,
because they were composed and sung by the Jews on the occasion of their
_going up_ to Jerusalem, after the deliverance from the captivity of
Babylon, whether it were to implore this deliverance from GOD, or to
return thanks for it after it had happened: others, that they were
severally composed not only upon this, but upon other remarkable
occasions when they made their ascent to the temple.
DEGREES in the universities denote a quality conferred on the students
or members thereof, as a testimony of their proficiency in the arts and
sciences, and entitling them to certain privileges. They were first
instituted by Pope Eugenius III. at the suggestion of Gratian, the
celebrated compiler of the canon law, in 1151; but were limited to the
faculty of canon law, for the encouragement of which they were
instituted; and consisted of the ranks of bachelor, licentiate, and
doctor. Shortly after Peter Lombard instituted similar degrees in
theology in the university of Paris. In the course of time degrees were
given in other faculties, those of arts and medicine being added. In
many of the foreign universities, theology and canon law have each their
three classes of degrees as above stated; medicine has generally but
two, bachelor and doctor; and arts two, bachelor and master. The
designation of doctor in philosophy is very modern. The English
universities have only two degrees, bachelor and doctor in the superior
faculties; master and bachelor in arts. The student of civil law is not,
properly speaking, a graduate. Formerly separate degrees were given in
England (as abroad) in canon and civil law; but the distinction ceased
in the 17th century. Oxford has for some time ceased to confer degrees
in _utroque jure_, (i. e. civil and canon law,) but only in civil law.
Hence her graduates are D. C. L. and B. C. L., and not L. L. D. and L.
L. B., as at Cambridge and Dublin. The three ancient universities of
England and Ireland confer degrees in music. Anciently degrees in
grammar, doctorate, mastership, and baccalaurenti were given at Oxford
or Cambridge. But they fell into disuse in the 17th century.
DEISTS. Those who deny the _existence and necessity_ of any revelation,
and profess to acknowledge that the being of a GOD is the chief article
of their belief. The term Deist is derived from the Latin word _Deus_,
GOD. The same persons are frequently called infidels, on account of
their incredulity, or want of belief in the Christian dispensation of
religion.—Consult _Boyle’s Lectures_, _Leland’s View of Deistical
Writers_, _Leslie’s Short and Easy Method with the Deists_, _Watson’s
Apology for the Bible_.
Dr. Clarke, (_Evidences of Nat. and Rev. Rel._ Introd.,) taking the
denomination in its most extensive signification, distinguishes deists
into four sorts. The first are, such as pretend to believe the existence
of an eternal, infinite, independent, intelligent Being; and who, to
avoid the name of Epicurean Atheists, teach also, that this Supreme
Being made the world; though, at the same time, they agree with the
Epicureans in this, that they fancy, GOD does not at all concern himself
in the government of the world, nor has any regard to, or care of, what
is done therein.
The second sort of deists are those, who believe, not only the being,
but also the providence of GOD, with respect to the natural world; but
who, not allowing any difference between moral good and evil, deny that
GOD takes any notice of the morally good or evil actions of men; these
things depending, as they imagine, on the arbitrary constitution of
human laws.
A third sort of deists there are, who, having right apprehensions
concerning the natural attributes of GOD, and his all-governing
providence, and some notion of his moral perfections also; yet, being
prejudiced against the notion of the immortality of the human soul,
believe, that men perish entirely at death, and that one generation
shall perpetually succeed another, without any future restoration or
renovation of things.
A fourth, and the last sort of deists, are such, as believe the
existence of a Supreme Being, together with his providence in the
government of the world, as also all the obligations of natural
religion; but so far only as these things are discoverable by the light
of nature alone, without believing any Divine revelation.
These, Dr. Clarke observes, are the only true deists: but, as the
principles of these men would naturally lead them to embrace the
Christian revelation, he concludes, there is now no consistent scheme of
deism in the world. “The heathen philosophers, those few of them, who
taught and lived up to the obligations of natural religion, had indeed a
consistent scheme of deism so far as it went. But the case is not so
now. The same scheme is not any longer consistent with its own
principles, if it does not now lead men to believe and embrace
revelation, as it then taught them to hope for it. Deists, in our days,
who reject revelation when offered to them, are not such men as Socrates
and Cicero were; but, under pretence of deism, it is plain, they are
generally ridiculers of all that is truly excellent in natural religion
itself. Their trivial and vain cavils; their mocking and ridiculing,
without and before examination; their directing the whole stress of
their objections against particular customs, or particular and perhaps
uncertain opinions, or explications of opinions, without at all
considering the main body of religion; their loose, vain, and frothy
discourses; and, above all, their vicious and immoral lives; show
plainly and undeniably, that they are not really deists, but mere
atheists; and consequently not capable to judge of the truth of
Christianity.”
“We are fallen into an age, (says another learned author, _Jenkyns,
Reasonableness of Christ. Relig._ in the Preface,) in which there are a
sort of men, who have shown so great a forwardness to be no longer
Christians, that have catched at all the little cavils and pretences
against religion—but they both think and live so ill, that it is an
argument for the goodness of any cause that they are against it. It was
urged as a confirmation of the Christian religion by Tertullian, that it
was hated and persecuted by Nero, the worst of men: and I am confident,
it would be but small reputation to it in any age, if such men should be
fond of it. They speak evil of the things they understand not, and are
wont to talk with as much confidence against any point of religion, as
if they had all the learning in the world in their keeping, when
commonly they know little or nothing of what has been said for that
against which they dispute.”
Prateolus (_Elench. Hæres._) mentions a sect of deists (as they were
called) which sprung up in Poland, in the year 1564. They were a branch
of the Lutherans, and, coming into France in 1566, settled at Lyons.
Their leader (he tells us) was one Gregorius Pauli, a minister of
Cracow. They boasted, that GOD had bestowed on them much greater gifts
than on Luther and others, and that the destruction of Antichrist was
reserved for them. They asserted, that there is one nature, or Deity,
common to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, but not one and the same
essence; and that the Father alone is the one only true GOD.
These deists (as Prateolus calls them) ought rather to be denominated
Arians.
DELEGATES. The court of delegates was so called, because these delegates
sat by force of the king’s commission under the great seal, upon an
appeal to the king in the court of Chancery, in three causes: 1. When a
sentence was given in any ecclesiastical cause by the archbishop or his
official: 2. When any sentence was given in any ecclesiastical cause in
places exempt: 3. When a sentence was given in the admiral’s court, in
suit civil and marine, by the order of the civil laws. And these
commissioners were called delegates, because they were delegated by the
king’s commission for these purposes.
For the origin of the high court of delegates, see 24 Hen. VIII. c. 12,
and 25 Hen. VIII. c. 19, §4. By the 2 & 3 Wm. IV. c. 92, the powers of
the high court of delegates, both in ecclesiastical and maritime causes,
are transferred to her Majesty in council; which transfer is further
regulated by the 3 & 4 Wm. IV. c. 41, and by 7 & 8 Vict. c. 69. This act
does not extend to Ireland.
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, consists of
The Lord President. │
The Lord Chancellor. │
─────────────────────────────────────────────────┼─────────────────────
The Lord Keeper of the Great Seal. │Provided they be
│ councillors.
The Chief Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench. │ „
The Master of the Rolls. │ „
The Vice-chancellor. │ „
The Chief Justice of the Court ofCommon Pleas. │ „
The Chief Baron of the Exchequer. │ „
The Judge of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury.│ „
The Judge of the Admiralty Court. │ „
The Chief Judge of the Bankruptcy Court. │ „
All who have held the aforenamed offices. │ „
─────────────────────────────────────────────────┴─────────────────────
Two privy-councillors appointed by
the sign-manual. │
No matter is to be heard unless in the presence of at least four members
of the committee; and no report or recommendation made to the Crown,
unless a majority of the members present at the hearing shall concur in
such report or recommendation.
DEMIURGE. (From δημιουργὸς, an artificer.) The name given by some
Gnostic sects to the Creator of the world, who, according to them, was
different from the supreme GOD. (See _Gnostics_.)
DEMONIACS. Persons possessed of the devil. That the persons spoken of in
the New Testament as possessed of the devil, were not simply lunatics,
is clear from a mere perusal of the facts recorded. The devils owned
CHRIST to be the Messiah; they besought him not to torment them; they
passed into the swine and drove them into the sea. The manner in which
our LORD addressed the demoniacs clearly shows that they were really
such: he not only rebuked the devils, but called them unclean spirits,
asking them questions, commanding them to come out, &c. We find also
that, for some time, in the early ages of the Church, demoniacs existed,
as there was a peculiar service appointed in the Church for their cure.
(See _Energumens_.)
DENARII DE CARITATE. (_Lat._) Customary oblations, anciently made to
cathedral churches, about the time of Pentecost, when the parish
priests, and many of their parishioners, went in procession to visit
their mother-church. This custom was afterwards changed into a settled
due, and usually charged upon the parish priest, though at first it was
but a gift of _charity_, or present, towards the support and ornament of
the bishop’s see.
DENOMINATIONS, THE THREE. The general body of dissenting ministers of
London and Westminster form an association so styled, which was
organized in 1727. The object of the association appears to be
political. The Three Denominations are, the Presbyterian, (now
Socinian,) Independent, and Baptist.
DEO GRATIAS. (_Lat._) _God be thanked_. A form of salutation, anciently
used by Christians, when they accosted each other. The Donatists
ridiculed the use of it; which St. Augustine defended, affirming, that a
Christian had reason to return God thanks when he met a brother
Christian. It is at present used only in the sacred offices of the
Romish Church. We have something like it in the _Communion Service_ of
our own Church, in which the minister says, _Let us give thanks unto our
Lord God_.
DEPOSITION. (See _Degradation_.)
DEPRECATIONS. (See _Litany_.)
DEPRIVATION is an ecclesiastical sentence, whereby a clergyman is
deprived of his parsonage, vicarage, or other spiritual promotion or
dignity.
