_Priest._ O Lord, save the king.

Quire. _And mercifully hear us when we call upon thee._

_Collect._ O Lord, our heavenly Father and merciful Saviour, we praise

and thank thee, O Lord, &c.

God save our gracious sovereign, and all the companions of the most

honourable and noble Order of the Garter.

_Here endeth the obiit service._

The verse and response, O Lord, save the queen, &c., are used daily

after the anthem in St. George’s Chapel.—_Jebb._

OBLATION. An offering to GOD.

In the office for the holy communion we pray GOD to “accept our alms and

oblations.” The word _oblations_ was added to this prayer for the Church

militant here on earth, at the same time that the rubric enjoined, that,

if there be a communion, “the priest is then,” just before this prayer,

“to place upon the table so much bread and wine as he shall think

sufficient.” Hence it is clearly evident that by that word we are to

understand the elements of bread and wine, which the priest is to offer

solemnly to GOD, as an acknowledgment of his sovereignty over his

creatures, and that from henceforth they may be peculiarly his. For in

all the Jewish sacrifices, of which the people were partakers, the

viands or materials of the feast were first made GOD’S by a solemn

oblation, and then afterwards eaten by the communicants, not as man’s,

but as GOD’S provision, who, by thus entertaining them at his own table,

declared himself reconciled and again in covenant with them. And

therefore our blessed SAVIOUR, when he instituted the sacrament of his

body and blood, first gave thanks, and blessed the elements, i. e.

offered them up to GOD as the Lord of the creatures, as the most ancient

Fathers expound that passage; who for that reason, whenever they

celebrated the eucharist, always offered the bread and wine for the

communion to GOD upon the altar, by this or some such short ejaculation,

“LORD, we offer thine own out of what thou hast bountifully given us.”

After which they received them, as it were, from him again, in order to

convert them into the sacred banquet of the body and blood of his dear

SON. Consonant to this, in the First Common Prayer of King Edward VI.,

the priest was ordered in this place to set the bread and wine upon the

altar. But at the second review, to conciliate the ultra-Protestants,

this ancient usage appears to have been thrown out. It was however

restored at the last review of the Prayer Book in the reign of Charles

II., when it was ordered that the bread and wine should be placed

solemnly on the table by the priest himself. Whence it appears that the

placing of the elements upon the altar before the beginning of the

morning service, by the hands of a lay-clerk or sexton, as is sometimes

the irreverent practice, is a profane breach of the aforesaid

rubric.—_Mede. Wheatly._

The English liturgy is not without a verbal oblation, which occurs at

the beginning of the prayers and commemorations. After the elements have

been placed on the table, and thus devoted to the service and honour of

GOD, the priest prays to GOD thus: “We humbly beseech thee most

mercifully to accept our alms and oblations, and to receive these our

prayers, which we offer unto thy Divine Majesty.” Here three species of

sacrifice or oblation are verbally offered: first, the “_alms_,” which

St. Paul describes as a sacrifice well-pleasing to GOD; secondly, the

“_oblations_,” namely, the creatures of bread and wine; thirdly, the

“_prayers_,” which, according to St. John, are offered with incense on

the heavenly altar, and of which the holy Fathers speak as a sacrifice

and oblation to GOD.—_Palmer._

In a more extended sense of the word, we mean by _oblations_ whatever

religious Christians offer to GOD and the Church, whether in lands or

goods. It is probable that the example of St. Paul might incite the

primitive Christians to offer these gifts to the Church; for he

appointed every one of the Corinthians and Galatians to yield something

to _God_ for the saints every LORD’S day: but this being thought too

often, therefore Tertullian tells us it was afterwards done every month,

and then _ad libitum_: but it was always the custom for communicants to

offer something at receiving the sacrament, as well for holy uses, as

for relief of the poor, which custom is, or ought to be, observed at

this day.

In the first ages of the Church, those _deposita pietatis_, which are

mentioned by Tertullian, were all voluntary oblations, and they were

received in lieu of tithes; for the Christians at that time lived

chiefly in cities, and gave out of their common stock, both to maintain

the Church, and those who served at the altar.

But when their numbers increased, and they were spread abroad in the

countries, then a more fixed maintenance was necessary for the clergy;

but still oblations were made by the people, which, if in the mother

Church, then the bishop had half, and the other was divided amongst the

clergy; but if offered in a parish church, then the bishop had a third

part, and no more.

These oblations, which at first were voluntary, became afterwards, by a

continual payment, due by custom.

It is true there are canons which require every one who approaches the

altar to make some oblation to it, as a thing convenient to be done.

And it is probable that, in obedience to the canons, it became customary

for every man who made a will before the Reformation, to devise

something to the high altar of the church where he lived, and something

likewise to the mother church or cathedral; and those who were to be

buried in the church usually gave something towards its reparations.

But at the great festivals all people were obliged to offer something,

not only as convenient, but as a duty; but the proportion was left to

the discretion of the giver; and we think, with great reason, for the

bounty of the Christians in those ages was so great, that men would

build churches on their own lands, on purpose that they might have an

equal share of those oblations with the clergy.

And this might be the occasion that the emperors Constantine and

Valentinian made laws to prohibit such excessive gifts, which in those

days were kept in store-houses built for that very purpose.

But in succeeding ages there was little occasion for such laws, for the

zeal of the people was so considerably abated, that, instead of those

repositories, the clergy had little chests to contain those gifts, till

at last they dwindled into so small a portion, that now, as a quaint

writer observes, they can scarce be felt in the parson’s pocket.

We have the authority of Bishop Patrick to show that, in the prayer

after the Offertory, the elements are specially intended by the word

_oblations_. “We humbly beseech GOD,” he says, “to accept not only our

alms, but also our oblations. These are things distinct; and the former,

_alms_, signifying that which was given for the relief of the poor, the

latter, _oblations_, can signify nothing else but (according to the

style of the ancient Church) the bread and wine presented unto

GOD.”—_Christian Sacrifice_, p. 77. But it is no less unquestionable,

(adds a note in Stephens’s edition of the Common Prayer Book, vol. i. p.

1175,) that this term was also employed to signify money, intended for

the maintenance of the clergy, for the service of God, for merciful

works of the more spiritual kind, and that it sometimes even denotes the

alms for relief of temporal necessities; and numerous authorities exist

to prove that, ecclesiastically speaking, “oblations” were not to be

confined to the sacred elements _exclusively_: although oblations are

expressly distinguished from alms.

The ecclesiastical meanings of the word oblation may be illustrated from

the coronation service of Queen Victoria. Her “first oblation” was a

pall or altar cloth of gold, and an ingot of gold: the next a sword: and

afterwards at the Offertory were two “oblations;” the first being _bread

and wine_ for the communion, which were “by the archbishop received from

the queen, (who was kneeling,) and reverently placed upon the altar, and

decently covered with a fine linen cloth:” with a prayer, “Bless, O

LORD, we beseech thee, these thy gifts, and sanctify them unto their

holy use,” &c. “Then the queen, kneeling as before, makes her second

oblation, a purse of gold;” and then follows a prayer to God “to receive

_these oblations_.”

OCTAVE. The octave is the _eighth day_ after any principal festival of

the Church. In ancient times it was customary to observe these days with

much devotion, including the whole period also from the festival to the

octave. It was thought that the subject and occasion of these high

festivals called for their being lengthened out in this manner; and the

period of eight days was chosen because the Jews celebrated their

greater feasts, some for seven days, and the feast of Tabernacles for

eight days. Such Jewish institutions being only types and shadows, the

Christians thought it fit not to have their commemorations of shorter

duration.

In our Prayer Book we retain the observance of the octaves of Christmas,

Easter, Ascension, and Whitsunday, by using, for seven days after each

of these festivals, an appropriate “Preface,” in the Communion Service,

if that sacrament is administered on any of these days. The preface for

Whitsunday is, however, only to be used for _six_ days after, because

the seventh (or octave of Whitsunday) would be Trinity Sunday, which has

a preface of its own.

The first two days of the octaves of Easter and Whitsunday have special

services, and in some cathedrals are observed with nearly the same

solemnity as the festival itself. It appears by the _Pietas

Londinensis_, published in 1714, that in the church of St. Dunstan in

the West, the holy communion was administered on every day during the

octaves of Christmas, Easter, and Whitsuntide.—_Jebb._

OFFERING DAYS. “The four general offering days,” Bishop Cosin says, “in

the Church of England enjoined by convocation in 1536, [ought to be

1537,] were Christmas Day, St. John Baptist’s Day, St. Michael’s Day,

[Easter Day.] Which order is in some places still observed, and the king

and queen in their chapel royal, or wherever they be at church on those

days, never omit it, but arise from their seat and go in solemn manner

to present their offering upon their knees at God’s altar. And then is

read by the priest or bishop attending, the sentence here prescribed, 1

Cor. ix.”—_Jebb._

OFFERTORY. So called, because it is that part of the Communion Service

in which the _offerings_ are made. The custom of making oblations at the

communion is certainly apostolical, as appears from 1 Cor. xvi. 2: “On

the first day of the week let every one lay by him in store as GOD hath

prospered him.” Which custom continued down to the following ages, as

appears from different passages in Justin Martyr, Tertullian, St.

Cyprian, St. Ambrose, and other ancient writers. Out of those offerings,

which were not always in money, but in bread, wine, corn, &c., were

taken as much bread and wine as served for the celebration of the

communion at the time; but if any persons were under public infamy, by

reason of any ill actions by them committed, their offerings were not to

be received. These offerings in the primitive times were so

considerable, that they were divided into four portions; one for the

relief of the poor; the second the bishop retained for his maintenance;

the third was for the maintenance of the church and its ornaments; and

the fourth for the clergy. The office of the Offertory was used in

Walafrid Strabo’s time, who lived in the middle of the ninth century;

and it was so long before his time, that he could not tell to whom to

ascribe its original.—_Dr. Nicholls._

Formerly, Mr. Palmer observes, this anthem was probably sung in choirs.

The sentences at the Offertory are set to varied melodies, in Marbeck’s

book, according to the licence given in King Edward VI.’s First Book,

either to sing or say them. This licence is withdrawn by the rubric as

it now stands, so altered in King Edward’s Second Book, since the saying

of the sentences by the priest is expressly enjoined. Of the old custom

a vestige is preserved in the ceremony of the installation of Knights of

the Garter, and formerly was at coronations.

OFFICIAL. The official is the person to whom cognisance of causes is

committed by such as have an ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The official

of an archdeacon stands in like relation to him as the chancellor does

to the bishop.

OGEE. (_Ogive_, French.) An inflected curve; a curve formed of two

segments of a circle, one struck from one side, and the other from the

other side of the same right line. This curve occurs chiefly in

mouldings, and is principally characteristic of the Decorated style; but

it occurs in other styles also, and has several variations according to

its place and date. The word is used in French as a generic term for

pointed architecture.

OPHITÆ (from ὄφις, _a serpent_); also called _Serpentinians_. A

ridiculous sort of heretics, who had for their leader a man called

Euphrates. They entertained almost the same fantastic opinions that were

holden by the other Egyptian Gnostics concerning the _æons_, the

_eternal matter_, the _creation of the world_ in opposition to the will

of GOD, the _rulers of the seven planets_ that presided over this world,

the _tyranny of Demiurge_, and also concerning CHRIST united to the man

JESUS, in order to destroy the empire of this usurper. But besides

these, they maintained the following particular tenet (whence they

received the name of _Ophites_): “That the _Serpent_ by which our first

parents were deceived, was either CHRIST himself, or _Sophia_,

[_Wisdom_,] concealed under the form of that animal;” and in consequence

of this opinion they are said to have nourished a certain number of

serpents, which they looked upon as sacred, and to which they offered a

sort of worship, a subordinate kind of divine honours. There is some

curious information about the Ophitæ in the lately discovered work of

Hippolytus.