By Canon 122. Sentence against a minister, of deprivation from his
living, “shall be pronounced by the bishop only with the assistance of
his chancellor and the dean, (if they may conveniently be had,) and some
of the prebendaries, if the court be kept near the cathedral church; or
of the archdeacon, if he may be had conveniently, and two other at the
least grave ministers and preachers to be called by the bishop, when the
court is kept in other places.”
The causes of deprivation may be reduced to three heads, viz. to want of
capacity, contempt, and crimes. Nonconformity is thus specially punished
by 1 Eliz. c. 2, 13 Eliz. c. 12, 14 Car. II. c. 4. Dilapidation used to
be held a good cause of deprivation, yet that it has ever been inflicted
as a punishment of dilapidation does not appear, either by the books of
common or canon law. In all causes of deprivation, where a person is in
actual possession of an ecclesiastical benefice, these things must
concur: 1st, A monition or citation of the party to appear: 2nd, A
charge given against him by way of libel or articles, to which he is to
give an answer: 3rd, A competent time must be assigned, for proofs and
interrogatories: 4th, The person accused shall have the liberty of
counsel to defend his cause, to except against witnesses, and to bring
legal proofs against them: and 5th, There must be a solemn sentence,
read by the bishop, after hearing the merits of the cause, or pleadings
on both sides. These are the fundamentals of all judicial proceedings in
the ecclesiastical courts, in order to a deprivation. And if these
things be not observed, the party has a just cause of appeal, and may
have a remedy in a superior court.
By 1 & 2 Vict. c. 106, s. 31, spiritual persons trading contrary to the
provisions of that act, may be, for the third offence, deprived.
DESK. This is the name usually given to the pulpit or pew in which
morning and evening prayers are sung or said in the English churches.
The using of this pulpit for prayer is peculiar to the English Church,
and has a very unpleasant effect. The First Prayer Book of Edward VI.
ordered “the priest, _being in the choir_, to begin the LORD’S Prayer,
called Pater Noster, (with which the morning and evening services then
began,) with a loud voice:” so that it was at that time the custom for
the minister to sing or say the morning and evening prayer, not in a
desk or pulpit, but at the upper end of the choir or chancel, near the
altar, towards which, whether standing or kneeling, he always turned his
face in the prayers. This gave great offence, however, though it had
been the custom of the Church of England for many hundred years, to some
superstitious weaker brethren, who so far forgot their charity as to
call it anti-Christian. The outcry, however frivolous and vexatious,
prevailed so far, that when, in the fifth year of King Edward, the
Prayer Book was altered, the following rubric appeared instead of the
old one, viz. “The morning and evening prayers shall be used in such
places of the church, chapel, or chancel, and the minister shall so turn
him, as the people best may hear. And if there be any controversy
therein, the matter shall be referred to the ordinary, and he or his
deputy shall appoint the place.” This caused great contentions—the more
orthodox kneeling in the old way, and singing or saying the prayers in
the chancel, and the innovators, or _ultra_-Protestants, adopting _new_
forms, and performing all the services in the body of the church. In the
reign of Elizabeth, the rubric was brought to its present form: “that
the morning and evening prayers shall be used in the accustomed place in
the church, chapel, or chancel,” by which was clearly meant the choir or
chancel, which had been for centuries the accustomed place; and it
cannot be supposed that the Second Book of Edward, which lasted only one
year and a half, could establish a custom. A dispensing power, however,
was left with the ordinary, who might determine it otherwise, if he saw
just cause. Pursuant to this rubric, the morning and evening services
were again, as formerly, sung or said in the chancel or choir. But in
some churches, owing to the too great distance of the chancel from the
body of the church, in others owing to the ultra-Protestant superstition
of the parishioners, the ordinaries permitted the clergy to leave the
chancel, and read prayers from a pew in the body of the church. This
innovation and novelty, begun first by some few ordinaries, and
recommended by them to others, grew by degrees to be more general, till
at last it came to be the universal practice; insomuch that the
convocation, in the beginning of King James the First’s reign, ordered
that in every church there should be a convenient seat made for the
minister to read service in. In new churches, where there can be no
complaint of the size of the chancels, there seems to be no reason why
the ordinaries should not now remove the desk, and send the clergy back
to their proper place, to sing or say the prayers in the chancel. At all
events, they might get rid of that unsightly nuisance, a second pulpit
instead of a reading pew. If the prayers are to be preached to the
people, as well as the sermon, one pulpit might suffice. It is
gratifying to know, that since the article was written in the first
edition of this work, this disfigurement of our churches has been very
generally removed. It is to be observed, that the word does not once
occur in the Prayer Book.
DEUS MISEREATUR. The Latin name for Psalm lxvii., which may be used
after the second lesson at evening prayers, instead of the _Nunc
Dimittis_, except on the twelfth day of the month, when it occurs among
the psalms of the day. It was first inserted in our service in the
Second Book of King Edward VI.
DEUTERONOMY. A canonical book of the Old Testament. The word implies a
_second law_, the principal design of it being, _a repetition_ of the
laws already delivered; which was a necessary thing, inasmuch as the
Israelites, who had heard it before, were dead in the wilderness, and
there was sprung up another generation of men, who had not heard the
Decalogue, or any other of the laws openly proclaimed. It contains
likewise some new laws; such as the taking down malefactors from the
tree in the evening; the making of battlements on the roofs of houses;
the expiation of an unknown murder; the punishment to be inflicted upon
a rebellious son; the distinction of the sexes by apparel; the marrying
a brother’s wife after his decease: as also, orders and injunctions
concerning divorce; laws concerning men-stealers; concerning unjust
weights and measures; concerning the marrying of a captive woman;
concerning servants that desert their master’s service; and several
other laws, not only ecclesiastical and civil, but also military. There
are inserted likewise some transactions, which happened in the last year
of the travels of the Israelites through the wilderness.
Deuteronomy is the last book of the Pentateuch, or five books of Moses;
though some have questioned whether it was written by that legislator,
because, in the last chapter, mention is made of his death and burial,
and of the succession of Joshua after him. But this only proves that the
last chapter was not written by Moses, but added by some other person;
most probably by Ezra, when he published an edition of the Holy
Scriptures. (See _Pentateuch_.)
DEVIL. From Διάβολος, which signifies an accuser, or calumniator. The
two words, Devil and Satan, are used in Scripture to signify the same
wicked spirit, who with many others, his angels or under-agents, is
fighting against GOD; and who has dominion over all the sons of Adam,
except the regenerate; and who is, in his kingdom of this world, the
nearest imaginable approximation, at infinite distance indeed, to the
omnipotence of the GODHEAD.
DIACONATE. The office or order of a deacon. (See _Deacon_.)
DIACONICUM. (_Gr._ and _Lat._) This word has different significations in
ecclesiastical authors. Sometimes it is taken for that part of the
ancient _church_ in which the deacons used to sit during the performance
of Divine service, namely, at the rails of the altar; sometimes for a
building adjoining to the church, in which the sacred vessels and habits
were laid up; sometimes for that part of the public prayers which the
deacons pronounced. Lastly, it denotes an ecclesiastical book, in which
are contained all things relating to the duty and office of a deacon,
according to the rites of the Greek Church.
DIAPER. In church architecture, a decoration of large surfaces with a
constantly recurring pattern, either carved or painted. Norman diapers
are usually either fretted or zigzag lines, or imbrications of the
masonry; and not only plain surfaces, but pillars, and small shafts, and
even mouldings, are diapered, as the cable moulding surrounding the nave
at Rochester. In the succeeding styles, flowers and leaves are the most
frequent patterns, which, in the Geometrical style, are often of extreme
beauty and delicacy. After the fourteenth century, diapers are painted
only, and now even the hollows of mouldings are thus treated.
DIET. The assembly of the states of Germany. We shall only notice the
more remarkable of those which have been held on the affairs of
religion.
The Diet of Worms, in 1521, where Alexander, the pope’s nuncio, having
charged Luther with heresy, the Duke of Saxony said, that Luther ought
to be heard; which the emperor granted, and sent him a pass, provided he
did not preach on this journey. Being come to Worms, he protested that
he would not recant unless they would show him his errors by the word of
GOD alone, and not by that of men; wherefore the emperor soon after
outlawed him by an edict.
The first Diet of Nuremberg was held in 1523, when Francis Cheregat,
Adrian VI.’s nuncio, demanded the execution of Leo X.’s bull, and of
Charles V.’s edict, published at Worms, against Luther: but it was
answered, that it was necessary to call a council in Germany, to satisfy
the nation about its grievances, which were reduced to a hundred
articles, some whereof struck at the pope’s authority, and the
discipline of the Roman Church: they added that, in the interim, the
Lutherans should be commanded not to write against the Roman Catholics,
&c. All these things were brought into the form of an edict, and
published in the emperor’s name.
The second Diet of Nuremberg was in 1524. Cardinal Cangegio, Pope
Clement VII.’s legate, entered the town incognito, for fear of
exasperating the people there: the Lutherans having the advantage, it
was decreed that, with the emperor’s consent, the pope should call a
council in Germany; but, in the interim, an assembly should be held at
Spire, to determine what was to be believed and practised; and that to
obey the emperor, the princes ought to order the observance of the edict
of Worms as strictly as they could. Charles, angry at this, commanded
that edict to be very strictly observed, and prohibited the assembly at
Spire.
The first Diet of Spire was held in 1526. The emperor Charles V. being
then held in Spain, named his brother, Archduke Ferdinand, to preside
over that assembly, where the Duke of Saxony and Landgrave of Hesse
demanded a full and free exercise of the Lutheran religion, so that the
Lutherans preached there publicly against Popery; and the Lutheran
princes’ servants had these five capital letters, V.D. M.I.Æ.,
embroidered on their sleeves, signifying, _Verbum Dei manet in Æternum_,
to show publicly they would follow nothing else but the pure word of
GOD. The archduke, not daring to oppose this, proposed two things, the
first concerning the Popish religion, which was to be maintained in
observing the edict of Worms; and the second concerning the aid demanded
by Lewis, king of Hungary, against the Turks: the Lutherans prevailing
about the first, it was decreed, that the emperor should be desired to
call a general or national council in Germany within a year, and that in
the mean time every one was to have liberty of conscience, and whilst
they were deliberating in vain about the second, King Lewis was defeated
and slain at the battle of Mohatz.
The second Diet of Spire was held in 1529. It was decreed against the
Lutherans, that wherever the edict of Worms was received, it shall be
lawful for nobody to change his opinion; but in the countries where the
new religion (as they termed it) was received, it should be lawful to
continue in it till the next council, if the old religion could not be
reestablished there without sedition. Nevertheless the mass was not to
be abolished there, and no Roman Catholic was allowed to turn Lutheran;
that the Sacramentarians should be banished out of the empire, and the
Anabaptists put to death; and that preachers should nowhere preach
against the doctrine of the Church of Rome. This decree destroying that
of the first Diet, six Lutheran princes, viz. the Elector of Saxony, the
Marquis of Brandenburg, the two Dukes of Lunenburg, the Landgrave of
Hesse, and the Prince of Anhalt, with the deputies of fourteen imperial
towns, protested in writing, two days after, in the assembly, against
that decree, which they would not obey, it being contrary to the gospel;
and appealed to the general or national council, to the emperor, and to
any other unprejudiced judge. From this solemn protestation came that
famous name of _Protestants_, which the Lutherans took presently, and
the Calvinists and other reformed Christians afterwards. They also
protested against contributing anything towards the war against the
Turks, till after the exercise of their religion was free in all
Germany. Next year the emperor held the famous Diet of Augsburg.
The first Diet of Augsburg was called in the year 1530, by the emperor
Charles V., to reunite the princes about some matters of religion, and
to join them all together against the Turks. Here the Elector of Saxony,
followed by many princes, presented the confession of faith called the
Confession of Augsburg. The conference about matters of faith and
discipline being concluded, the emperor ended the Diet by a decree, that
nothing should be altered in the doctrine and ceremonies of the Church
of Rome till a council should order it otherwise.
The second Diet of Augsburg was held in 1547. The electors being divided
concerning the decisions of the Council of Trent, the emperor demanded
that the management of this affair should be left to him, and it was
resolved, that every one should conform to the council’s decisions.
The third Diet of Augsburg was held in 1548, when, the commissioners
named to examine some memoirs about a confession of faith, not agreeing
together, the emperor named three divines, who drew the design of that
famous _Interim_ so well known in Germany and elsewhere.
The fourth Diet of Augsburg was held in 1550, when the emperor
complained that the Interim was not observed, and demanded that all
should submit to the council, which they were going to renew at Trent;
but Duke Maurice, one of Saxony’s deputies, protested that their master
did submit to the council on this condition, that the divines of the
Confession of Augsburg not only should be heard there, but should vote
also like the Roman Catholic bishops, and that the pope should not
preside: but, by plurality of votes, submission to the council was
resolved on.
The first Diet of Ratisbon was held in 1541, for uniting the Protestants
to the Church of Rome. The pope’s legate having altered the twenty-two
articles drawn up by the Protestant divines, the emperor proposed to
choose some learned divines that might agree peaceably upon the
articles, and being desired by the Diet to choose them himself, he named
three Papists, viz. Julius Phlugus, John Gropperus, and John Eckius; and
three Protestants, viz. Philip Melancthon, Martin Bucer, and John
Pistorius. After an examination and dispute of a whole month, those
divines could never agree upon more than five or six articles, wherein
the Diet still found some difficulties; wherefore the emperor, to end
these controversies, ordered by an edict, that the decision of those
doctors should be reserved to a general council, or to the national
council of all Germany, or to the next Diet eighteen months after; and
that, in the mean while, the Protestants should keep the articles agreed
on, forbidding them to solicit anybody to change the old religion, (as
they called it,) &c. But to gratify the Protestants in some measure, he
gave them leave, by patent, to retain their religion, notwithstanding
the edict.
The second Diet at Ratisbon was held in 1546: none of the Protestant
confederate princes appeared; so that it was easily decreed here, by
plurality of votes, that the Council of Trent was to be followed, which
yet the Protestant deputies opposed, and this caused a war against them.
The third Diet of Ratisbon was held in 1557: the assembly demanded a
conference between some famous doctors of both parties; which
conference, held at Worms, between twelve Lutheran and as many Popish
divines, was soon dissolved by the Lutherans’ division among
themselves.—_Broughton._
DIGNITARY. One who holds cathedral or other preferment to which
jurisdiction is annexed.
The dignitaries in British cathedrals are, for the most part, the dean,
precentor, chancellor, treasurer, and archdeacon. Sometimes the
_subdean_ and _succentor canonicorum_ are so called; and in a few
churches in Ireland, the _provost_, and _sacrist_ (or treasurer). The
only dignitary in cathedrals of the new foundation is the _dean_; as the
archdeacon is not necessarily a member of such chapters. It is a vulgar
error to style prebendaries, or canons residentiary, dignitaries. The
prebendaries without dignity were styled _canonici_ (or _prebendarii_)
_simplices_.—_Jebb._
DILAPIDATION is the incumbent suffering the chancel, or any other
edifices, of his ecclesiastical living, to go to ruin or decay, by
neglecting to repair the same; and it likewise extends to his
committing, or suffering to be committed, any wilful waste in or upon
the glebe, woods, or any other inheritance of the church. By the
injunctions of King Edward VI. it is required, “that the proprietors,
parsons, vicars, and clerks, having churches, chapels, or mansions,
shall yearly bestow on the said mansions or chancels of their churches,
being in decay, the fifth part of their benefices, till they be fully
repaired; and the same being thus repaired, they shall always keep and
maintain them in good estate.”—See _Art. XIII. of Queen Elizabeth’s
Injunctions_.
By the constitutions of Othobon it is ordained, that “all clerks shall
take care decently to repair the houses of their benefices and other
buildings, as need shall require, whereunto they shall be earnestly
admonished by their bishops or archdeacons; and if any of them, after
the monition of the bishops or archdeacons, shall neglect to do the same
for the space of two months, the bishop shall cause the same effectually
to be done, at the cost and charges of such clerk, out of the profits of
his church and benefice, by the authority of this present statute,
causing so much thereof to be received as shall be sufficient for such
reparation: the chancels also of the church they shall cause to be
repaired by those who are bound thereunto according as is above
expressed; also we do enjoin, by attestation of the Divine judgment, the
archbishops and bishops, and other inferior prelates, that they do keep
in repair their houses and other edifices, by causing such reparation to
be made as they know to be needful.”—See 13 Eliz. c. 10; 17 Geo. III. c.
53; 21 Geo. III. c. 66; _Gibson’s Codex_, pp. 751–754, and _Hodgson’s
Instructions to the Clergy_.
DIMISSORY LETTERS. In the ancient Christian Church, they were letters
granted to the clergy, when they were to remove from their own diocese
and settle in another, to testify, that they had the bishop’s leave to
_depart_; whence they were called _Dimissoriæ_, and sometimes
_Pacificæ_.
In the Church of England, _dimissory letters_ are such as are used when
a candidate for holy orders has a title in one diocese, and is to be
ordained in another; in which case the proper diocesan sends his
letters, directed to the ordaining bishop, giving leave that the bearer
may be ordained by him.
Persons inferior to bishops cannot grant these letters, unless the
bishop shall, by special commission, grant this power to his
vicar-general; or unless the bishop be at a great distance from his
diocese, in which case his vicar-general in spirituals may grant such
licence as the chapter of a cathedral may do _sede vacante_; or, lastly,
when a bishop is taken prisoner by the enemy, for then the chapter
exercises the same rights and powers as if the bishop were naturally
dead.
DIOCESE. The circuit of a bishop’s jurisdiction. The ecclesiastical
division in England is, primarily, into two provinces, those of
Canterbury and York. In Ireland into two, Armagh and Dublin; till
lately, however, into four, Cashel and Tuam, besides the two now
mentioned. A province is a circuit of an archbishop’s jurisdiction. Each
province contains divers dioceses, or sees of suffragan bishops; whereof
Canterbury includes twenty, and York five. Armagh and Dublin, five each;
though till lately Armagh had seven, Dublin three, Cashel five, and Tuam
three. Though, properly speaking, the Irish dioceses are far more
numerous, as most of the bishops have more than one see under their
jurisdiction; which nevertheless, though thus united as to episcopal
government, have their separate chapters, ecclesiastical officers, &c.
Every diocese in England is divided into archdeaconries, and each
archdeaconry into rural deaneries, and every deanery into parishes. In
Ireland, there is but one archdeaconry to each diocese, though in two
instances, those of Glendaloch and Aghadoe, these dioceses have been so
long united to the adjacent sees, that their boundaries are now unknown,
and consequently the diocese of Dublin and Ardfert have apparently,
though not really, two archdeacons each. The division into rural
deaneries and parishes is as in England.
The division of the Church into dioceses may be viewed as a natural
consequence of the institution of the office of bishops. The authority
to exercise jurisdiction, when committed to several hands, requires that
some boundaries be defined within which each party may employ his
powers; otherwise disorder and confusion would ensue, and the Church,
instead of being benefited by the appointment of governors, might be
exposed to the double calamity of an overplus of them in one district,
and a total deficiency of them in another. Hence we find, so early as
the New Testament history, some plain indications of the rise of the
diocesan system, in the cases respectively of James, bishop of
Jerusalem; Timothy, bishop of Ephesus; Titus, of Crete, to whom may be
added the “angels” or bishops of the seven churches in Asia. These were
placed in cities, and had jurisdiction over the churches and inferior
clergy in those cities, and probably in the country adjacent. The first
dioceses were formed by planting a bishop in a city or considerable
village, where he officiated regularly, and took the spiritual charge,
not only of the city itself, but of the suburbs, or region lying round
about it, within the verge of its [civil] jurisdiction; which seems to
be the plain reason of that great and visible difference which we find
in the extent of dioceses, some being very large, others very small,
according as the civil government of each city happened to have a larger
or lesser jurisdiction.