OPTION. An archbishop had the choice or option of any one dignity or

benefice in the gift of every bishop consecrated or confirmed by him,

which he may confer on his chaplain, or whom else he pleases. This was

styled his _option_. The privilege has been relinquished by English

archbishops since 1845, in consequence of a construction put on some

words in the cathedral act (3 & 4 Vict. c. 113, sect. 42). “That it

shall not be lawful for any spiritual person to sell or _assign_ any

patronage or presentation belonging to him by virtue of any dignity or

spiritual office held by him.”

Bishop Sherlock, on his appointment to the see of London in 1749, had a

dispute with Archbishop Herring as to the right of option. A compromise

took place: but the bishop printed a pamphlet on the subject in 1755. It

never was published, and but 50 copies were printed.—_Heylin’s Life of

Bishop Sherlock_, prefixed to his Works, vol. i. lx.

OPUS OPERATUM. An expression frequently occurring in discussions

respecting the efficacy of the sacraments, &c., importing a necessary

spiritual effect flowing from the outward administration, (from _the

thing done_,) irrespective of the moral qualities of the recipient. This

doctrine is alleged as one of the corruptions of the Church of Rome,

and, if carried out, would obviously equalize, in a great measure, the

benefits received by the worthy and the unworthy who approach the altar,

and would justify the administration of baptism to the heathen, &c., not

only on consent, but by the application of physical force.

In a certain sense it is unquestionably true, that all the appointed

means of grace have an effect _ex opere operato_, inasmuch as the act

itself, though inefficacious in its own nature, is an institution of

GOD, and consecrated by him as an instrument not to be made void at the

caprice of man. Thus, the preaching of the gospel is inevitably a savour

of life or of death. The administration of baptism is invariably an

admission into the Church. But that the use of an appointed ordinance

goes beyond this, and results in all cases in a moral effect on the

individual, and in the insuring of higher portions of Divine grace _ex

necessitate_, is contrary to the views of the Church, the doctrine of

Scripture, and the preservation of man’s free agency.

ORARIUM. (See _Stole_.)

ORATORIO. In Church music, a musical drama, of which the subject is

always sacred, and intended to be performed in a church. The origin of

this kind of spiritual and musical drama, which has now run into great

excesses, is found in the plan of Filippo Neri, in the early part of the

sixteenth century, to arrest the attention of those to whom he preached,

by procuring the execution of pieces of sacred music of more than common

interest before and after his sermon. This custom, which commenced in

the congregation of the Oratory, (whence the name Oratorio,) was

imitated by all the societies of the same foundation, and soon became so

popular, that the best masters, both in composition and in execution,

were found to take a part in it. The performance in the time of Filippo

Neri himself was scarcely more than a cantata, but it soon after assumed

a more perfectly dramatic form, being distributed between several

persons, and accompanied with action and scenic representation, so as to

present much of the character of a musical mystery. (See _Moralities_.)

In this way many sacred subjects were performed, such as Job and his

friends, the Good Samaritan, and the Prodigal Son.

_Oratorio_ derived its name from the Oratorio, or chapel in the church

of St. Girolamo della Carita at Rome, where Filippo Neri’s confraternity

assembles. (See _Priests of the Oratory_.)

In England, oratorios have been much used in our cathedrals. Among the

most celebrated oratorios are _the Messiah_ of Handel, and _the

Creation_ of Haydn.

ORATORY. A name given by Christians to certain places of religious

worship.

In ecclesiastical antiquity, the term houses of prayer, or _oratories_,

is frequently given to churches in general, of which there are

innumerable instances in ancient Christian writers. But in some canons

the name _oratory_ seems confined to private chapels, or places of

worship set up for the convenience of private families, yet still

depending on the parochial churches, and differing from them in this,

that they were only places of prayer, but not for celebrating the

communion; or, if that were at any time allowed to private families,

yet, at least, upon great and solemn festivals, they were to resort for

communion to the parish churches.—_Broughton._

ORATORY, PRIESTS OF THE. There are two congregations of monks, one in

Italy, the other in France, which are called by this name.

The priests of the oratory in Italy had for their founder, Philip de

Neri, a native of Florence, who, in the year 1548, founded at Rome the

Confraternity of the Holy Trinity. This society originally consisted of

but fifteen poor persons, who assembled in the church of St. Saviour _in

campo_, every first Sunday in the month, to practise the exercises of

piety prescribed by the holy founder. The pope gave leave to assemble in

the church of St. Girolamo dell Carita, from the _Oratorio_ or chapel in

which church they derived their name. Afterwards, their number

increasing, by the addition to the society of several persons of

distinction, Neri proceeded to establish an hospital for the reception

of poor pilgrims, who, coming to Rome to visit the tombs of St. Peter

and St. Paul, were obliged, for want of a lodging, to lie in the

streets, and at the doors of the churches. For this charitable purpose,

Pope Paul IV. gave to the society the parochial church of St. Benedict,

close by which church was built an hospital so large, that, in the

Jubilee year, 1600, it received 44,500 men, and 25,500 women, who came

in pilgrimage to Rome.

Philip Neri, besides this charitable foundation for pilgrims, held

spiritual conferences at Rome, in a large chamber accommodated in the

form of an oratory: in which he was assisted by the famous Baronius,

author of the “Ecclesiastical Annals.” Here were delivered lectures of

religion and morality, and the auditors were instructed in

ecclesiastical history. The assembly always ended with prayers, and

hymns to the glory of GOD; after which, the founder, and his companions,

visited the churches and hospitals, and took care of the sick. And now

it was that this religious society began to be called _Priests of the

Oratory_.

In 1574, the Florentines at Rome, with the permission of Pope Gregory

XIII., built a very spacious oratory, in which Neri continued his

religious assemblies. The pope likewise gave him the parochial church of

Vallicella, and, the same year, approved the constitutions he had drawn

up for the government of his congregation, of which St. Philip himself

was the first general.

This new institute soon made a great progress, and divers other

establishments were made on the same model; particularly at Naples,

Milan, Fermo, and Palermo. The founder having resigned the office of

general, he was succeeded therein by Baronius, who was afterwards

promoted to the dignity of a cardinal. Neri died the 25th of May, 1595,

and was canonized in 1622 by Pope Gregory XV. After his death, this

congregation made a further progress in Italy, and has produced several

cardinals and eminent writers, as Baronius, Oderic Rainaldi, and others.

The priests of the Oratory in France were established upon the model of

those in Italy, and owe their rise to Cardinal Berulle, a native of

Champagne; who resolved upon this foundation, in order to revive the

splendour of the ecclesiastical state, which was greatly sunk through

the miseries of the civil wars, the increase of heresies, and a general

corruption of manners. To this end he assembled a community of

ecclesiastics, in 1611, in the suburb of St. James, where is at present

the famous monastery of Val-de-Grace. They obtained the king’s letters

patent for their establishment; and, in 1613, Pope Paul V. approved this

congregation under the title of the Oratory of JESUS.

This congregation consisted of two sorts of persons; the one, as it

were, incorporated, the other only associates. The former governed the

houses of this institute; the latter were only employed in forming

themselves to the life and manners of ecclesiastics. And this was the

true spirit of this congregation, in which they taught neither human

learning, nor theology, but only the virtues of the ecclesiastical life.

After the death of Cardinal Berulle, which happened the 2nd of October,

1629, the priests of the Oratory made a great progress in France and

other countries. This order had eleven houses in the Low Countries, one

at Liege, two in the county of Avignon, and one in Savoy, besides

fifty-eight in France. The first house, which was, as it were, the

mother of all the rest, was that of the street St. Honoré, at Paris,

where the general resided. The priests of this congregation were not,

properly speaking, monks, being obliged to no vows, and their institute

being purely ecclesiastical or sacerdotal.—_Broughton._ The Oratorians

have lately appeared in England.

ORDEAL. An appeal to the judgment of Almighty GOD, in criminal cases,

when the innocence or guilt of the accused rested on insufficient

evidence.

Among the Saxons and Normans, if any person was charged with theft,

adultery, murder, treason, perjury, &c., in these cases, if the person

neither pleaded guilty, nor could be convicted by legal evidence, it was

either in the prosecutor’s or judge’s power to put him upon the ordeal;

and provided he passed through this test unhurt, he was discharged;

otherwise he was put into the hands of justice, to be punished as the

law directed, in case he had been cast by the ordinary forms of

prosecution. For we are to observe, that this trial by ordeal was not

designed for the punishment of those in whose cases the ordinary forms

had miscarried; the intention of it was rather to clear the truth, where

it could not be otherwise discovered, and make way for the execution of

the law.

There are several sorts of this inquiry; the trial was sometimes made by

cold, and sometimes by scalding, water; sometimes by ploughshares, or

bars of iron, heated burning hot; sometimes the accused purged their

innocence by receiving the sacrament; and sometimes by eating a piece of

barley bread called the corsned.

In the trial by cold water, the persons suspected were thrown naked into

a pond, or river: if they sank they were acquitted, but if they floated

upon the river without any swimming postures it was taken for an

evidence of guilt.

When scalding water was the test, they were to plunge their arm in a

tub, or kettle, to the elbow; if this was done without any signs of

pain, or marks of scalding, the person was discharged; but if there was

the least complaint under the operation, or any scar or impression to be

seen, it was taken for proof against him. Slaves, peasants, and people

of mean condition, were put upon this water ordeal.

Persons of figure and quality were generally tried by the burning iron.

This ordeal had different circumstances in proportion to the crimes

objected. If the person was only impeached for a single crime, the iron

was to weigh but one pound: but if he was prosecuted upon several

articles, the weight of the iron was to increase proportionably; and

here the person impeached was either to hold a burning ball of iron in

his hand, and move with it to a certain distance, or else to walk

barefoot upon heated ploughshares, placed about a yard from each other.

If after this trial his hands and feet were untouched, and he discovered

no signs of feeling any pain, he was discharged by the court; but if the

matter fell out otherwise, he was remitted to the punishment of the law.

Before the person accused was brought to the ordeal, he was obliged to

swear his innocence, and sometimes receive the holy eucharist.

The Christians of this age had a strong reliance upon this way of trial,

not in the least doubting but that GOD would suspend the force of

nature, and clear the truth by a supernatural interposition. If we may

believe the records of those times, we shall find that innocent persons

were frequently rescued, in a surprising manner, perhaps by some skilful

management on the part of the authorities aware of the fact.

To proceed to some of the preliminaries of the ordeal. After the charge

was legally brought in, the person impeached was to spend three days in

fasting and prayer. At the day of the trial, which was made in the

church, the priest, appearing in the habit of his function, took up the

iron which lay before the altar, and, repeating the hymn of the Three

Children, put it into the fire. This being done, he proceeded to some

forms of benediction over the fire and iron; after which, he sprinkled

the iron with holy water, and made the sign of the cross in the name of

the Blessed TRINITY: upon which the person accused passed through the

test.

The ceremony of the scalding water ordeal was much the same. But when

the trial was to be made by cold water, the three days’ fast and the

other religious circumstances being premised, the person suspected drank

a draught of holy water, to which the priest added an imprecation in

case he was guilty: then the water, into which the presumed criminal was

to be thrown, had a sort of exorcising form of prayer said over it; by

which the element was, as it were, conjured, by the most solemn

expressions, to detect the guilty and discover the truth.

The bread called the _corsned_ was another way of trial. The person

prosecuted took an ounce of it fasting, or sometimes the same quantity

in cheese, and sometimes the holy eucharist. Immediately before this was

done, the priest read the Litany proper to the occasion, and proceeded

to another prayer, in which he desired that GOD would please to bring

the truth of the matter in question to light, and that the evil spirits

might have no power to perplex the inquiry, and prevent the discovery;

that if the person was guilty, the morsel might stick in his throat and

find no passage; that his face might turn pale, his limbs be convulsed,

and an horrible alteration appear in his whole body; but if innocent, he

desired that which the party received might make its way easily into his

stomach, and turn to health and nourishment.