Thus, in our own Church, there were at first only seven bishoprics, and
these were commensurate with the Saxon kingdoms. Since that time our
Church has thought fit to lessen the size of her dioceses, and to
multiply them into above twenty; and if she thought fit to add forty or
a hundred more, she would not be without precedent in the primitive
Church. It is a great misfortune to the Church of England that her
dioceses, compared with the population, are so extensive and so few. It
is impossible for our bishops to perform all their canonical duties,
such as visiting _annually every parish_ in the diocese, inspecting
schools, Divine service, instruction, &c., besides baptizing,
confirming, consecrating. Episcopal extension, as well as Church
extension, is most important. We must seek to add to the number of our
bishops. There will be prejudices and difficulties for some time to be
overcome on the part of the State, which is not sufficiently religious
to tolerate an increase in the number of spiritual peers. An addition to
the number of our spiritual peers is however not what we seek, but that
our spiritual pastors may be more numerous.
The ancient bishoprics being baronies, the possessors of them might sit
in parliament; while the new bishoprics, not having baronies attached,
might only qualify for a seat in the upper house of convocation. The
beginning of a new system was made on the erection of the see of
Manchester, in 1847, since which time the junior bishop has no seat in
the House of Lords.
DIOCESAN. A bishop, as he stands related to his diocese. (See _Bishop_.)
DIPPERS. (See _Dunkers_.)
DIPTYCH. A kind of sacred book, or register, made use of in the ancient
Christian Church, and in which were written the names of such eminent
bishops, saints, and martyrs, as were particularly to be commemorated,
just before oblation was made for the dead. It was called _diptych_
(δίπτυχος) from its being _folded together_; and it was the deacon’s
office to recite the names written in it, as occasion required. Some
distinguish three sorts of diptychs: one, wherein the names of bishops
only were written, such especially as had been governors of that
particular church; a second, in which the names of the living were
written, such in particular as were eminent for any office or dignity,
or some benefaction and good work, in which rank were bishops, emperors,
and magistrates; lastly, a third, containing the names of such as were
deceased in catholic communion.
Theodoret mentions these kind of registers in relation to the case of
St. Chrysostom, whose name, for some time, was left out of the diptychs,
because he died under the sentence of excommunication, pronounced
against him by Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, and other Eastern
bishops, with whom the Western Church would not communicate until they
had replaced his name in the diptychs; for, to erase a person’s name out
of these books was the same thing as declaring him to have been an
heretic, or some way deviating from the faith.—_Bingham._
DIRECTORY. A kind of regulation for the performance of religious
worship, drawn up by the Assembly of Divines in England, at the instance
of the parliament, in the year 1644. It was designed to supply the place
of the Liturgy, or Book of _Common Prayer_, the use of which the
parliament had abolished. It consisted only of some general heads, which
were to be managed and filled up at discretion; for it prescribed no
form of prayer or circumstances of external worship, nor obliged the
people to any responses, excepting _Amen_. The use of the _Directory_
was enforced by an ordinance of the Lords and Commons at Westminster,
which was repeated August 3rd, 1645. By this injunction, the Directory
was ordered to be dispersed and published in all parishes, chapelries,
donatives, &c. In opposition to this injunction, King Charles issued a
proclamation at Oxford, November 13th, 1645, enjoining the use of the
Common Prayer according to law, notwithstanding the pretended ordinances
for the new Directory.
To give a short abstract of the Directory: It forbids all salutations
and civil ceremony in the churches. The reading the Scripture in the
congregation is declared to be part of the pastoral office. All the
canonical books of the Old and New Testament (but none of the
_Apocrypha_) are to be publicly read in the vulgar tongue. How large a
portion is to be read at once is left to the minister, who has likewise
the liberty of _expounding_, when he judges it necessary. It prescribes
heads for the prayer before sermon; among which part of the prayer for
the king is, _to save him from evil counsel_. It delivers rules for
managing the _sermon_; the introduction to the text must be short and
clear, drawn from the words or context, or some parallel place of
Scripture; in dividing the text, the minister is to regard the order of
the matter more than that of the words; he is not to burden the memory
of his audience with too many divisions, nor perplex their
understandings with logical phrases and terms of art; he is not to start
unnecessary objections; and he is to be very sparing in citations from
ecclesiastical, or other human writers, ancient or modern.
The Directory recommends the use of the LORD’S Prayer, as the most
perfect model of devotion. It forbids private or lay persons to
administer baptism, and enjoins it to be performed in the face of the
congregation. It orders the communion table at the LORD’S supper to be
so placed that the communicants may sit about it. The dead, according to
the rules of the Directory, are to be buried without any prayers or
religious ceremony.
The Roman Catholics publish an annual Directory for their laity, which
serves the purpose of a book of reference in matters of ceremonial as
settled by their communion.—_Broughton._
DISCIPLE, in the first sense of the word, means one who _learns_ any
thing from another. Hence the followers of any teacher, philosopher, or
head of a sect, are usually called his _disciples_. In the Christian
sense of the term, _disciples_ are the followers of JESUS CHRIST in
general; but, in a more restrained sense, it denotes those who were the
immediate followers and attendants on his person. The names _disciple_
and _apostle_ are often used synonymously in the gospel history; but
sometimes the apostles are distinguished from disciples, as persons
selected out of the number of disciples, to be the principal ministers
of his religion. Of these there were twelve; whereas those who are
simply styled _disciples_ were seventy, or seventy-two, in number. There
was not as yet any catalogue of the disciples in Eusebius’s time, i. e.
in the fourth century. The Latins kept the festival of the seventy or
seventy-two disciples on the 15th of July, and the Greeks on 4th of
January.
DISCIPLINE, ECCLESIASTICAL. The Christian Church being a spiritual
community or society of persons professing the religion of JESUS, and,
as such, governed by spiritual or ecclesiastical laws, her discipline
consists in putting those laws in execution, and inflicting the
penalties enjoined by them against several sorts of offenders. To
understand the true nature of church discipline, we must consider how it
stood in the ancient Christian Church. And, first,
The primitive Church never pretended to exercise discipline upon any but
such as were within her pale, in the largest sense, by some act of their
own profession; and even upon these she never pretended to exercise her
discipline so far as to cancel or disannul their baptism. But the
discipline of the Church consisted in a power to deprive men of the
benefits of external communion, such as public prayer, receiving the
eucharist, and other acts of Divine worship. This power, before the
establishment of the Church by human laws, was a mere spiritual
authority, or, as St. Cyprian terms it, a spiritual sword, affecting the
soul, and not the body. Sometimes, indeed, the Church craved assistance
from the secular power, even when it was heathen, but more frequently
after it was become Christian. But it is to be observed, that the Church
never encouraged the magistrate to proceed against any one for mere
error, or ecclesiastical misdemeanour, further than to punish the
delinquent by a pecuniary mulct, or bodily punishment, such as
confiscation or banishment; and St. Austin affirms, that no good men in
the Catholic Church were pleased that heretics should be prosecuted unto
death. Lesser punishments, they thought, might have their use, as means
sometimes to bring them to consideration and repentance.
Nor was it a part of the ancient discipline to deprive men of their
natural or civil rites. A master did not lose his authority over his
family, a parent over his children, nor a magistrate his office and
charge in the state, by being cast out of the Church. But the discipline
of the Church being a mere spiritual power, was confined to, 1. The
admonition of the offender; 2. The lesser and greater excommunication.
As to the objects of ecclesiastical discipline, they were all such
delinquents as fell into great and scandalous crimes after baptism,
whether men or women, priests or people, rich or poor, princes or
subjects. That princes and magistrates fell under the Church’s censures,
may be proved by several instances; particularly St. Chrysostom relates,
that Babylas denied communion to one of the Roman emperors on account of
a barbarous murder committed by him: St. Ambrose likewise denied
communion to Maximus for shedding the blood of Gratian; and the same
holy bishop absolutely refused to admit the emperor Theodosius the Great
into his church, notwithstanding his humblest entreaties, because he had
inhumanly put to death 7000 men at Thessalonica, without distinguishing
the innocent from the guilty.
DISPENSATION. The providential dealing of GOD with his creatures. We
thus speak of the Jewish dispensation and the Christian dispensation.
(See _Covenant of Redemption_.)
In ecclesiastical law, by dispensation is meant the power vested in
archbishops of dispensing, on particular emergencies, with certain minor
regulations of the Church, more especially in her character as an
establishment.
DISSENTERS. Separatists from the Church of England, and the service and
worship thereof, whether Protestants or Papists. At the Revolution a law
was enacted, that the statutes of Elizabeth and James I., concerning the
discipline of the Church, should not extend to Protestant Dissenters.
But persons dissenting were to subscribe the declaration of 30 Car. II.
c. 1, and take the oath or declaration of fidelity, &c. They are not to
hold their meetings until their place of worship is certified to the
bishop, or to the justices of the quarter sessions, and registered; also
they are not to keep the doors of their meeting-houses locked during the
time of worship. Whoever disturbs or molests them in the performance of
their worship, on conviction at the sessions, is to forfeit £20 by the
statute of 1 W. & M.—_Broughton_.
At the present time there are in England 34 dissenting communities or
sects; 26 native or indigenous, 9 foreign.
PROTESTANT SECTS.
Scottish Presbyterians:
_Church of Scotland._
_United Presbyterian Synod._
_Presbyterian Church in England._
Independents, or Congregationalists.
Baptists:
_General._
_Particular._
_Seventh Day._
_Scotch._
_New Connexion General._
Society of Friends.
Unitarians.
Moravians, or United Brethren.
Wesleyan Methodists:
_Original Connexion._
_New Connexion._
_Primitive Methodists._
_Bible Christians._
_Wesleyan Association._
_Independent Methodists._
_Wesleyan Reformers._
Calvinistic Methodists:
_Welsh Calvinistic Methodists._
_Countess of Huntingdon’s Connexion._
Sandemanians, or Glassites.
New Church.
Brethren.
_FOREIGN:_
Lutherans.
German Protestant Reformers.
Reformed Church of the Netherlands.
French Protestants.
OTHER CHRISTIAN SECTS.
Roman Catholics.
Greek Church.
German Catholics.
Italian Reformers.
Irvingites, or Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Latter-day Saints, or Mormons.
_JEWS._
_Registrar-general’s Report._
DIVINE. Something relating to GOD; a minister of the gospel; a priest; a
theologian. (See _Clergy_.)
DIVINITY. The science of Divine things; theology; a title of the
GODHEAD. (See _Theology_.) In strictness, meaning that department of
sacred knowledge which has more peculiar reference to the attributes and
essence of GOD.
DIVORCE. A separation of a married man and woman by the sentence of an
ecclesiastical judge qualified to pronounce the same.
Among us, divorces are of two kinds, _à mensâ et thoro_, from bed and
board; and _à vinculo matrimonii_, from the marriage tie. The former
neither dissolves the marriage, nor debars the woman of her dower, nor
bastardizes the issue; but the latter absolutely dissolves the marriage
contract, making it void from the very beginning. The causes of a
divorce _à mensâ et thoro_ are adultery, cruelty of the husband, &c.;
those of a divorce _à vinculo matrimonii_, precontract, consanguinity,
impotency, &c. On this divorce the dower is gone, and the children, if
any begotten, bastardized. On a divorce for adultery, some acts of
parliament have allowed the innocent person to marry again.
DOCETÆ. Heretics, so called ἀπὸ τοῦ δοκέειν (_apparere_), because they
taught that our LORD had only a _seeming_ body, and that his actions and
sufferings were not in reality, but in appearance. There was in the
second century a sect which especially bore this name; but the Docetic
error was common to many kinds of Gnostics. (See _Gnostics_.)
DOCTOR. One who has the highest degree in the faculties of divinity,
law, physic, or music. (See _Degree_.)
DOCTRINE. A system of teaching. By Christian doctrine should be intended
the principles or positions of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
DOGMA. A word used originally to express any doctrine of religion
formally stated. _Dogmatic_ theology is the statement of positive truths
in religion. The indifference of later generations to positive truth is
indicated, among other things, by the different notion which has come to
be attached, in common discourse, to these words. By a _dogma_ is now
generally meant too positive or harsh a statement of uncertain or
unimportant articles; and the epithet _dogmatic_ is given to one who is
rude or obtrusive, or overbearing in the statement of what he judges to
be true.
DOMINICAL or SUNDAY LETTER. In the calendar, the first seven letters of
the alphabet are applied to the days of the week, the letter A being
always given to the 1st of January, whatsoever that day may be, and the
others in succession to the following days. If the year consisted of 364
days, making an exact number of weeks, it is evident that no change
would ever take place in these letters: thus, supposing the 1st of
January in any given year to be Sunday, all the Sundays would be
represented by A, not only in that year, but in all succeeding. There
being, however, 365 days in the year, the first letter is again repeated
on the 31st of December, and consequently the Sunday letter for the
following year will be G. This retrocession of the letters will, from
the same cause, continue every year, so as to make F the dominical
letter of the third, &c. If every year were common, the process would
continue regularly, and a cycle of seven years would suffice to restore
the same letters to the same days as before. But the intercalation of a
day, every bissextile or fourth year, has occasioned a variation in this
respect. The bissextile year, containing 366 instead of 365 days, will
throw the dominical letter of the following year back two letters, so
that if the dominical letter at the beginning of the year be C, the
dominical letter of the next year will be, not B, but A. This alteration
is not effected by dropping a letter altogether, but by changing the
dominical letter at the end of February, where the intercalation of a
day takes place. In consequence of this change every fourth year,
twenty-eight years must elapse before a complete revolution can take
place in the dominical letter, and it is on this circumstance that the
period of the solar cycle is founded.
DOMINICAN MONKS. The religious order of Dominic, or _friars preachers_;
called in England _Black friars_, and in France _Jacobins_.
Dominic de Guzman was born in the year 1170, at Calaruega, a small town
of the diocese of Osma, in Old Castile. According to the Romish legend,
his mother, being with child of him, dreamed she was delivered of a
little dog, which gave light to all the world, with a flambeau in his
mouth. At six years of age he began to study humanity under the
direction of his uncle, who was archpriest of the church of Gumyel de
Ystan. The time he had to spare from his studies was spent in assisting
at divine offices, singing in the churches, and adorning the altars. At
thirteen years of age, he was sent to the university of Palencia, in the
kingdom of Leon, where he spent six years in the study of philosophy and
divinity. From that time he devoted himself to all manner of religious
austerities, and he employed his time, successfully, in the conversion
of sinners and heretics. This raised his reputation so high, that the
bishop of Osma, resolving to reform the canons of his church, cast his
eyes upon Dominic for that purpose, whom he invited to take upon him the
habit of a canon in the church of Osma. Accordingly, Dominic astonished
and edified the canons of Osma by his extraordinary humility,
mortification, and other virtues. Some time after, Dominic was ordained
priest by the bishop of Osma, and was made sub-prior of the chapter.
That prelate, making a scruple of confining so great a treasure to his
own church, sent Dominic out to exercise the ministry of an evangelical
preacher; accordingly, he went through several provinces, as Galicia,
Castile, and Aragon, converting many, till, in the year 1204, the bishop
of Osma, being sent ambassador into France, took Dominic with him. In
their passage through Languedoc, they were witnesses of the desolation
occasioned by the _Albigenses_, and obtained leave of Pope Innocent III.
to stay some time in that country, and labour on the conversion of those
heretics. Here it was that Dominic resolved to put in execution the
design he had long formed, of instituting a religious order, whose
principal employment should be, preaching the gospel, converting
heretics, defending the faith, and propagating Christianity. By degrees
he collected together several persons, inspired with the same zeal,
whose number soon increased to sixteen. Pope Innocent III. confirmed
this institution, at the request of Dominic, who went to Rome for that
purpose. They then agreed to embrace the rule of St. Augustine, to which
they added statutes and constitutions which had formerly been observed
either by the _Carthusians_, or the _Premonstratenses_. The principal
articles enjoined perpetual silence, abstinence from flesh at all times,
wearing of woollen, rigorous poverty, and several other austerities.
The first monastery of this order was established at Toulouse, by the
bounty of the bishop of Toulouse, and Simon earl of Montfort. From
thence Dominic sent out some of the community to several parts, to
labour in preaching, which was the main design of his institute. In the
year 1218 he founded the convent of Dominicans at Paris, in the _Rue St.
Jaques_, from whence they had the name of _Jacobins_. At Metz, in
Germany, he founded another monastery of his order; and another, soon
after, at Venice. At Rome, he obtained of Pope Honorius III. the church
of St. Sabina, where he and his companions took the habit which they
pretended the Blessed Virgin showed to the holy Renaud of Orleans, being
a white garment and scapular, to which they added a black mantle and
hood ending in a point. In 1221, the order had sixty monasteries, being
divided into eight provinces, those of Spain, Toulouse, France,
Lombardy, Rome, Provence, Germany, and England. St. Dominic, having thus
settled and enlarged his order, died at Bologna, August 4th, 1221, and
was canonized by Pope Gregory IX., July 13th, 1234.
The order of the Dominicans, after the death of their founder, made a
very considerable progress in Europe and elsewhere. They therefore
erected four new provinces, namely, those of Greece, Poland, Denmark,
and the Holy Land. Afterwards the number of monasteries increased to
such a degree, that the order was divided into forty-five provinces,
having spread itself into all parts of the world. It has produced a
great number of martyrs, confessors, bishops, and holy virgins: there
are reckoned of this order 3 popes, 60 cardinals, 150 archbishops, 800
bishops, besides the masters of the sacred palace, who have always been
Dominicans.
There are _nuns_ of this order, who owe their foundation to St. Dominic
himself, who, whilst he was labouring on the conversion of the
_Albigenses_, was so much concerned to see that some gentlemen of
Guienne, not having wherewith to maintain their daughters, either sold
or gave them to be brought up by heretics, that, with the assistance of
the archbishop of Narbonne, and other charitable persons, he laid the
foundation of a monastery at Prouille, where those poor maids might be
brought up, and supplied with all necessaries for their subsistence. The
habit of these religious was a white robe, a tawny mantle, and a black
veil. Their founder obliged them to work at certain hours of the day,
and particularly to spin yarn and flax. The nuns of this order had above
130 houses in Italy, 45 in France, 50 in Spain, 15 in Portugal, 40 in
Germany, and many in Poland, Russia, and other countries. They never eat
flesh, excepting in sickness; they wear no linen, and lie on straw beds;
but many monasteries have mitigated this austerity.
In the year 1221, Dominic sent Gilbert du Fresney, with twelve brothers,
into England, where they founded their first house at Oxford the same
year, and soon after another at London. In the year 1276, the mayor and
aldermen of the city of London gave them two streets by the river
Thames, where they had a very commodious monastery; whence that place is
still called _Black Friars_. They had monasteries likewise at Warwick,
Canterbury, Stamford, Chelmsford, Dunwich, Ipswich, Norwich, Thetford,
Exeter, Brecknock, Langley, and Guildford.