Notwithstanding the commonness of this custom in England, and other

parts of Christendom, it began to be disliked at last, and fell several

times under the censure of the Church and State: thus Louis, and

Lotharius his successor, emperors of Germany, positively forbade the

ordeal by cold water. The trial likewise by scalding water, and burning

iron, was condemned by Pope Stephen V. It is probable they might think

it a rash way of proceeding, and a tempting of GOD; and that it was

unreasonable to put innocence upon supernatural proof, and pronounce a

man guilty, unless he had a miracle to acquit him. The first public

discountenance of it from the State which we meet with in England, was

in the third year of King Henry III. Most of the judges in their

circuits received an order from the king and council not to put any

person upon the trial ordeal, in regard it was prohibited by the court

of Rome. This order of the king and council, Sir Edward Coke, as Sir

Henry Spelman observes, mistakes for an act of parliament. It is true,

as that learned antiquary goes on to say, at that time of day, a public

regulation, passed in council, and sealed with the king’s seal, had the

force of a law. It must, however, be said, this prohibition does not run

to the judges of all the circuits; but, it may be, the rest of the

justices might receive the same instructions another way. And though we

meet with no express law afterwards to this purpose, yet this method of

trial, standing condemned by the canons, languished by degrees, and at

last grew quite out of practice.

ORDER. The rules or laws of a monastic institution; and afterwards, in a

secondary sense, the several monastics living under the same rule or

order. Thus the _Order of Clugni_ signifies literally the new rule of

discipline prescribed by Odo to the Benedictines already assembled in

the monastery of Clugni; but secondarily, and in the more popular sense,

the great body of monastic institutions, wherever established, which

voluntarily subjected themselves to the same rule.

ORDERS, HOLY. (See _Bishop_, _Clergy_, _Deacon_, _Ordinal_,

_Ordination_, _Presbyter_, _Priest_.) “It is evident unto all men

diligently reading the Holy Scriptures and ancient authors, that from

the apostles’ time there have been these orders of ministers in CHRIST’S

Church; bishops, priests, and deacons. Which offices were evermore had

in such reverent estimation, that no man might presume to execute any of

them except he were first called, tried, examined, and known to have

such qualities as are requisite for the same; and also by public prayer,

with imposition of hands, were approved and admitted thereunto by lawful

authority. And therefore, to the intent that these orders might be

continued and reverently used and esteemed, in the united Church of

England and Ireland, no man shall be accounted or taken to be a bishop,

priest, or deacon in the united Church of England or Ireland, or

suffered to execute any of the said functions, except he be called,

tried, examined, and admitted thereunto, according to the form hereafter

following, or hath _had formerly episcopal consecration or

ordination_.”—_Preface to the English Ordinal._

As it is here said, in the ancient Church these three orders of

ministry, as established by CHRIST and his apostles, universally

prevailed. But, besides the bishops, priests, and deacons, there were,

in most of the Churches, other ecclesiastical persons of inferior rank,

who were allowed to take part in the ministrations of religion. These

constituted what are called the _inferior orders_, and in some of the

ancient canons they have the name of “clergy.”

There is this great difference between the three holy orders and the

others, that the former are everywhere mentioned as those degrees of men

whose ministrations were known and distinguished, and without which no

Church was looked upon as complete; but to show that the inferior orders

were never thought to be necessary in the same degree, let it be

considered, that different Churches, or the same Church in different

ages, had more or fewer of the inferior orders. In some were only

_readers_; in others, _subdeacons_, _exorcists_, _and acolyths_. The

Apostolic Canons mention only _subdeacons_, _readers_, _and singers_.

The Laodicean enumerate these, and also _exorcists and ostiaries_. But

while there was no standing rule respecting these merely ecclesiastical

orders, the three essential grades of the ministry were found in all

parts of the Church.

In the Church of England, the following are the regulations respecting

admission to Holy Orders observed in the various dioceses, as given in

Hodgson’s “Instructions.”

Persons desirous of being admitted as candidates for deacon’s orders,

are recommended to make a written application to the bishop,[10] six

months before the time of ordination, stating their age, college,

academical degree, and the usual place of their residence; together with

the names of any persons of respectability to whom they are best known,

and to whom the bishop may apply, if he thinks fit, for further

information concerning them.

The following six papers are to be sent by a candidate for deacon’s

orders, to the bishop in whose diocese the curacy which is to serve as a

title is situate, three weeks before the day of ordination, or at such

other time as the bishop shall appoint; and in due time he will be

informed by the bishop’s secretary when and where to attend for

examination.

1. Letters testimonial from his college; and in case the candidate shall

have quitted college, he must also present letters testimonial for the

period elapsed since he quitted college, in the following form, signed

by three beneficed clergymen, and countersigned by the bishop of the

diocese in which their benefices are respectively situate, if they are

not beneficed in the diocese of the bishop to whom the candidate applies

for ordination.

2. Form of letters testimonial for orders.

“To the [11]Right Reverend ——, by Divine permission Lord Bishop of ——

[_the bishop in whose diocese the curacy conferring the title is

situate_].

Whereas our beloved in Christ, A. B., bachelor of arts, (_or other

degree_,) of —— college, in the university of ——, hath declared to us

his intention of offering himself as a candidate for the sacred office

of a deacon, and for that end hath requested of us letters testimonial

of his good life and conversation; we therefore, whose names are

hereunto subscribed, do testify that the said A. B. hath been personally

known to us for the space of[12]—— last past; that we have had

opportunities of observing his conduct; that during the whole of that

time we verily believe that he lived piously, soberly, and honestly; nor

have we at any time heard anything to the contrary thereof; nor hath he

at any time, as far as we know or believe, held, written, or taught

anything contrary to the doctrine or discipline of the united Church of

England and Ireland; and, moreover, we believe him, in our consciences,

to be, as to his moral conduct, a person worthy to be admitted to the

sacred order of deacons.

In witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names, this —— day

of ——, in the year of our Lord 18—.

[13]C. D. rector of ——.

E. F. vicar of ——.

G. H. rector of ——.”

[_Countersignature._]

3. Form of notice or “Si quis,” and of the certificate of the same

having been published in the church of the parish where the

candidate usually resides, to be presented by the candidate if he

shall have quitted college.

“Notice is hereby given, that A. B., bachelor of arts, (_or other

degree_,) of —— college, Oxford, [_or_ Cambridge,] and now resident in

this parish, intends to offer himself a candidate for the holy office of

a deacon, at the ensuing ordination of the Lord Bishop of ——;[14] and if

any person knows any just cause or impediment for which he ought not to

be admitted into holy orders, he is now to declare the same, or to

signify the same forthwith to the Lord Bishop of ——.

We do hereby certify, that the above notice was publicly read by the

undersigned C. D., in the parish church of ——, in the county of ——,

during the time of Divine service on Sunday the —— day of last [_or_

instant], and no impediment was alleged.

Witness our hands this —— day of ——, in the year of our Lord 18—.

C. D. officiating minister.

E. F. churchwarden.”

4. Certificate from the divinity professor in the university, that the

candidate has duly attended his lectures. Also a certificate from any

other professor whose lectures the candidate may have been directed by

the bishop to attend.

5. Certificate of the candidate’s baptism, from the register book of the

parish where he was baptized, duly signed, by the officiating minister,

to show that he has completed his age of twenty-three years; and in case

he shall have attained that age, but cannot produce a certificate of his

baptism, then his father or mother, or other competent person, must make

a declaration, before a justice of the peace, of the actual time of his

birth: and here it may be necessary to remark, that by an act of the 44

Geo. III. c. 43, intituled “An Act to enforce the due observance of the

canons and rubric respecting the ages of persons to be admitted into the

sacred order of deacon and priest,” it is enacted, that thenceforth no

person shall be admitted a deacon before he shall have attained the age

of three and twenty years complete; and that no person shall be admitted

a priest before he shall have attained the age of four and twenty years

complete: and that if a person shall be admitted a deacon before he

shall have attained the age of twenty-three years complete, or a priest

before he shall have attained the age of twenty-four years complete,

such admission shall be void in law; and the person so admitted shall be

incapable of holding any ecclesiastical preferment.

6. The form of a nomination to serve as a title for orders, if the

incumbent is non-resident.

To the Right Reverend ——, Lord Bishop of ——.

These are to certify your lordship, that I, C. D., rector [_or_ vicar,

&c.] of ——, in the county of ——, and your lordship’s diocese of ——, do

hereby nominate A. B., bachelor of arts, (_or other degree_,) of ——

college in the university of ——, to perform the office of curate in my

church of —— aforesaid; and do promise to allow him the yearly stipend

of —— pounds, to be paid by equal quarterly payments, [_as to amount of

stipend, see title “Stipends payable to Curates,”_] with the surplice

fees, amounting on an average to —— pounds per annum, (_if they are

intended to be allowed_,) and the use of the glebe-house, garden, and

offices, which he is to occupy (_if that be the fact; if not, state the

reason, and name where and what distance[15] from the church the curate

purposes to reside_): and I do hereby state to your lordship, that the

said A. B. does not intend to serve, as curate, in any other parish, nor

to officiate in any other church or chapel (_if such be the fact,

otherwise state the real fact_); that the net annual value of my said

benefice, estimated according to the act of parliament 1 & 2 Victoria,

c. 106, sects. 8 and 10, is —— pounds, and the population thereof,

according to the latest returns of population made under the authority

of parliament, is ——. That there is only one church belonging to my said

benefice (_if there be another church or chapel, state the fact_); and

that I was admitted to the said benefice on the —— day of —— 18—.[16]

“And I do hereby promise and engage with your lordship and the said A.

B., that I will continue to employ the said A. B., in the office of

curate in my said church, until he shall be otherwise provided of some

ecclesiastical preferment, unless, for any fault by him committed, he

shall be lawfully removed from the same; and I hereby solemnly declare

that I do not fraudulently give this certificate, to entitle the said A.

B. to receive holy orders, but with a real intention to employ him in my

said church, according to what is before expressed.”

Witness my hand this —— day of ——, in the year of our Lord 18—.

[_Signature and address of_] C. D.

_Declaration [to be written at the foot of the Nomination]._

“We the before-named C. D. and A. B. do declare to the said Lord Bishop

of ——, as follows; namely, I the said C. D. do declare that I _bonâ

fide_ intend to pay, and I the said A. B. do declare that I _bonâ fide_

intend to receive, the whole actual stipend mentioned in the foregoing

nomination and statement, without any abatement in respect of rent or

consideration for the use of the glebe-house, garden, and offices

thereby agreed to be assigned, and without any other deduction or

reservation whatsoever.

Witness our hands this —— day of ——, 18—.

[_Signatures of_] C. D.

A. B.”

6. (_a_) The form of nomination to serve as a title for orders, if the

incumbent is resident.

The same form as No. 6, so far as “quarterly payments;” then proceed as

follows:—And I do hereby state to your lordship, that the said A. B.

intends to reside in the said parish, in a house [_describe its

situation, so as clearly to identify it_], distant from my church ——

mile [_if_ A. B. _does not intend to reside in the parish, then state at

what place he intends to reside, and its distance from the said

church_]; that the said A. B. does not intend to serve, as curate, any

other parish, nor to officiate in any other church or chapel (_if such

be the fact, otherwise state the real fact_); and I do hereby promise

and engage with your lordship, and so on [_in the same form as No. 6, to

the end_].

Witness my hand this —— day of ——, 18—.

[_Signature and address of_] C. D.

The declaration to be written at the foot of the nomination is to be in

the same form as No. 6, so far as the word “statement,” after which

proceed as follows:—“Without any deduction or reservation whatsoever.

Witness our hands this —— day of ——, 18—.

[_Signatures of_] C. D.

A. B.”

It is proper to observe, that the following declaration is to be

subscribed previous to ordination, in the bishop’s presence, by all

persons who are to be ordained:—

“I, A. B., do willingly, and from my heart, subscribe to the thirty-nine

articles of religion of the united Church of England and Ireland, and to

the three articles in the thirty-sixth canon; and to all things therein

contained.”

N. B.—The following are the three articles referred to:

“1. That the Queen’s majesty, under GOD, is the only supreme governor of

this realm, and of all other her highness’s dominions and countries, as

well in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal;

and that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate hath,

or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or

authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within her majesty’s said

realms, dominions, and countries.

“2. That the Book of Common Prayer, and of ordering of bishops, priests,

and deacons, containeth in it nothing contrary to the word of GOD, and

that it may lawfully so be used; and that he himself will use the form

in the said book prescribed, in public prayer and administration of the

sacraments, and none other.

“3. That he alloweth the book of articles of religion, agreed upon by

the archbishops and bishops of both provinces and the whole clergy, in

the convocation holden at London, in the year of our LORD one thousand

five hundred sixty and two; and that he acknowledgeth all and every the

articles therein contained, being in number nine and thirty, besides the

ratification, to be agreeable to the word of GOD.”

_Oaths to be taken by those who are to be ordained, at the time of

Ordination._

THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE.

“I, A. B., do sincerely promise and swear, that I will be faithful, and

bear true allegiance to her Majesty Queen Victoria. So help me GOD.”

THE OATH OF SUPREMACY.

“I, A. B., do swear, that I do from my heart abhor, detest, and abjure,

as impious and heretical, that damnable doctrine and position, that

princes excommunicated or deprived by the pope, or any authority of the

see of Rome, may be deposed or murdered by their subjects, or any other

whatsoever. And I do declare, that no foreign prince, person, prelate,

state, or potentate hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power,

superiority, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual,

within this realm. So help me GOD.”

The act of parliament 59 Geo. III. c. 60, contains directions for the

use and guidance of candidates for orders who are to officiate as

clergymen in the colonies, or for her Majesty’s foreign possessions.

_Instructions as to Priest’s orders._[17]

The following papers are to be sent by a candidate for priest’s orders

to the bishop, three weeks before the day of ordination, or at such

other time as the bishop shall appoint, and in due time he will be

informed by the bishop’s secretary when and where to attend for

examination.

Where a candidate applies for priest’s orders to the same bishop who

ordained him deacon, the papers 1 and 2 only are required.

1. Letters testimonial of his sound doctrine, good life, and behaviour,

for the time elapsed since he was ordained deacon, signed by three

beneficed clergymen, and countersigned by the bishop of the diocese in

which their benefices are respectively situate, if not beneficed in the

diocese of the bishop to whom the candidate applies for ordination. (See

_Form of Testimonial, in Instructions as to Deacon’s Orders, No. 2_.)

2. Notice, or “Si quis,” and certificate of the publication thereof.

(See _Form thereof, in the Instructions as to Deacon’s Orders, No. 3_.)

In case the candidate was ordained deacon by the bishop of another

diocese, he must produce not only the papers, Nos. 1 and 2, but also the

following papers, Nos. 3, 4, and 5.

As it is not common for a deacon to be ordained priest by any other than

the bishop who admitted him to deacon’s orders, a candidate applying to

the bishop of another diocese must, in the first instance, state to him

the particular circumstances which occasion the application, the curacy

which he served, and for what period.

3. Letters of deacon’s orders.

4. A certificate of baptism.

5. Nomination, if not already licensed.

The same subscriptions and oaths are made and taken by candidates for

priest’s orders, as by candidates for deacon’s orders.

With respect to foreign Protestants, Palmer observes: “We are not bound

to condemn Presbyterian orders in every case: for instance, the

appointment of ministers by the Protestants in Germany during the

Reformation, was most probably _invalid_; and yet, considering their

difficulties, the fact of their appeal to a general council, their

expectation of reunion with the Church, and therefore the impossibility

of establishing a rival hierarchy, I think we are not bound to condemn

their appointments of ministers, as many learned and orthodox writers

have done; who, however, seem not to have observed the peculiarities of

their position, and to have supposed that they were at once definitively

separated from the Roman churches. Certain differences of opinion, then,

in reference to the question of Presbyterian ordinations, may exist

without any material inconvenience.

“That ordinations by mere presbyters are, (however _excusable_ under

circumstances of great difficulty,) in fact, _unauthorized and invalid_,

is the more usual sentiment of theologians, and is most accordant with

Scripture, and with the practice of the Catholic Church in general, and

of our Churches in particular, which do not recognise any such

ordinations.”

ORDERS OF MONKS. The several orders of monks are distinguished in this

manner by their habits. The White Friars are canons regular of the order

of St. Augustine. Grey Friars are Cistercian monks, who changed their

black habit into a grey one. The Black Friars are Benedictines.

ORDINAL. The Ordinal is that book which contains the forms observed in

the Church for making, ordaining, and consecrating, bishops, priests,

and deacons. In the liturgy established in the second year of King

Edward VI., there was also a form of consecrating and ordaining of

bishops, priests, and deacons, not much differing from the present form.

Afterwards, by the 3 & 4 Edward VI. c. 10, it was enacted that all books

heretofore used for the service of the Church, other than such as shall

be set forth by the king’s majesty, shall be clearly abolished (s. 1).

And by the 5 & 6 Edward VI. c. 1, it is thus enacted: The king, with the

assent of the lords and commons in parliament, has annexed the Book of

Common Prayer to this present statute, adding also a form and manner of

making and consecrating of archbishops, bishops, priests, and deacons,

to be of like force and authority as the Book of Common Prayer. And, by

Art. 36: “The book of consecration of archbishops and bishops, and

ordering of priests and deacons, lately set forth in the time of Edward

VI., and confirmed at the same time by authority of parliament, doth

contain all things necessary to such consecration and ordering; neither

hath it anything that of itself is superstitious and ungodly. And

therefore whosoever are consecrated or ordered according to the rites of

that book, since the second year of the forenamed King Edward unto this

time, or hereafter shall be consecrated or ordered according to the same

rites, we declare all such to be rightly ordered, and lawfully

consecrated and ordered.” And by Canon 8: “Whosoever shall affirm or

teach, that the form and manner of making and consecrating bishops,

priests, and deacons, containeth anything that is repugnant to the word

of GOD; or that they who are made bishops, priests, and deacons, in that

form, are not lawfully made, nor ought to be accounted either by

themselves or others to be truly either bishops, priests, or deacons,

until they have some other calling to those Divine offices, let him be

excommunicated, _ipso facto_, not to be restored until he repent and

publicly revoke such his wicked errors.”

The form in which orders are conferred in our Church is this: “The

bishop, with the priests present, shall lay their hands severally upon

the head of every one that receiveth the order of priesthood; the

receivers humbly kneeling, and the bishop saying, ‘Receive the HOLY

GHOST for the office and work of a priest, in the Church of GOD, _now

committed unto thee_ by the imposition of our hands. Whose sins thou

dost forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins thou dost retain, they

are retained. And be thou a faithful dispenser of the word of GOD, and

of his holy sacraments: in the name of the FATHER, and of the SON, and

of the HOLY GHOST.’” In the office for the ordering of deacons, the

bishop lays on his hands, but does not use the words, “Receive the HOLY

GHOST,” &c., or grant authority to forgive or retain sins. In the office

for the consecration of bishops, the form is thus: “Then the archbishop

and bishops present shall lay their hands upon the head of the elected

bishop, kneeling before them on his knees, the archbishop saying,

‘Receive the HOLY GHOST for the office and work of a bishop in the

Church of GOD, now committed unto thee by the laying on of our hands, in

the name of the FATHER, and of the SON, and of the HOLY GHOST. Amen. And

remember that thou stir up _the grace of_ GOD _which is given thee_ BY

_the imposition of our hands_, for GOD hath not given us the spirit of

fear, but of power, and love, and soberness.’”

Several Protestant dissenting communities have taken it upon themselves

to lay on hands when a person is elected to the dissenting ministry; but

none, that we are aware of, have ever assumed the solemn office of thus

conferring the grace of GOD by the imposition of human hands, which

would clearly be blasphemous, except there existed a commission from GOD

to do so, which commission, without the apostolical succession, cannot

be proved, unless by miracle. This form has given great offence to many

conscientious ultra-Protestants. Attempts are sometimes made to explain

the words away; but such explanations have been seldom found

satisfactory, except to those whose interest it is to be satisfied. It

is evident that they are to be understood simply, clearly,

unequivocally, to express that the grace of GOD is given by the

imposition of the bishop’s hands; and that if we speak of this as

superstitious or ungodly, we are, as may be seen from the 36th Article

and the 8th Canon, under the anathema of our Church. On the other hand,

the comfort is indescribably great to those who believe that grace

ministerial is thus conveyed in attending the ministry of the Church;

the efficacy of the ministrations of whose ministers depends not on the

merit or talent of the individual, but on the grace of GOD, of which he

is the authorized, though unworthy, dispenser.

ORDINANCES OF THE CHURCH. Rites ordained by GOD to be means of grace,

such as, 1. Baptism (Matt. xxviii. 19); 2. The LORD’S supper (Matt.

xxvi. 26; 1 Cor. xi. 24, &c.); 3. Preaching and reading the word (Mark

xvi. 15; Rom. x. 15); 4. Hearing the gospel (Mark iv. 24; Rom. x. 17);

5. Public and private prayer (1 Cor. xiv. 15, 19; Matt. vi. 6; Ps. v. 1,

7); 6. Singing of psalms (Col. iii. 16; Eph. v. 19); 7. Fasting (Matt.

ix. 15; Joel ii. 12); 8. Solemn thanksgiving (Ps. ix. 14; 1 Thess. v.

18). See _Rites_.

ORDINARY. The person who has ecclesiastical jurisdiction, as of course

and of common right, in opposition to persons who are extraordinarily

appointed. In some acts of parliament we find the bishop called

ordinary, and so he is taken at the common law, as having ordinary

jurisdiction in causes ecclesiastical; albeit, in a more general

acceptation, the word _Ordinary_ signifies any judge authorized to take

cognizance of causes in his own proper right, as he is a magistrate, and

not by way of deputation or delegation.

ORDINATION. (See _Orders_.) The apostles appointed bishops, priests, and

deacons, to be the standing guides and governors of the Church; and

because there should be a succession of them continued in all ages, for

the peace and preservation of those churches which they had planted,

therefore it is necessary that there should be a power lodged somewhere,

to set apart some distinct orders of men to those public offices, and

this is called ordination. Many dissenting sects hold it necessary that

there should be such a power, but they dispute where it is. Some affirm

that a man ought not to take upon him the ministry without a lawful

call, which is very true. They likewise agree that ordination ought to

be continued, and they define it to be a solemn setting apart of some

person to a church office; but they say it is only to be done by

preaching presbyters, and that those who are not set apart themselves

for the work of the ministry, have no power to join in setting apart

others for that purpose; and this form of ordination was proposed to the

parliament, in the year 1643, by an assembly of those persons, in order

to be ratified. There is another sort of people who hold that where

there are no such preaching presbyters, in such case, other persons,

sufficiently qualified and approved for their gifts and graces by other

ministers, being chosen by the people, and set apart for the ministry,

by prayer and fasting in the congregation, may exercise that office, so

that some place the power of ordination in simple presbyters, and others

in the people. There are others who maintain that ordination is not to

be justified by Scripture, and that the word itself signifies a lifting

up of hands, and is used in Scripture for giving a vote, which in all

popular assemblies is customary even at this day: from whence they infer

that the Christian churches were at first democratical, that is, the

whole congregation chose their pastor; and that by virtue of such choice

he did not pretend to any peculiar jurisdiction distinct from others,

but he was only approved by the congregation for his parts, and

appointed to instruct the people, to visit the sick, and to perform all

other offices of a minister, and at other times he followed his trade;

and that the Christians in those days had no notion how a pastor could

pretend to any succession to qualify him for the ministry, for that the

pretence of dispensing divine things by a mere human constitution was

such an absurdity that it could not be reconciled to reason.