The Dominicans, being fortified with an authority from the court of Rome
to preach and take confessions, made great encroachments upon the
English bishops and the parochial clergy, insisting upon a liberty of
preaching wherever they thought fit. And many persons of quality,
especially women, deserted from the parochial clergy, and confessed to
the Dominicans, insomuch that the character of the secular clergy was
greatly sunk thereby. This innovation made way for a dissoluteness of
manners; for the people, being under no necessity of confessing to their
parish priest, broke through their duty with less reluctancy, in hopes
of meeting with a Dominican confessor, those friars being generally in a
travelling motion, making no stay where they came, and strangers to
their penitents.—_Brouqhton._
DONATISTS. Schismatics, originally partisans of Donatus, an African by
birth, and bishop of _Casæ Nigræ_, in Numidia. A secret hatred against
Cecilian, elected bishop of Carthage, notwithstanding the opposition of
Donatus, excited the latter to form one of the most pernicious schisms
that ever disturbed the peace of the Church. He accused Cecilian of
having delivered up the sacred books to the Pagans, and pretended that
his election was thereby void, and all those who adhered to him
heretics. Under this false pretext of zeal for the Church, he set up for
the head of a party, and about the year 312, taught that baptism,
administered by heretics, was null; that the Church was not infallible;
that it had erred in his time; and that he was to be the restorer of it.
But a council, held at Arles in 314, acquitted Cecilian, and declared
his election valid.
The schismatics, irritated at this sentence, refused to acquiesce in the
decisions of the council; and the more firmly to support their cause,
they thought it better to subscribe to the opinions of Donatus, and
openly to declaim against the Catholics: they gave out, that the Church
was become prostituted; they rebaptized the Catholics; they trod under
foot the eucharist consecrated by priests of the Catholic communion;
they overthrew their altars, burned their churches, and ran up and down
decrying the Church. (See _Circumcellians_.) They had chosen into the
place of Cecilian one Majorinus; but he dying soon after, they brought
in one Donatus, different from him of _Casæ Nigræ_.
This new head of the cabal used so much violence against the Catholics,
that the schismatics took their name from him. But as they could not
prove that they composed a true Church, they sent one of their bishops
to Rome, who secretly took upon him the title of bishop of Rome. This
bishop being dead, the Donatists appointed him a successor. They
attempted likewise to send some bishops into Spain, that they might say,
their Church began to spread itself everywhere; but it was only in
Africa that it could gain any considerable footing, and this want of
diffusion was much insisted on by their opponents as an argument against
their pretensions.
After many vain efforts to crush this schism, the emperor Honorius
assembled a council of bishops at Carthage, in the year 410; where a
disputation was held between seven of each party. Marcellinus, the
emperor’s deputy, who presided in that assembly, decided in favour of
the Catholics, and ordered them to take possession of all the churches,
which the Donatist bishops had seized on by violence, or otherwise. This
decree exasperated the Donatists; but the Catholic bishops used so much
wisdom and prudence, that they insensibly brought over most of those who
had strayed from the bosom of the Church. It appears, however, that the
schism was not quite extinct till the 7th century.—_Broughton._
DONATIVE. A donative is when the king, or any subject by his licence,
founds a church or chapel, and ordains that it shall be merely in the
gift or disposal of the patron, and vested absolutely in the clerk by
the patron’s deed of donation, without presentation, institution, or
induction. This is said to have been anciently the only way of
conferring ecclesiastical benefices in England; the method of
institution by the bishop not being established more early than the time
of Archbishop Becket in the reign of Henry II. And therefore Pope
Alexander III., (_Decretal_, 1. 3, t. 7, c. 3,) in a letter to Becket,
severely inveighs against the _prava consuetudo_, as he calls it, of
investiture conferred by the patron only: this however shows what was
then the common usage. Others contend, that the claim of the bishops to
institution is as old as the first planting of Christianity in this
island; and, in proof of it, they allege a letter from the English
nobility to the pope in the reign of Henry III., recorded by Matthew
Paris, (A. D. 1239,) which speaks of presentation to the bishop as a
thing immemorial. The truth seems to be that, where a benefice was to be
conferred on a mere layman, he was first presented to the bishop, in
order to receive ordination, who was at liberty to examine and refuse
him: but where the clerk was already in orders, the living was usually
vested in him by the sole donation of the patron; until about the middle
of the twelfth century, when the pope endeavoured to introduce a kind of
feudal dominion over ecclesiastical benefices, and, in consequence of
that, began to claim and exercise the right of institution universally
as a species of spiritual investiture.
By the act 14 & 15 Vict. c. 97, sec. 9, the right of perpetual
nomination of an incumbent may be acquired by the person or body, their
heirs, &c., who shall procure a church to be erected and endowed.
DONNELLAN LECTURES. Mrs. Anne Donnellan, in the last century, bequeathed
a sum of £1243 to the college of Dublin, for the encouragement of
religion, learning, and good manners; the application of the sum being
intrusted to the provost and senior fellows; who, consequently, in 1794,
resolved, that a lecturer should be annually appointed to preach six
lectures in the college chapel: the subject of the lectures for each
year being determined by them. The other regulations are analogous to
those of the Bampton Lectures at Oxford. Many distinguished works have
been the fruits of this Lecture: among them may be mentioned Dr.
Graves’s Lectures on the Pentateuch, Archbishop Magee on Prophecy, &c.
DORMITORY, DORTOR, or DORTURE. The sleeping apartment in a monastic
institution.
A place of sepulture is also so called, with reference, like the word
_cemetery_, which has the same meaning, to the resurrection, at which
time the bodies of the saints, which for the present repose in their
graves, shall arise, or awake. But it must be borne in mind, that the
word has reference to the sleep of the body, and not of the soul, which
latter was never an article of the Christian faith.
DORT. The Synod of Dort was convened to compose the troubles occasioned
by the celebrated Arminian controversy.
Arminius, professor of divinity at Leyden, had received his theological
education at Geneva. After much profound meditation on the abstruse
subject of predestination, he became dissatisfied with Calvin’s doctrine
of the absolute decrees of GOD, in respect to the salvation and
perdition of man; and, while he admitted the eternal prescience of the
Deity, he held, with the Roman Catholic Church, that no mortal is
rendered finally unhappy, by an eternal and invincible decree; and that
the misery of those who perish comes from themselves. Many who were
eminent for their talents and learning, and some who filled high
situations in Holland, embraced his opinions; but, apparently at least,
a great majority sided against them. The most active of these was Gomar,
the colleague of Arminius in the professorship. Unfortunately, politics
entered into the controversy. Most of the friends of Arminius were of
the party which opposed the politics of the Prince of Orange; while,
generally, the adversaries of Arminius were favourable to the views of
that prince. Barneveldt and Grotius, two of the most respectable
partisans of Arminius, were thrown into prison for their supposed
practices against the state. The former perished on the scaffold; the
latter, by his wife’s address, escaped from prison. While these
disturbances were at the highest, Arminius died.
On his decease, the superintendence of the party devolved to Episcopius,
who was, at that time, professor of theology at Leyden, and universally
esteemed for his learning, his judgment, and his eloquence. The Arminian
cause prospering under him, the opposite party took the alarm, and, in
1618, a synod was called at Dort, by the direction, and under the
influence, of Prince Maurice. It was attended by deputies from the
United Provinces, and from the Churches of England, Hesse, Bremen,
Switzerland, and the Palatinate.
The synod adopted the Belgic Confession, decided in favour of absolute
decrees, and excommunicated the Arminians. Its canons were published
under the title of “Judicium Synodi nationalis reformatarum ecclesiarum
habiti Dordrechti anno 1618 et 1619, de quinque doctrinæ capitibus, in
ecclesiis Belgicis, controversis: Promulgatum VI. Maii MDCXIX. 4to.” It
concludes the Sylloge Confessionum, printed at the Clarendon
press.—_Butler’s Confession of Faith._
DOXOLOGY. (See _Gloria Patri_.) A hymn used in the Divine service of
Christians. The ancient doxology was only a single sentence, without a
response, running in these words: “Glory be to the FATHER, and to the
SON, and to the HOLY GHOST, world without end. Amen.” Part of the latter
clause, “As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be,” was
inserted some time after the first composition. The fourth Council of
Toledo, in the year 633, added the word “honour” to it, and read it,
“Glory and honour be to the FATHER,” &c., because the prophet David
says, “Bring glory and honour to the LORD.” It is not easy to say at
what time the latter clause was inserted. Some ascribe it to the Council
of Nice, and suppose it was added in opposition to the Arians. But the
first express mention made of it is in the second Council of Vaison, an.
529, above two centuries later.
There was another small difference in the use of this ancient hymn; some
reading it, “Glory be to the FATHER, and to the SON, with the HOLY
GHOST;” others, “Glory be to the FATHER, in (or by) the SON, and by the
HOLY GHOST.” This difference of expression occasioned no disputes in the
Church, till the rise of the Arian heresy: but, when the followers of
Arius began to make use of the latter, and made it a distinguishing
character of their party, it was entirely laid aside by the Catholics,
and the use of it was enough to bring any one under suspicion of
heterodoxy.
This hymn was of most general use, and was a doxology, or giving of
praise to GOD, at the close of every solemn office. The Western Church
repeated it at the end of every psalm, with some few exceptions; and
omitted it on the three days before Easter, and in offices of the dead;
and the Eastern Church used it only at the end of the last psalm. Many
of their prayers were also concluded with it, particularly the solemn
thanksgiving, or consecration-prayer at the eucharist. It was also the
ordinary conclusion of their sermons.
There was likewise another hymn, of great note in the ancient Church,
called the great doxology, or angelical hymn, beginning with those
words, which the angels sung at our SAVIOUR’S birth, “Glory be to GOD on
high,” &c. This was chiefly used in the Communion Service. It was also
used daily in men’s private devotions. In the Mozarabic liturgy it is
appointed to be sung before the lessons on Christmas day. St. Chrysostom
often mentions it, and observes that the Ascetics, or Christians who had
retired from the world, met together daily to sing this hymn. Who first
composed it, adding the remaining part to the words sung by the angels,
is uncertain. Some suppose it to be as ancient as the time of Lucian,
about the beginning of the second century. Others take it for the
_Gloria Patri_; which is a dispute as difficult to be determined, as it
is to find out the first author and original of this hymn.
Both these doxologies have a place in the liturgy of the Church of
England, the former being repeated after every psalm, the latter used in
the Communion Service.