This and many more such calumnies were cast on ordination, and the

bishops themselves were called ordination-mongers; but it was by those

who alleged that the purity of the Christian religion, and the good and

orderly government of the world, had been much better provided for

without any clergy. But we will show from Scripture, from antiquity, and

from the concurrent testimony of the Fathers, that bishops had, and

ought to have, the power of ordination.

When our SAVIOUR established the Christian Church, he made his apostles

governors thereof, and vested them with a power to ordain others to the

ministry; and, accordingly, they ordained the seven deacons, and

consecrated St. James bishop of Jerusalem, and he ordained presbyters of

that church. That Timothy, as soon as he was made bishop of Ephesus by

the great apostle of the Gentiles, but not before, had this power of

ordination, is allowed by St. Chrysostom himself, who magnified the

power of presbyters more than any of the Fathers; and he proves it thus,

viz. because St. Paul gave Timothy a caution, not to admit any one

rashly to an ecclesiastical office. It is true he likewise bid him not

to despise the gift which was given to him by prophecy, with laying on

of the hands of the company of elders; but he could not mean by those

words an assembly of ordinary presbyters, for as such they could not

have conferred any extraordinary commission, especially upon Timothy,

because he was, at that very time, a bishop, and ordained by St. Paul

himself. He had a jurisdiction over all the presbyters of Asia; for he

had power given him by that apostle to inquire into their conversation

and abilities, and then to admit them into that holy office, if he found

them qualified, and not otherwise. Titus had the same power throughout

that populous island of Crete; and these things are so plain, that they

must deny the authority of the Scriptures, who deny the power of

ordination to be originally in bishops: and therefore they have invented

a senseless objection, viz. that though Timothy and Titus were superior

to presbyters, yet their power was but temporary; for they were chosen

by the apostles at that time, upon a particular occasion, to preside in

the assemblies of presbyters, to moderate the affairs of those churches,

which power was to determine at the expiration of their commission. But

this cannot be proved by history, or any records. It is a mere

invention, contrived to make a party between those two distinct orders

of men; and it can have no foundation in Scripture, from the promiscuous

use of the words bishop and presbyter: for though it is true that the

last is used to show the humility of a bishop, yet it is as true that

the word apostle is likewise used to show his superiority. So that, in

the primitive times, bishops ordained as bishops, and not as presbyters;

for in those days, as it has been already observed, bishops and

presbyters were accounted distinct in order, whatever has of late years

been advanced to the contrary. Therefore, the objection that a bishop

and presbyter were neither distinct in order or office; that though the

apostles, and those who immediately succeeded them, exercised a large

jurisdiction, yet it was granted to them by our SAVIOUR as they were

apostles, and did in no wise concern their successors, to whom he gave

no such authority, nor any manner of superiority over their fellow

presbyters,—these, and such like, are doctrines which neither agree with

the Scripture, nor with the Fathers; they are contrary to the plain and

constant usage in the Church for 1600 years, during all which time all

Christian churches were governed by bishops.

By the 31st canon of the Church of England it is ordained: “Forasmuch as

the ancient Fathers of the Church, led by the example of the apostles,

appointed prayers and fasts to be used at the solemn ordaining of

ministers, and to that purpose allotted certain times, in which only

sacred orders might be given and conferred, we, following their holy and

religious example, do constitute and decree, that no deacons or

ministers be made or ordained, but only on Sundays immediately following

_jejunia quatuor temporum_, commonly called Ember Weeks, appointed in

ancient time for prayer and fasting, (purposely for this cause at the

first institution,) and so continued at this day in the Church of

England.” (See _Ember Days_.)

ORGAN. The greatest of all instruments of music, consisting of pipes, or

flutes, made vocal by wind, which is supplied by bellows, and acted on

by keys touched by the hands and feet. The Latin word _organum_, means

an instrument in general; (just as we now employ the word organ;) but in

the course of time it was more specially applied, in a more limited

sense, to instruments of music, and specially to that great vehicle of

sound, which is in part a combination of many instruments, and is an

orchestra in itself. The first organ was made by Ctesibius of

Alexandria, about 200 years B. C., (as appears from Athenæus, iv. 75,)

with pipes of bronze and lead, with keys, levers, and slides: the wind

from a bellows, in which the pressure of water supplied the place of the

weight now placed on the bellows. This sort of organ was called

hydraulic; and continued in use so late as the ninth century. An epigram

of Julian the Apostate, in the middle of the fourth century, describes

it as played with the _fingers_, not with the _fists_, and as having

copper pipes. (_Brunck, Analecta_ ii. 403.) St. Augustine describes it

as “_grande, et inflata follibus_.” It is also spoken of by Ammianus

Marcellinus; and exactly described by Claudian, in the fourth century;

and Cassiodorus (in the fifth century) defines it as a _tower_, made

with various pipes, inflated by bellows, and played on by the fingers,

and as having great sweetness and power. It was never used in the Greek

Church. Its first ecclesiastical use in the West is a matter of

obscurity. Bellarmine states, though on doubtful authority, that, in

660, Pope Vitalian introduced it into the church service at Rome. D.

Rimbault, in his very interesting notes to Roger North’s Memoirs of

Music, (p. 48,) says, that it was introduced into the English service by

Theodore and Adrian, emissaries of Vitalian; and from a passage in the

writings of Adhelm, bishop of Sherborne, who died in 709, it appears

that the external case was gilt, (“_auratis capsis_,”) and that the

pipes were numerous: “maxima _millenis_ organa _flabris_.” All

ecclesiastical historians relate, that in 757 the Eastern emperor

Constantine Copronymus sent an organ to Pepin, which was placed, as

affirmed by M. Hamel, (Manuel des Facteurs des Orgues,) in a church at

Compiegne. In 811, ambassadors from Constantinople brought two organs to

Charlemagne. However, it is supposed that its use did not become

generally known in France till 826, when a Venetian priest introduced

what is supposed to be an hydraulic organ. In the same century, Walafred

Strabo says, Louis le Debonnaire gave an organ to Aix la Chapelle. In

994, according to Petronius, there were organs at Erfurt and Magdeburg.

In 951, Wulstan relates that Elphege, bishop of Winchester, gave an

organ to Winchester with 400 pipes, 40 keys, and (if his meaning is

clear) 26 pairs of bellows, played by two organists. (See _Turner’s

Anglo-Saxons_, book ix. c. 9.) In the tenth century, Dunstan, archbishop

of Canterbury, gave an organ to Malmesbury, described by William of

Malmesbury as having copper pipes. At the same time an organ was given

to Ramsey church, with copper pipes, “emitting a sweet melody and

far-resounding peal,” played on feast days. (See _Turner_, as before.)

In the twelfth century, an organ is mentioned in the abbey of Fécamp.

And Gervas the monk, describing Canterbury cathedral as he knew it

before the fire in 1172, says, that it had arches to carry organs.

The above notices suffice to show the error of Bingham’s statement, that

organs were not used in churches till after Thomas Aquinas’ time in

1250. Aquinas merely specifies _harps_ and _psalteries_, as not used,

“which our Church does not assume, lest she should seem to judaize.” The

south of France, as also the south of Italy, long retained Oriental

customs in their churches; thus at Lyons organs were for a long time

unemployed. Cardinal Caietan says, the organ was not used in the

primitive Church, and gives this as a reason why it is not used in the

pope’s chapel. A tenacious respect for antiquity seems to be the only

reason which forbids its use in the Greek churches: since, in some

branches of that communion, as in Russia, vocal harmony in the sacred

offices is carried to great perfection. Hospinian, an ultra-Protestant

writer, contends against the use of it, on the authority of St. Paul.

So strongly prejudiced were other writers of the ultra-Protestant school

against organs that Newte, in his preface to Dodwell on Music, after

mentioning the report of Balæus, that organs were introduced in the year

660, adds, “or rather that it may not want the mark of the beast of the

Revelation, as the Magdeburg continuators say, 666.” It is difficult to

understand the principle of the objection. The ordering of the

instrumental as well as oral music in the temple was a matter, be it

remembered, of Divine institution: thus in 2 Chron. xxix. 25. “And he

set the Levites in the house of the Lord with cymbals, with psalteries,

and with harps, according to the commandment of David, and of Gad the

king’s seer, and Nathan the prophet: _for so was the commandment of the

Lord by his prophets_.” To be consistent, all oral song, nay, the words

of the sacred songs themselves, ought to be silenced also.

At the time of the Reformation, organs were considered as among the

vilest remnants of Popery, by all the more enthusiastic partisans of

Protestantism. And by those who carried out the principles of

ultra-Protestantism to their legitimate extent at the great Rebellion,

organs were so generally demolished, that scarcely an instrument could

be found in England at the Restoration; and foreigners were brought over

to play on some of those which were then erected. It is satisfactory to

see such prejudices wearing away. We now find those whose horror at

fasting, or at self-denials, or at turning to the east in prayer, or at

preaching in a surplice, as the Prayer Book directs, or implies, or at

bowing to the altar, or at preferring prayer to preaching, &c., is

unfeigned, and who see in these observances nothing but Popery,

nevertheless expending large sums of money to erect organs, which are

now heard to sound in their very meeting-houses. We believe the Kirk of

Scotland is alone consistent in this respect, and true to the principles

of their ultra-Protestant forefathers; the members of that Establishment

do not even yet tolerate what at the Reformation was called “a squeaking

abomination.”

The organ in the Anglican Church had been the regular accompaniment of

the choral service for some hundred years before the Reformation. It is

still used in cathedrals, collegiate and royal churches and chapels,

more frequently than abroad; where it is more employed for symphonies

than for an accompaniment, and that in general only on Sundays,

holy-days, and eves; whereas in regular English choirs it is used at

least twice daily, accompanying the psalms, canticles, and anthems, and

those parts of the service which are allowed by the rubric to be sung,

including the responses and litanies on more solemn occasions. In

ancient times (till the great Rebellion) organs were more common in the

college chapels at the universities than now. The general introduction

of organs into London parish churches, however, did not take place till

after the Restoration. Their use appears never to have been very

general, even in cathedrals, in Ireland; and in Scotland it is supposed

that they were not introduced till the 15th century.

The phrase _pair of organs_ occurs in many old books. It had its origin

probably in the two _stops_ which were common in the smaller mediæval

organs: possibly, however, to the two organs, which in the middle ages,

as now, entered into the construction of the larger instruments. These

large organs consist in reality of three or four instruments, each

having its separate sound-board and set of keys; viz. 1. The great

organ, for choruses and louder passages: 2. The choir organ, softer than

the former, used for the verse passages, &c., and the alternate chant of

the psalms; generally placed in front of the great organ; not called

from _chair_, as some suppose, (as being placed behind the organist’s

_chair_,) but from the choir: as appears from _Dugd. Mon._ ed. 1830, ii.

103, “when in the 15th century the abbot of Croyland gave two organs to

his church; the greater one being placed in the nave, the lesser in the

choir.” 3. The swell, an English invention, formerly the third manual,

played what was called the echo; which is still occasionally found

abroad. 4. The pedal organ, or that which is played by the feet. Foreign

organs have frequently four rows of manuals, and two of pedals.

It appears from Mr. Hamel’s work, already mentioned, that the organ of

the middle ages was by no means so small as is commonly imagined by

those who have been misled by ancient monuments and drawings. In the

16th century began the construction of those enormous machines, for

which Germany is so renowned: and in consequence it became customary in

the north of Europe to transfer the organ from one side of the choir to

the chancel screen, (the worst position possible,) or the west end. The

improvement of the organ has been progressively advancing ever since.

It may be considered consistent with the object of a Church Dictionary

to conclude this long article with some observation on an objection

often made to the employment in sacred music of what are wrongly called

the _imitative_ stops of the organ. In reality very few of its stops are

imitative. The organ is properly a collection of several instruments,

which a most complicated machinery enables the organist to play at the

same time. The trumpet, the bassoon, and hautboy stops, for example, are

each a set of real instruments of these names, differing from those

usually so called, only in being inflated by a bellows, not by the

mouth, and each giving but one note, and played on by keys. Thus when

the psalmist calls on us to praise him with the sound of the trumpet, it

is a _literal_ response to his summons to accompany the voice with the

stop of that name.

See _Hamel_, Manuel des Facteurs des Orgues, (comprehending _Bedos’_

great work;) and _Roger North’s Memoirs of Music, edited by Rimbault_,

already referred to; _Burney and Hawkins’s Histories of Music_; and

_Burney’s Musical Tour_.

The ORGAN mentioned in Scripture as the invention of Jubal, (Gen. iv.

21,) and in Job xxi. 12, and Ps. cl. 4, is in the Hebrew _Huggab_,

meaning, as Parkhurst supposes, a fastening or joining together. It is

supposed by Calmet (see _Music_) to have been like the ancient Pandean

pipes, a set of unequal flutes played by the mouth. As used in Gen. iv.

it seems to indicate wind instruments generally; but its form and

capacity is altogether unknown.

ORGANIST. An ecclesiastical officer, whose business it is to play upon

the organ in churches. In ancient times there was no stated organist,

the vicars choral being responsible for this duty in turn. In cathedrals

and choral foundations, he is, or ought to be, an essential member of

the collegiate body. The duty of English cathedral organists is

responsible, arduous, and of a sacred character. They are bound to

attend twice every day; and in order to be efficient, ought to be

skilful musicians, profound harmonists, versed in the knowledge of both

instrumental and vocal harmony, and endued with religious feeling. No

pains ought to be spared by the governing members of collegiate bodies

to render the office not only respectable and efficient, but religious

also.

ORIGINAL SIN. “Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as

the _Pelagians_ do vainly talk); but it is the fault and corruption of

the nature of every man that naturally is engendered of the offspring of

Adam; whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is

of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always

contrary to the spirit; and therefore in every person born into this

world, it deserveth GOD’S wrath and damnation. And this infection of

nature doth remain, yea, in them that are regenerated; whereby the lust

of the flesh, called in the Greek _phronema sarkos_, which some do

expound the wisdom, some sensuality, some the affection, some the desire

of the flesh, is not subject to the law of GOD. And although there is no

condemnation for them that believe, and are baptized,” [_renatis_, i. e.

born again, is the word used in the Latin copy,] “yet the apostle doth

confess, that concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of

sin.”—_Article_ ix. This article was intended to oppose the notion of

the School divines, who maintained that the infection of our nature is

not a mental, but a mere corporeal taint; that the body alone receives

and transmits the contagion, while the soul proceeds, in all cases,

immaculate from the hands of the Creator. Original sin they directly

opposed to original righteousness, and this they considered, not as

something connatural with man, but as a superinduced habit, or

adventitious ornament, the removal of which could not prove detrimental

to the native powers of the mind. Thus the School divines maintained, in

opposition to our Articles, that the lapse of Adam conveys to us solely

_imputed_ guilt, the corporeal infection which they admitted, not being

sin itself, but the subject matter; not _peccatum_, but _fomes peccati_.

The Lutherans taught that original sin is a corruption of our nature in

a general sense, the depravation of the mental faculties and the

corporeal appetites. The Calvinists maintain that lust and concupiscence

are truly and properly sin.

The Scriptures teach us that the sin of Adam not only made him liable to

death, but that it also changed the upright nature in which he was

originally formed, into one that was prone to wickedness; and that this

liability to death, and propensity to sin, were entailed from him upon

the whole race of mankind: “By one man sin entered into the world, and

death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have

sinned.” (Rom. v. 12.) “As by the offence of one, judgment came upon all

men to condemnation, even so, by the righteousness of one, the free gift

came upon all men unto justification of life.” (ver. 18.) “By one man’s

disobedience many were made sinners.” (ver. 19.) “Through the offence of

one, many be dead.” (ver. 15.) “By one man’s offence death reigned by

one.” (ver. 17.) “By man came death.” (1 Cor. xv. 21.) “In Adam all

die.” (ver. 22.) “The imagination of man’s heart is evil from his

youth.” (Gen. viii. 21.) “There is no man that sinneth not.” (1 Kings

viii. 46.) “God made man upright, but they found out many inventions.”

(Ecc. vii. 29.) “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves,

and the truth is not in us.” (1 John i. 8.) “The heart is deceitful

above all things, and desperately wicked.” (Jer. xvii. 9.) “The flesh is

weak.” (Matt. xxvi. 41.) “The flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the

spirit against the flesh, and these are contrary the one to the other,

so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.” (Gal. v. 17.) “I see

another law in my members warring against the law of my mind, and

bringing me into captivity to the law of sin, which is in my members.”

(Rom. vii. 23.) The general corruption of human nature, in consequence

of Adam’s disobedience, was acknowledged by the ancient Fathers of the

Christian Church. The term _Original Sin_ was first used by Augustine,

and before his time it was called the old guilt—the ancient wound—the

common curse—the old sin, &c.—_Tomline._

In Scripture this is called “the sin that dwelleth in us” (Rom. vii.

17); “the body of sin” (vi. 6); “the law of sin and death” (viii. 2);

“lust” (vii. 7); “the sin which so easily besets us” (Heb. xii. 1); “the

flesh” (Gal. v. 16); “the old man” (Eph. iv. 22); “the likeness of Adam”

(Gen. v. 3).

The corruption of nature called “original sin” is derived by

continual descent from father to son; wherewith all the powers of

the soul and body are infected, and that in all men equally. And

then, actual sin arising from hence, the understanding is blinded

with ignorance and infidelity. The memory is prone to forget the

good things which the understanding hath conceived. The will is

disobedient to the will of GOD, understood and remembered by us,

(the freedom of holiness, which it had at the first, being now

lost,) and is wholly bent to sin. The affections are ready to

overrule the will, and are subject to all disorder. And the

conscience itself is distempered and polluted.—_Usher._

Let us look into the world, let us look into ourselves, and we shall see

sufficient proofs of this original corruption; even in our infancy it

shows itself in many instances of obstinacy and perverseness; and as we

grow up it increases with our years; and unless timely checked by our

utmost care and diligence, (through the assistance of Divine grace,)

produces habits of all manner of iniquity. Let the proud deist boast of

the dignity of his nature, the sufficiency of his reason, and the

excellency of his moral attainments; but let us Christians not be

ashamed to own our own misery and our guilt; that our understandings are

darkened, our wills corrupted, and our whole nature depraved: then may

we apply to the Physician of our souls for the succours of his grace,

which alone can help and relieve us.—_Waldo._

ORIGENISTS. Heretics, in the fourth century, so called, because they

pretended to draw their opinions from the writings of the famous Origen,

a priest of Alexandria.

The Origenists made their first appearance in Italy in 397. Rufinus of

Aquileia, a priest of Alexandria, had studied the works of Origen with

so much application, that he adopted that writer’s Platonic notions for

Catholic truths. Full of these ideas, he went to Jerusalem, where Origen

had a great many partisans. There he made his court to Melania, a Roman

lady, who had embraced Origen’s opinions. Afterwards he came to Rome

with this lady, who was greatly esteemed in that city. Here he set out

with an outward show of simplicity, and pretended, after the example of

Origen, an universal contempt of all worldly things. This made him

looked upon as one who lived up to the highest Christian perfection.

Rufinus took advantage of this prejudice in his favour to propagate his

opinions, in which the credit of Melania was of great use to him. And

now he began to have a great number of followers, and to form a

considerable sect. But another Roman lady, named Marcella, having

acquainted Pope Anastasius, that Rufinus and Melania were spreading very

dangerous opinions in Rome, under the veil of piety, the holy father

examined into the fact, and forbade them to teach any more. Rufinus and

Melania submitted to the prohibition; Melania returned to Jerusalem, and

Rufinus to Aquileia. However, the opinions they had broached continued

to be maintained and defended by many learned men, who were therefore

distinguished by the name of Origenists.

The errors ascribed to the Origenists are in number nine, and are as

follows:—

1. The souls of men were holy intelligences, who enjoyed the presence of

GOD; but being tired with the Divine contemplation, they degenerated;

and as their first fervour was greatly abated, the Greeks therefore

called the soul νους, from the word νοσεω, which signifies to slacken or

grow cold.

2. Our SAVIOUR’S soul was united to the WORD, before his conception, and

before he was born of the Holy Virgin.

3. The body of our SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST was first formed entire in the

Virgin’s womb; and afterwards his soul, which long before had been

united to the WORD, came and was joined to it.

4. The WORD of GOD has been successively united with all the angelical

natures; insomuch that it has been a cherub, seraph, and all the

celestial virtues, one after another.

5. After the resurrection, the bodies of men will be of a spherical

figure, and not of their present erect stature.

6. The heavens, sun, moon, and stars, are animated bodies, and have an

intelligent soul.

7. In future ages, our SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST will be crucified for the

salvation of the devils, as he has already been for that of men.

8. The power of GOD is not infinite, and was so exhausted in the

creation of things, that he has no more left.

9. The punishment of the devils, and of the damned, will continue only

for a certain limited time.

These nine errors are distinctly recited by the second Council of

Constantinople, at the end of a letter of the emperor Justinian against

Origen. The recital of them is immediately followed by an anathema

against Origen, and all who maintained his opinions: in which it is

remarkable, that the council excommunicated Origen near three hundred

years after his death.

The heresy of the Origenists spread widely in Egypt, and especially

among the monks. Several eminent bishops opposed them, particularly

Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, who, in the year 399, assembled a

council in that city, in which the monks inhabiting the mountain of

Nitria were condemned as Origenists.

Avitus, a Spanish priest, revived the errors of the Origenists in Spain,

about the year 415; and probably it was against the followers of this

Avitus, that the Council of Toledo was held in 633.

ORNAMENTS OF THE CHURCH. The common feelings of our nature would suggest

the decent adornment of the house of our GOD: “Shall we,” in the words

of our homily, “be so mindful of our common base houses, deputed to so

low occupying, and be forgetful toward that house of GOD wherein be

administered the words of our eternal salvation; wherein are entreated

the sacraments and mysteries of our redemption; _the fountain of the

regeneration_ is there presented unto us; the partaking of the body and

blood of our SAVIOUR CHRIST is there offered unto us; and shall we not

esteem the place where so heavenly things are handled?”

The following are the chief enactments of the Church and the State, with

reference to the ornaments of the church. By the rubric before the

Common Prayer, as also by the 1st of Elizabeth, c. 2, “Such ornaments of

the church, and of the ministers thereof, at all times of their

ministration, shall be retained and be in use as were in this Church of

England, by authority of parliament, in the second year of the reign of

King Edward the Sixth.”

_Reynolds._ “The archdeacons shall take care that the clothes of the

altar be decent and in good order; that the church have fit books both

for singing and reading; and at least two sacerdotal vestments.”

By the statute of _Circumspecte agatis_, 13 Edward I. st. iv. “The king

to his judges sendeth greeting:—Use yourselves circumspectly in all

matters concerning the prelates, where they do punish for that the

church is not conveniently decked: in which case the spiritual judge

shall have power to take knowledge, notwithstanding the king’s

prohibition.”

“Not conveniently decked.” For the law allows the ecclesiastical court

to have cognizance in this case, of providing decent ornaments for the

celebration of Divine service.

Canon 85. “The churchwardens or questmen shall take care that all things

in the church be kept in such an orderly and decent sort, without dust,

or anything that may be either noisome or unseemly, as best becometh the

house of GOD, and is prescribed in a homily to that effect.”

Canon 82. “Whereas we have no doubt but that in all churches within the

realm of England, convenient and decent tables are provided and placed

for the celebration of the holy communion; we appoint that the same

tables shall from time to time be kept and repaired in sufficient and

seemly manner, and covered in time of Divine service with a carpet of

silk or other decent stuff, thought meet by the ordinary of the place,

(if any question be made of it,) and with a fair linen cloth at the time

of the ministration, as becometh that table, and so stand, saving when

the said holy communion is to be administered.”