As the ancient doxology of “Glory to the _Father_, SON, and HOLY GHOST”
was, among the Christians, a solemn profession of their belief in the
Holy Trinity, so the Mohammedans, by their doxology, “There is but one
GOD,” (to which they sometimes add, “and Mohammed is his prophet,”)
which they use both in their public and private prayers, and in their
acclamations, sufficiently show their disbelief of a Trinity of persons
in the Godhead.—_Bingham._
DRIPSTONE. In church architecture, the projecting moulding which crowns
doors, windows, and other arches, in the exterior of a building.
DULCINISTS. Heretics, so denominated from one Dulcinus, a layman, of
Novara in Lombardy, who lived in the beginning of the 14th century. He
pretended to preach the reign of the HOLY GHOST; and while he justly
enough rejected the pope’s authority, he foolishly made himself to be
the head of that third reign, saying, that the FATHER had reigned from
the beginning of the world to the coming of CHRIST; and the SON’S reign
began then, and continued until the year 1300. He was followed by a
great many people to the Alps, where he and his wife were taken and
burnt by the order of Clement IV.
DULIA. (Δουλεία.) The worship paid by Romanists to saints and angels,
and to images. Not denying that all these are made by them objects of
worship, the Papists invent a distinction of many kinds and degrees of
worship, and very accurately assign to each object of worship its proper
amount of reverence. The lowest degree is the _dulia_, which is given to
saints and angels. _Hyperdulia_ (ὑπερδουλεία) is reserved for the
Blessed Virgin alone: and _Latria_ (λατρεια) is given to the LORD
himself, and to each person in the ever blessed and glorious Trinity.
Images of either of these receive a relative worship of the same order.
An image of a saint or angel, _relative Dulia_: an image of the Blessed
Virgin, _relative hyperdulia_: an image of either person of the Blessed
Trinity, _relative Latria_. (See _Idolatry_, _Images_, _Invocation of
Saints_.)
DUNKERS, or DIPPERS. A sect of Baptists, originating (1724) in the
teaching of one Conrad Peysel or Beissel, a German, in Philadelphia, one
of the American states. They are distinguished not only by their
adherence to the rite of baptism with trine immersion, which, like other
Baptists, they of course confine to adults, but also by their rigid
abstinence from flesh, except on particular occasions; by their living
in monastic societies, by their peculiar garb, like that of the
Dominican friars, and by their scruples with regard to resistance, war,
slavery, and litigation. Their great settlement is at a place which they
call Euphrata, in allusion to the lament of the Hebrews in their
captivity, which they used to pour forth to their harps as they sat on
the banks of the Euphrates.
EAGLE. A frequent, and the most beautiful, form of the lectern for
reading the lessons from in churches. It has probably some reference to
the eagle, which is the symbolical companion of St. John, in
ecclesiastical design. The eagle is frequently employed in foreign
churches, but generally for the chanting of the service, not for the
lessons. Sometimes it is employed for the reading of the Epistles and
Gospels, and there are instances of one being on each side of the choir
or chancel. Several of the cathedrals and colleges in our universities
have this kind of lecterns. Before the civil wars in 1651, there was in
the cathedral of Waterford, a “great standing pelican to support the
Bible, a brazen eagle,” and other ornaments.—_Ryland’s Waterford._
Winchester and St. John’s College, Cambridge, have of late years been
provided with eagle lecterns. The “_Lecterna_” or Bible eagle at
Peterborough was given by Abbot Ramsay and John Maldon in 1471.—_Dugd.
Monast._ ed. 1830, i. 344.—_Jebb._
EARLY ENGLISH, or LANCET, the first style of pure Gothic architecture,
fully established about 1190, and merging in the Geometrical about 1245.
The Lancet window is the principal characteristic of this style; but it
has, besides, various peculiarities, (see _Arcade_, _Capital_,
_Moulding_, _Vaulting_,) among which are the following:—The doorways are
frequently divided by a central shaft. As compared with the preceding
style, the buttresses have a considerable projection, and they usually
terminate in a plain pediment. The flying buttress becomes frequent.
Gables are of very high pitch; the parapet usually retains the
corbel-table. Piers consist of a circular or octagonal shaft, surrounded
by four or eight smaller ones, which stand free, except that, when of
great length, they are generally banded in the centre. Purbeck or
Petworth marble is often used both for the central, which is really the
bearing shaft, and the smaller ones; but in this case the marble of the
bearing shaft is laid as in the quarry, while the smaller shafts are set
upwards, for the sake of greater length. The triforium still maintains
its importance, though hardly so lofty as in the Norman style: it is
usually of two smaller behind a principal arch, or of four smaller
behind two principal arches. The clerestory is generally of the three
Lancets, the central one much more lofty than the two others. The
carving is extremely sharp and good, and very easily recognised, when it
contains foliage, by the stiff stalks ending in crisped or curled
leaves. Panels are often used to relieve large spaces of masonry, either
blank or pierced; and sometimes in window-heads, and in triforium
arcades, approach very nearly to the character of tracery. They are also
often filled with figures. The dog-tooth, which had made its appearance
in the Transition, is now extremely abundant, often filling the hollows
of the mouldings in two or three continuous trails. The spires are
almost invariably broach-spires.
EAST. (See also _Bowing_ and _Apostles’ Creed_.) In the aspect of their
churches, the ancient Christians reversed the order of the Jews, placing
the altar on the east, so that in facing towards the altar in their
devotions they were turned to the east. As the Jews began their day with
the _setting sun_, so the followers of CHRIST began theirs with the
_rising sun_. The eye of the Christian turned with peculiar interest to
the east, whence the day-spring from on high had visited him. There the
morning star of his hope fixed his admiring gaze. Thence arose the Sun
of righteousness with all his heavenly influences. Thither, in prayer,
his soul turned with kindling emotions to the altar of his GOD. And even
in his grave, thither still he directed his slumbering eye, in quiet
expectation of awakening to behold in the same direction the second
appearing of his LORD, when he shall come in the clouds of heaven to
gather his saints.
In the ancient Church it was a ceremony almost of general use and
practice, the turning the face to the east in their solemn adorations,
which custom seems derived from the ceremonies of baptism, when it was
usual to renounce the devil with the face to the west, and then turn to
the east and make the covenant with CHRIST. Several reasons were given
by the Fathers for this. First, As the east, the place of the day-spring
from darkness, was the symbol of CHRIST, “the Sun of righteousness.”
2ndly, As it was the place of paradise, lost by the fall of the first
Adam, and to be regained by the second Adam. 3rdly, That CHRIST made his
appearance on earth in the east; there ascended into heaven; and thence
will again come at the last day. And, 4thly, That the east, as the seat
of light and brightness, was the most honourable part of the creation,
and therefore peculiarly ascribed to GOD, the fountain of light, and
illuminator of all things; as the west was ascribed to the devil,
because he hides the light, and brings darkness on men to their
destruction.
When we repeat the creed, it is customary to turn towards the east, that
so, whilst we are making profession of our faith in the blessed Trinity,
we may look towards that quarter of the heavens where God is supposed to
have his peculiar residence of glory.—_Wheatly._
Turning towards the east is an ancient custom,—as indeed in most
religions, men have directed their worship some particular way. And this
practice being intended only to honour CHRIST, the Sun of righteousness,
who hath risen upon us, to enlighten us with that doctrine of salvation
to which we then declare our adherence, it ought not to be condemned as
superstition.—_Secker._
Most churches are so contrived, that the greater part of the
congregation faces the east. The Jews, in their dispersion throughout
the world, when they prayed, turned their faces towards the mercy-seat
and cherubim, where the ark stood. (2 Chron. vi. 36–38.) Daniel was
found praying towards Jerusalem, (Dan. vi. 10,) because of the situation
of the temple. And this has always been esteemed a very becoming way of
expressing our belief in God.—_Collis._
EASTER. A festival of the Christians observed in the memory of our
Saviour’s resurrection. The Latins, and others, call it Pascha, an
Hebrew word, which signifies “passage,” and is applied to the Jewish
feast of the Passover, to which the Christian festival of Easter
corresponds. This festival is called, in English, Easter, from the Saxon
_Eostre_, an ancient goddess of that people, worshipped with peculiar
ceremonies in the month of April.
Concerning the celebration of this festival, there were anciently very
great disputes in the Church. Though all agreed in the observation of it
in general, yet they differed very much as to the particular time when
it was to be observed; some keeping it precisely on the same stated day
every year; others, on the fourteenth day of the first moon in the new
year, whatever day of the week it happened on; and others, on the first
Sunday after the first full moon. This diversity occasioned a great
dispute, in the second century, between the Asiatic Churches and the
rest of the world; in the course of which Pope Victor excommunicated all
those Churches. But the Council of Nice, in the year 324, decreed, that
all Churches should keep the Pasch, or festival of Easter, on one and
the same day, which should be always a Sunday. This decree was
afterwards confirmed by the Council of Antioch, in the year 341. Yet
this did not put an end to all disputes concerning the observation of
this festival; for it was not easy to determine on what Sunday it was to
be held, because, being a movable feast, it sometimes happened, that the
Churches of one country kept it a week, or a month, sooner than other
Churches, by reason of their different calculations. Therefore the
Council of Nice is said to have decreed further, that the bishops of
Alexandria should adjust a proper cycle, and inform the rest of the
world, on what Sunday every year Easter was to be observed.
Notwithstanding which, the Roman and Alexandrian accounts continued to
differ, and sometimes varied a week, or a month, from each other; and no
effectual cure was found for this, till, in the year 525, Dionysius
Exiguus brought the Alexandrian canon, or cycle, entirely into use in
the Roman Church. Meantime, the Churches of France and Britain kept to
the old Roman canon, and it was two or three ages after, before the new
Roman, that is, the Alexandrian canon was, not without some struggle and
difficulty, settled among them.—_Bingham, Orig. Eccles._ b. xx. c. 5.