In ancient times, the bishops preached standing upon the steps of the

altar. Afterwards it was found more convenient to have pulpits erected

for that purpose.

And by Canon 83. “The churchwardens or questmen, at the common charge of

the parishioners, in every church, shall provide a comely and decent

pulpit, to be set in a convenient place within the same, by the

discretion of the ordinary of the place (if any question do arise); and

to be there seemly kept for the preaching of GOD’S word.”

Canon 82. “And likewise a convenient seat shall be made at the charge of

the parish, for the minister to read service in.”

Canon 58. “Every minister saying the public prayers, or ministering the

sacraments or other rites of the Church, shall wear a decent and comely

surplice with sleeves, to be provided at the charge of the parish. And

if any question arise touching the matter, decency, or comeliness

thereof, the same shall be decided by the discretion of the ordinary.”

Canon 81. “According to a former constitution, (viz. among the

constitutions of 1570,) too much neglected in many places, we appoint,

that there shall be a font of stone in every church and chapel where

baptism is to be ministered: the same to be set in the ancient usual

places. In which only font the minister shall baptize publicly.”

In an act in the 27 Henry VIII. it was enacted, that money collected for

the poor should be kept in the common coffer or box standing in the

church of every parish.

And by Canon 84. “The churchwardens shall provide and have, within three

months after the publishing of these constitutions, a strong chest, with

a hole in the upper part thereof, to be provided at the charge of the

parish, (if there be none such already provided,) having three keys; of

which one shall remain in the custody of the parson, vicar, or curate,

and the other two in the custody of the churchwardens for the time

being; which chest they shall set and fasten in the most convenient

place, to the intent the parishioners may put into it their alms for

their poor neighbours. And the parson, vicar, or curate shall

diligently, from time to time, and especially when men make their

testaments, call upon, exhort, and move their neighbours, to confer and

give as they may well spare to the said chest: declaring unto them, that

whereas heretofore they have been diligent to bestow much substance

otherwise than GOD commanded, upon superstitious uses, now they ought at

this time to be much more ready to help the poor and needy, knowing that

to relieve the poor is a sacrifice which pleaseth GOD: and that also,

whatsoever is given for their comfort, is given to CHRIST himself, and

is so accepted of Him, that He will mercifully reward the same. The

which alms and devotion of the people, the keepers of the keys shall

yearly, quarterly, or oftener, (as need requireth,) take out of the

chest, and distribute the same in the presence of most of the parish, or

of six of the chief of them, to be truly and faithfully delivered to

their most poor and needy neighbours.”

Rubric. “Whilst the sentences of the offertory are reading, the deacons,

churchwardens, or other fit persons appointed for that purpose, shall

receive the alms for the poor, and other devotions of the people, in a

decent basin, to be provided by the parish for that purpose.”

This offertory was anciently an oblation for the use of the priest; but

at the Reformation it was changed into alms for the poor.

Canon 20. “The churchwardens against the time of every communion shall,

at the charge of the parish, with the advice and direction of the

minister, provide a sufficient quantity of fine white bread, and of good

and wholesome wine: which wine we require to be brought to the communion

table in a clean and sweet standing pot, or stoop of pewter, if not of

purer metal.”

_Winchelsea._ “The parishioners shall find at their own charge, the

_chalice_, or _cup_, for the wine.”

Which, says Lyndwood, “although expressed in the singular number, yet is

not intended to exclude more than one, where more are necessary.”

_Winchelsea._ The parishioners, at their own charge, shall find _bells_

with _ropes_.

_Winchelsea._ The parishioners shall find, at their own charge, a _bier_

for the dead.

“If any parishes be yet unfurnished of the _Bible_ of the largest

volume, the churchwardens shall, within convenient time, provide the

same at the charge of the parish.”

By Canon 80. “The churchwardens or questmen of every church and chapel

shall, at the charge of the parish, provide the Book of Common Prayer,

lately explained in some few points, by his Majesty’s authority

according to the laws and his Highness’s prerogative in that behalf; and

that, with all convenient speed, but, at the furthest, within two months

after the publishing of these our constitutions.”

By the 1 _Eliz_. c. 2. _The Book of Common Prayer_ shall be provided at

the charge of the parishioners of every parish and cathedral church. (s.

19.)

By the 13 & 14 _Charles II._ c. 4. “A true printed copy of the (present)

_Book of Common Prayer_ shall, at the costs and charges of the

parishioners of every parish church and chapelry, cathedral, church,

college, and hall, be provided before the feast of St. Bartholomew,

1662, on pain of £3 a month for so long time as they shall be unprovided

thereof.” (s. 2.)

Canon 80. “If any parishes be yet unfurnished of the _Book of Homilies_

allowed by authority, the churchwardens shall, within convenient time,

provide the same at the charge of the parish.”

By Canon 17. “In every parish church and chapel shall be provided one

_parchment book_ at the charge of the parish, wherein shall be written

the day and year of every christening, wedding, and burial within the

parish; and for the safe keeping thereof, the churchwardens, at the

charge of the parish, shall provide one sure _coffer_, with three locks

and keys, whereof one to remain with the minister, and the other two

with the churchwardens severally.”

Canon 99. “The _table of degrees of marriages prohibited_ shall be, in

every church, publicly set up at the charge of the parish.”

Canon 82. “The _Ten Commandments_ shall be set, at the charge of the

parish, upon the east end of every church and chapel, where the people

may best see and read the same.”

Canon 82. “And other chosen _sentences_ shall, at the like charge, be

written upon the walls of the said churches and chapels in places

convenient.”

Lord Coke says, “Concerning the building or erecting of _tombs_,

_sepulchres_, or _monuments_ for the deceased in church, chancel, common

chapel, or churchyard, in convenient manner, it is lawful; for it is the

last work of charity that can be done for the deceased; who, whilst he

lived, was a living temple of the HOLY GHOST, with a reverent regard and

Christian hope of a joyful resurrection. And the defacing of them is

punishable by the common law, and those who build or erect the same

shall have the action during their lives, and, after their decease, the

heir of the deceased shall have the action. But the building or erecting

the sepulchre, tomb, or other monument, ought not to be to the

hinderance of the celebration of Divine service.”

Of _grave-stones_, (he says,) _winding-sheets_, _coats of arms_,

_penons_, or other _ensigns of honour_, hung up, laid, or placed in

memory of the dead, the property remains in the executors; and they may

have actions against such as break, deface, or carry them away, or an

appeal of felony.

But Sir Simon Degge says, he conceives that this must be intended, by

licence of the bishop, or consent of the parson and churchwardens.

Dr. Watson says, this is to be understood of such monuments only as are

set up in the aisles belonging to particular persons; or if they be set

up in any other part of the church, he supposes it is to be understood

that they were placed there with the incumbent’s consent.

And Dr. Gibson observing thereupon says thus:—“Monuments, coat armour,

and other ensigns of honour, set up in memory of the deceased, may not

be removed at the pleasure of the ordinary or incumbent. On the

contrary, if either they or any other person shall take away or deface

them, the person who set them up shall have an action against them

during his life, and after his death the heir of the deceased shall have

the same, who (as they say) is inheritable to arms, and the like, as to

heir-looms: and it avails not that they are annexed to the freehold,

though that is in the parson. But this, as he conceives, is to be

understood with one limitation; if they were set up with consent of the

ordinary; for though (as my Lord Coke says) tombs, sepulchres, or

monuments may be erected for the deceased, in church or chancel, in

convenient manner, the ordinary must be allowed the proper judge of that

conveniency; inasmuch as such erecting, he adds, ought not to be to the

hinderance of the celebration of Divine service. And if they are erected

without consent, and upon inquiry and inspection be found to the

hinderance of Divine service, he thinks it will not be denied that in

such case the ordinary has sufficient authority to decree a removal,

without any danger of an action at law.”

If any _superstitious pictures_ are in a window of a church or aisle, it

is not lawful for any to break them without licence of the ordinary: and

in _Pricket’s case_, Wray, chief justice, bound the offender to good

behaviour.

Besides what has been observed in particular, there are many other

articles for which no provision is made by any special law, and

therefore must be referred to the general power of the churchwardens,

with the consent of the major part of the parishioners as aforesaid, and

under the direction of the ordinary; such as the erecting _galleries_,

adding new _bells_, (and of consequence, as it seems, salaries for the

ringers,) _organs_, _clock_, _chimes_, _king’s arms_, _pulpit cloths_,

_hearse cloth_, _rushes or mats_, _vestry furniture_, and such like. The

soil and freehold of the church and churchyard is in the parson; but the

fee simple of the glebe is in abeyance. And if the walls, windows, or

doors of the church be broken by any person, or the trees in the

churchyard be cut down, or grass there be eaten up by a stranger; the

incumbent of the rectory (or his tenant, if they be let) may have his

actions for the damages. But the goods of the church do not belong to

the incumbent, but to the parishioners; and if they be taken away or

broken, the churchwardens shall have their action of trespass at the

common law.

The magnificence of the first Jewish temple was acceptable to GOD; and

the too sparing contributions of the people towards the second, was

severely reproved; and therefore no one can justly complain, that the

ornaments now made use of in our churches are too many, or expensive.

Far from us be all ornaments unbecoming the worship of a spirit, or the

gravity of a church; but it has an ill aspect when men think that well

enough in GOD’S house, which they would not endure in the meanest

offices of their own. It is not enough barely to devote churches to the

public services of religion, unless they are set apart with the solemn

rites of a formal dedication. By these solemnities the founders were

accustomed to surrender all the right they had in them, and make GOD

himself the sole owner. And whoever gave any lands or endowments to the

service of GOD, gave it in a formal writing, sealed and witnessed, (as

is now usual in common transactions,) the tender of the gift being made

upon the altar, by the donor on his knees. At the consecration of both

the tabernacle and the temple of the Jews, it pleased the Almighty to

give a manifest sign that he then took possession of them. (Ex. xl. 34;

1 Kings viii. 10, 11.)—_Wheatly._

Temples, and other utensils designed by GOD himself, are holy as related

to him by that designation. Temples, utensils, lands, &c. devoted and

lawfully separated by man, for holy uses, are holy as justly related to

GOD by that lawful separation. To say, as some do, that they are indeed

consecrated and separated, but not holy, is to be ridiculously wise by

self-contradiction, and the masterly use of the word holy contrary to

custom and terms. Ministers are more holy than temples, lands, or

utensils, as being more nearly related to holy things. And things

separated by GOD himself are more holy than those justly separated by

man. And so of days.—_Baxter._

Can we judge it a thing seemly for any man to go about the building of

an house to the GOD of heaven, with no other appearance than if his end

were to rear up a kitchen, or a parlour, for his own use? or when a work

of such a nature is finished, remaineth there nothing but presently to

use it, and so an end? Albeit the true worship of GOD be to GOD in

itself acceptable, who respecteth not so much in what place, as with

what affection he is served; and therefore Moses in the midst of the

sea, Job on the dunghill, Ezekiah in bed, Jeremy in mire, Jonas in the

whale, Daniel in the den, the Children in the furnace, the Thief on the

cross, Peter and Paul in prison, calling unto GOD were heard, as St.

Basil noteth, manifest notwithstanding it is, that the very majesty and

holiness of the place where GOD is worshipped hath in regard of us great

virtue, force, and efficacy, for that it serveth as a sensible help to

stir up devotion.—_Hooker._

The reader who desires to possess a perfect knowledge on this head, is

referred to Bingham’s “Origines Ecclesiasticæ,” or _Antiquities of the

Christian Church_, b. viii.

ORTHODOXY. (Ὀρθὸς and δοκέω.) Soundness of doctrine.

Of course the question here to be decided is, What _is_ soundness of

doctrine? If two men take Scripture for their guide, and professing to

have no other guide, come to opposite conclusions, it is quite clear

that neither has a right to decide that the other is not orthodox. On

this principle it is as uncharitable and illogical for the Trinitarian

to call the Socinian not orthodox, as it is for the Socinian to

predicate the same of the Trinitarian. But if we interpret Scripture by

the sense of the Church, then we may consistently call those orthodox

who hold the doctrines which she deduces from Scripture, and those

heterodox who do not hold those doctrines. So that orthodoxy means

soundness of doctrine, the doctrine being proved to be sound by

reference to the consentient testimony of Scripture and the Church.

Hence perhaps it is, that as those low-churchmen, who repudiate Socinian

notions, are by some called evangelicals, so high-churchmen are

designated orthodox. Both titles, if intended to be applied

_exclusively_, are applied incorrectly.

ORTLIBENSES. (_Lat._) A sect, or branch, of the ancient Vaudois or

Waldenses.

The Ortlibenses denied there was a Trinity before the nativity of JESUS

CHRIST, who, according to them, was not till that time the SON of GOD.

To these two persons of the GODHEAD they added a third, during the

preaching of JESUS CHRIST; namely, St. Peter, whom they acknowledged to

be the HOLY GHOST. They held the eternity of the world; but had no

notion of the resurrection of the body, or the immortality of the soul.

Notwithstanding which, they maintained (perhaps by way of irony) that

there would be a final judgment, at which time the pope and the emperor

would become proselytes to their sect.

They denied the death and resurrection of JESUS CHRIST. His cross, they

pretended, was penance and their own abstemious way of life: this, they

said, was the cross our SAVIOUR bore. They ascribed all the virtue of

baptism to the merit of him who administered it. They were of opinion,

that Jews might be saved without baptism, provided they embraced their

sect. They boldly asserted, that they themselves were the only true

mystical body, that is to say, the Church of CHRIST.

PACIFICATION, EDICTS OF, were decrees or edicts, granted by the kings of

France to the Protestants, for appeasing the troubles occasioned by

their persecution.

The first edict of pacification was granted by Charles IX., in January,

1562, permitting the free exercise of the reformed religion near all the

cities and towns of the realm. March 19, 1563, the same king granted a

second edict of pacification, at Amboise, permitting the free exercise

of the reformed religion in the houses of gentlemen and lords

high-justiciaries (or those that had the power of life and death) to

their families and dependants only; and allowing other Protestants to

have their sermons in such towns as they had them in before the seventh

of March; obliging them withal to quit the churches they had possessed

themselves of during the troubles. Another, called the edict of

Lonjumeau, ordering the execution of that of Amboise, was published

March 27, 1558, after a treaty of peace. This pacification was of but

short continuance; for Charles, perceiving a general insurrection of the

Huguenots, revoked the said edicts in September, 1568, forbidding the

exercise of the Protestant religion, and commanding all the ministers to

depart the kingdom in fifteen days. But, on the eighth of August, 1570,

he made peace with them again, and published an edict on the eleventh,

allowing the lords high-justiciaries to have sermons in their houses for

all comers, and granting other Protestants two public exercises in each

government. He likewise gave them four cautionary towns, viz. Rochelle,

Montauban, Cognac, and La Charité, to be places of security for them

during the space of two years. Nevertheless, in August, 1572, he

authorized the Bartholomew massacre, and at the same time issued a

declaration, forbidding the exercise of the Protestant religion.

Henry III., in April, 1576, made peace with the Protestants, and the

edict of pacification was published in parliament, May 14, permitting

them to build churches, and have sermons where they pleased. The Guisian

faction, enraged at this general liberty, began the famous league for

defence of the Catholic religion, which became so formidable, that it

obliged the king to assemble the states of the kingdom at Blois, in

December, 1576; where it was enacted, that there should be but one

religion in France, and that the Protestant ministers should be all

banished. In 1577, the king, to pacify the troubles, published an edict

in parliament, October 8th, granting the same liberty to the reformed

which they had before. However, in July, 1585, the league obliged him to

publish another edict, revoking all former concessions to the

Protestants, and ordering them to depart the kingdom in six months, or

turn Papists. This edict was followed by more to the same purpose.

Henry IV. coming to the crown, published a declaration, July 4, 1591,

abolishing the edicts against the Protestants. This edict was verified

in the parliament of Chalons; but the troubles prevented the

verification of it in the parliaments of the other provinces; so that

the Protestants had not the free exercise of their religion in any place

but where they were masters, and had banished the Romish religion. In

April, 1598, the king published a new edict of pacification at Nantes,

granting the Protestants the free exercise of their religion in all

places where they had the same in 1596 and 1597, and one exercise in

each bailiwick.

This edict of Nantes was confirmed by Louis XIII. in 1610, and by Louis

XIV. in 1652. But his letter, in 1685, abolished it entirely; since

which time the Protestants ceased to be tolerated in France till the

Revolution.—_Broughton._

PÆDO-BAPTISM. (From παῖς, _a child_, and βαπτίζω, _to baptize_.) The

baptism of children. (See _Baptism of Infants_.)

PALL, or PALLIUM. The word pallium properly signifies a cloak, thrown

over the shoulders: afterwards it came to denote a sort of cape or

tippet, and hence the ecclesiastical designation in the Western Church.

The origin of the pall, which has been generally worn by the Western

metropolitans, is disputed; but whoever considers the ancient figures of

it which are found in manuscripts, &c., will see that it was originally

only a stole wound round the neck, with the ends hanging down behind and

before. In the East the pall is called _omophorion_, and has been used,

at least, since the time of Chrysostom. It is used by all the Eastern

bishops, above the phenolion or vestment, during the eucharist; and, as

used by them, resembles the ancient pall much more nearly than that worn

by the Western metropolitans.—_Palmer._

The pall was part of the imperial habit, and originally granted by the

emperors to the patriarchs. Thus Constantine gave the use of the pall to

the bishop of Rome; and Anthimus, patriarch of Constantinople, being

expelled his see, is said to have returned the pall to the emperor

Justinian; which implies his having received it from him. And the reason

of the royal consent in this manner seems to be, because it was high

treason to wear any part of the imperial habit without licence.

In after ages, when the see of Rome had carried its authority to the

highest pitch, under Pope Innocent III., that pontiff, in the Lateran

Council, A. D. 1215, decreed the pall to be a mark and distinction,

intimating the plenitude of the apostolic power, and that neither the

function nor title of archbishop should be assumed without it; and this,

not only when a bishop was preferred to the degree of archbishop, but

likewise in case of translations, when an archbishop was removed from

one see to another. It was decreed, likewise, that every archbishop

should be buried in his pall, that his successor might make no use of

it, but be obliged to apply to the pope for another. By these means the

court of Rome brought vast sums of money into its exchequer.

In the Romish Church the following is the description of the pall as

given by Romish writers. The pallium is a part of the pontifical dress

worn only by the pope, archbishops, and patriarchs. It is a white

woollen band of about three fingers’ breadth, made round, and worn over

the shoulders, crossed in front with one end hanging down over the

breast; the other behind it is ornamented with purple crosses, and

fastened by three golden needles or pins. It is made of the wool of

perfectly white sheep, which are yearly, on the festival of St. Agnes,

offered and blessed at the celebration of the holy eucharist, in the

church dedicated to her in the Nomentan Way in Rome. The sheep are

received by two canons of the church of St. John Lateran, who deliver

them into the charge of the subdeacons of the Apostolic College, and

they then are kept and fed by them until the time for shearing them

arrives. The palliums are always made of this wool, and when made they

are brought to the church of St. Peter and St. Paul, and are placed upon

the altar over their tomb on the eve of their festival, and are left

there the whole night, and on the following day are delivered to the

subdeacons, whose office it is to take charge of them. The pope alone

_always_ wears the pallium, and wherever he officiates, to signify his

assumed authority over all other particular churches. Archbishops and

patriarchs receive it from him, and cannot wear it, except in their own

churches, and only on certain great festivals when they celebrate the

mass.

An archbishop in the Romish Church, although he be consecrated as

bishop, and have taken possession, cannot before he has petitioned for,

and received and paid for the pallium, either call himself archbishop,

or perform such acts as belong to the “greater jurisdiction;” those,

namely, which he exercises not as a bishop, but as archbishop, such as

to summon a council, or to visit his province, &c. He can, however, when

his election has been confirmed, and before he receives the pallium,

depute his functions, in the matter of ordaining bishops, to his

suffragans, who may lawfully exercise them by his command. If, however,

any archbishop in the Romish Church, before he receives the pallium,

perform those offices which result immediately from the possession of

it, such as, for instance, those relating to orders and to the chrism,

&c., the acts themselves are valid, but the archbishop offends against

the canons and laws of the Church.

The pall is still retained as an heraldic ensign, in the arms of the

archbishops of Canterbury, Armagh, and Dublin, and formerly constituted

those of the archbishop of York also.

PALL is also used for a covering; as the black cloth which covers the

coffin at funerals, and sometimes for an _altar cloth_. Thus at the

coronation, the sovereign makes an oblation of a _pall_, or _altar cloth

of gold_.

PALM SUNDAY. The Sunday next before Easter, so called from palm branches

being strewed on the road by the multitude, when our SAVIOUR made his

triumphal entry into Jerusalem.

This week, immediately preceding the feast of Easter, is more especially

designed to fit us for that great solemnity; and, to that end, is to be

spent in more than ordinary piety and devotion. It was anciently called

sometimes the Great Week, sometimes the Holy Week, because it hath a

larger service than any other week, every day having a second service

appointed for it, in which are rehearsed at large the sufferings of

CHRIST, as they are described by the four evangelists; that by hearing

and reading the history of his passion, we may be better prepared for

the mystery of his resurrection; that, by his rising from the dead, we

may be quickened to newness of life. This day, which begins this holy

week, is called by the name of Palm Sunday, being the day on which our

SAVIOUR entered Jerusalem with great joy; some spreading their garments,

others cutting down branches of palm, carrying them in their hands, and

strewing them in the way, which hath been remembered with great

solemnity.—_Dr. Hole._

In the missals this Sunday is called Palm Sunday; and in many parts of

England it still retains its ancient name. On this day, till the æra of

the Reformation, the people in solemn procession carried in their hands

palms, or branches of some other tree, in commemoration of CHRIST’S

triumphal entry into Jerusalem five days before his death. The palms

were then placed on the altar by the clerks, before the time of the

celebration of the eucharist; and numerous benedictory collects were

pronounced over them by the priest.—_Shepherd._

The collect for the day puts us in mind of the tender love of GOD

towards mankind, in sending his SON, not only to take upon him our

flesh, but to suffer in it the death of the cross for our sins; to the

intent, “that all mankind should follow the example of his great

humility;” and thence teaches us to pray, “that we may both follow the

example of his patience, and also be made partakers of his

resurrection.”

The Epistle for the day presents us to this purpose with the highest and

best pattern for our imitation, even the SON of GOD, who hath done and

suffered all these great things for us.

This Gospel, with the rest that follow on each day of this holy week,

gives us an ample account of the death and passion of our blessed

SAVIOUR, together with the many circumstances that went before and came

after it.—_Dr. Hole._

PANTHEISM. (Πᾶν, _all_; Θεὸς, _God_.) A subtle kind of atheism, which

makes GOD and the universe the same, and so denies the existence and

sovereignty of any GOD over the universe. It is to be feared that much

of the mere natural religion of the present day partakes of the

character of Pantheism.

PAPA. (Πάππας, Greek.) A name originally given to the bishops of the

Christian Church, though now it is become in the West the pretended

prerogative and sole privilege of the pope, or bishop of Rome. The word

signifies no more than _father_.

Tertullian, speaking indefinitely of any Christian bishop who absolves

penitents, gives him the name of _Benedictus Papa_. Heraclas, bishop of

Alexandria, has the same title given him. St. Jerome gives the title of

_Papa_ to Athanasius, Epiphanius, and Paulinus; and, writing often to

St. Augustine, he always inscribes his epistles _Beatissimo Papæ

Augustino_.