_Theod._ lib. i. c. 10. _Socrat._ lib. ii. c. 9. _Euseb. de Vit. Const._
lib. iii. c. 14. _Leo_, Ep. 63, _ad Marcian. Imper._
But though the Christian Churches differed as to the time of celebrating
Easter, yet they all agreed in showing a peculiar respect and honour to
this festival. Gregory Nazianzen calls it the Queen of Festivals, and
says, it excels all others as far as the sun exceeds the other stars.
Hence, in some ancient writers, it is distinguished by the name of
_Dominica Gaudii_, i. e. the “Sunday of joy.” One great instance of the
public joy was given by the emperors, who were used to grant a general
release to the prisons on this day, with an exception only to such
criminals as were guilty of the highest crimes. The ancient Fathers
frequently mention these Paschal indulgences, or acts of grace, and
speak of them with great commendations. It was likewise usual at this
holy season for private persons to grant slaves their freedom or
manumission.—_Orat._ 19, _in fun. Patris_, t. v. _Cod. Theod._ lib. ix.
tit. 38, leg. 3. _Cod. Justin._ lib. iii. tit. 12, leg. 8.
To these expressions of public joy may be added, that the Christians
were ambitious, at this time especially, to show their liberality to the
poor. They likewise kept the whole week after Easter day, as part of the
festival; holding religious assemblies every day, for prayer, preaching,
and receiving the communion. Upon which account the author of the
Constitutions requires servants to rest from their labour the whole
week. All public games were prohibited during this whole season; as also
all proceedings at law, except in some special and extraordinary
cases.—Lib. viii. c. 53. _Cod. Theod._ lib. xv. tit. v. leg. 5. _Ib._
lib. ii. tit. viii.
The festival of Easter was, likewise, the most noted and solemn time of
baptism, which, except in cases of necessity, was administered only at
certain stated times of the year.
The eve, or vigil, of this festival was celebrated with more than
ordinary pomp, with solemn watchings, and with multitudes of lighted
torches, both in the churches and in private houses, so as to turn the
night itself into day. This they did as a _prodromus_, or forerunner of
that great light, the Sun of righteousness, which the next day arose
upon the world.—_Greg. Naz._ Orat. ii. _in Pasch._
The paschal canon, or rule, of Dionysius having become the standing
rule, for the celebration of Easter, to all the Western Churches, it
will be proper briefly to explain it. The particulars of it are as
follows: viz. That Easter be always on the Sunday next after the Jewish
Passover; that, the Jewish Passover being always on the fourteenth day
of the first vernal moon, the Christian Easter is always to be the next
Sunday after the said fourteenth day of that moon; that, to avoid all
conformity with the Jews in this matter, if the fourteenth day of the
said moon be on a Sunday, this festival is to be deferred to the Sunday
following; that the first vernal moon is that, whose fourteenth day is
either upon the day of the vernal equinox, or the next fourteenth day
after it; that the vernal equinox, according to the Council of Nice, is
fixed to the twenty-first day of March; that therefore the first vernal
moon, according to this rule, is that, whose fourteenth day falls upon
the 21st of March, or the first fourteenth day after; that the next
Sunday after the fourteenth day of the vernal moon (which is called the
paschal term) is always Easter day; that, therefore, the earliest
paschal term being the 21st of March, the 22nd of March is the earliest
Easter possible; and the 18th of April being the latest paschal term,
the seventh day after, that is, the 25th of April, is the latest Easter
possible; that the cycle of the moon, or golden number, always shows us
the first day of the paschal moon, and the cycle of the sun, or
dominical letter, always shows us which is the next Sunday
after.—_Prideaux, Connect._ part ii. b. iv.
In the Romish Church, on Easter eve, the bells are rung about four in
the afternoon; the ornaments of the churches and altars are changed from
black to white; and the paschal taper is placed in a great candlestick
made in the shape of an angel. On the morning of Easter Sunday, matins
are said before day-break, because our Saviour rose at that time. When
the pope officiates, two cardinal deacons are placed on the right and
left of the altar, dressed in white robes, to represent the two angels
who watched our SAVIOUR’S sepulchre.—_Sacra Cerem. Eccl. Rom._ lib. ii.
In the Greek Church, it is usual, on Easter day, upon meeting their
friends, to greet them with this salutation, “JESUS CHRIST is risen from
the dead;” to which the person accosted replies, “He is risen indeed.”
On Good Friday, two priests carry in procession, on their shoulders, the
picture or representation of a tomb, in which the crucified JESUS,
painted on a board, is deposited. On Easter Sunday, this sepulchre is
carried out of the church, and exposed to public view, when the priest
solemnly assures the people, that CHRIST is risen from the dead, and
shows them the picture turned on the other side, which represents JESUS
CHRIST rising out of the sepulchre. The whole congregation embrace each
other, and, in transports of joy, shoot off pistols.—_Tournefort’s
Voyages_, Letter III. _Broughton_.
The anniversary festival appointed in remembrance of the resurrection of
our blessed SAVIOUR from the state of death, to which he had subjected
himself as an atonement for the sins of men. It is stated by Venerable
Bede, that this name was given to this festival at the time when
Christianity was first introduced among our Saxon ancestors in this
island. Those people, says Bede, worshipped an imaginary deity, called
Eostre, whose feast they celebrated every year at this season; the name
remained when the worship was altered. Others conceive the name to be
derived from an old Saxon word importing rising; Easter day thus
signifying the day of resurrection. Easter Sunday is not strictly the
anniversary day of our SAVIOUR’S resurrection, but is the day appointed
by the Church to be kept in remembrance of that event. After great
difference of opinions, it was decided in the Council of Nice that
Easter day should be kept on the Sunday following the Jewish feast of
the Passover, which Passover is kept on the 14th day, or full moon, of
the Jewish month _Nisan_. At the same time, to prevent all uncertainty
in future, it was made a further rule of the Church, that the full moon
next to the vernal (or spring) equinox should be taken for the full moon
in the month _Nisan_, and the 21st of March be accounted the vernal
equinox. Easter Sunday, therefore, is always the Sunday following the
full moon which falls on, or next after, the 21st of March. Easter is
thus observed with reference to the feast of the Passover, on account of
the typical quality of that day; the annual sacrifice commanded by the
Jewish law being regarded as a type of the greater sacrifice of CHRIST
for our redemption, and the deliverance of the Israelites out of Egypt
as a type of our deliverance from sin and death by his merits.
This was the birthday of our SAVIOUR in his state of glory and
exaltation, as his nativity was his birthday to his state of
humiliation. It was anciently called the “great day,” and “the feast of
feasts;” being by eminence “the day which the LORD hath made,” (Ps.
cxviii. 24,) for the Fathers unanimously expound that passage of this
day, and therefore with them, as with us, that psalm was always part of
the office of the day. For the antiquity of the observation of this day
innumerable authors might be produced; but the matter is not at all
controverted.—_L’Estrange._
This is the highest of all feasts, saith Epiphanius: this day CHRIST
opened to us the door of life, being the first-fruits of those that rose
from the dead: whose resurrection was our life; for he rose again for
our justification. (Rom. iv. 25.)—_Bp. Sparrow._
In the primitive times the Christians of all Churches on this day used
this morning salutation, “CHRIST is risen;” to which those who were
saluted answered, “CHRIST is risen indeed;” or else thus, “and hath
appeared unto Simon;” a custom still retained in the Greek Church. And
our Church, supposing us as eager of the joyful news as they were, is
loth to withhold from us long the pleasure of expressing it; and
therefore, as soon as the absolution is pronounced, and we are thereby
rendered fit for rejoicing, she begins her office of praise with anthems
proper to the day, encouraging her members to call upon one another “to
keep the feast; for that CHRIST our Passover is sacrificed for us, and
is also risen from the dead, and become the first-fruits of them that
slept,” &c.—_Wheatly._
The first lesson in the morning is the twelfth chapter of Exodus, in
which is mentioned the institution of the Passover, proper for this day,
the feast of the Passover: for, as St. Augustine observes, “we do in
this feast not only call to mind the history of our SAVIOUR’S
resurrection, but also celebrate the mystery of ours.” That as CHRIST
this day rose again from death to life, so by CHRIST, and the virtue of
his resurrection, shall we be made alive, and rise from death to life
eternal. CHRIST is therefore our true Passover, whereof the other was a
type: the lesson then is proper for the day. So is the first lesson for
the evening, (Exod. xiv.,) for it is concerning the Israelites’
deliverance out of Egypt, a type of our deliverance from hell this day
by CHRIST’S glorious resurrection. As that day Israel saw that great
work, which the LORD did upon Egypt, (ver. 31,) so this day we see the
great conquest over hell and death finished by CHRIST’S triumphant
resurrection from the dead. The second lessons are plain. The Gospel
gives us the full evidence of CHRIST’S resurrection; the Epistle tells
us what use we should make of it, “If CHRIST be risen, seek those things
that are above,” &c. The collect prays for grace, to make the use of it
which the Epistle directs.
Thus holy Church is careful to teach and instruct all her children in
the matter of the feast, preaching CHRIST’S resurrection to us, both in
the type and prophecy out of the Old Testament, and in the history of it
out of the New. And she does not only teach us to know what GOD hath
done for us this day, but also she is careful that we may do our duty to
GOD for this his marvellous goodness, commanding and directing us to
pray for grace to do our duty, prescribing us excellent forms of adoring
and blessing GOD for his mercy this day, such methods as the HOLY GHOST
hath set down, in which we may be sure to pray and praise God by the
spirit.—_Bp. Sparrow._ On this day, as on Christmas day, there were
formerly [in the First Book of King Edward VI.] two communions, whereof
we have retained the former Epistle and Gospel.—_Bp. Cosin._
Easter day is a scarlet day at the universities of Cambridge and Oxford.
In choirs, the Responses and Litanies used to be universally, and in
many places are still, solemnly sung to the organ; and the Responses, on
the Monday and Tuesday following.—_Jebb._