foot, and repeating them with great devotion; and it is pretended that by this means several countries were delivered from great calamities. The days on which they were used were called Rogation days: these were appointed by the canons of different councils, till it was decreed by the council of Toledo, that they should be used every month throughout the year; prayers, to make the office look more awful and venerable to the people. At length, things were carried to such a pitch, that a regulation became necessary ; and it was found necessary to put the service and the manner of performing it into writing, and this was what they called a liturgy. Liturgies have been different at different times and in different and thus, by degrees, they came countries. We have the liturgy of to be used weekly on Wednesdays and Fridays, the ancient stationary days for fasting. To these days the rubrick of the church of England has added Sundays, as being the greatest day for assembling at divine service. Before the last review of the common prayer, the litany was a distinct service by itself, and used sometimes after the morning prayer was over; at present, it is made one office with the morning service, being ordered to be read after the third collect for grace, instead of the intercessional prayers in the daily service. St. Chrysostom, of St. Peter, the Armenian liturgy, Gallican liturgy, &c. &c. "The properties required in a public liturgy," says Paley, "are these: it must be compendious; express just conceptions of the Divine attributes; recite such wants as a congregation are likely to feel, and no other; and contain as few controverted propositions as possible." The liturgy of the church of England was composed in the year 1547, and established in the second year of king Edward VI. In the fifth year of this king it was reviewed, because some things were contained in that liturgy which shewed a compliance with the superstition of those times, and some exceptions were taken against it by some learned men at home, and by Calvin abroad. Some alterations were made in it, which consisted in adding the general confession and absolution, and the communion to begin with LITURGY denotes all the ceremonies in general belonging to divine service. The word comes from the Greek λειλεργια, “ service, public ministry,” formed of λείος, “ public," and ερίον, " work." In a more restrained signification, liturgy is used among the Romanists to signify the mass, and among us the common prayer. All who have written on liturgies the ten commandments. The use agree, that, in primitive days, di- of oil in confirmation and extreme vine service was exceedingly sim-unction was left out, and also ple, clogged with a very few ceremonies, and consisted of but a small number of prayers; but, by degrees, they increased the number of ceremonies, and added new prayers for souls departed, and what related to a belief of Christ's real presence in the eucharist. This liturgy, so reformed, was established by the acts of 5th and 6th 1 66 a others think that Lollard was no Edward VI, cap. 1. However, it was abolished by queen Mary, who enacted, that the service should stand as it was most commonly used in the last year of the reign of king Henry VIII. That of Edward VI was re-established, with some few alterations, by Elizabeth. Some farther alterations were introduced, in consequence of the review of the common prayer book, by order of king James, in the first year of his reign, particularly in the office of private baptism, in several rubricks, and other passages, with the addition of five or six new prayers and thanksgivings, and all that part of the catechism which contains the doctrine of the sacraments. The book of common prayer, so altered, remained in force from the first year of king James to the fourteenth of Charles II. The last review of the liturgy was in the year 1661. Many supplications have been since made for a review, but without success. Bingham's Orig. Eccl., 13; Broughton's Dict.; Bennet, Robinson, and Clarkson, on Liturg. passim; A Letter to a Dissenting Minister on the Expediency of The Alexians or Cellites were Forms, and Brekell's Answer; Ro-called Lollards, because they were gers's Lectures on the Liturgy of public singers, who made it their the Church of England; Biddulph's Essays on the Liturgy. LOLLARDS, a religious sect, differing in many points from the church of Rome, which arose in Germany about the beginning of the fourteenth century; so called, as many writers have imagined, from Walter Lollard, who began to dogmatize in 1815, and was burnt at Cologne, though business to inter the bodies of those who died of the plague, and sang a dirge over them, in a mournful and indistinct tone, as they carried them to the grave. The name was afterwardsassumed by persons that dishonoured it; for we find among those Lollards who made extraordinary pretences to religion, and spent the greatest part of their time in meditation, prayer, and such acts of piety, there were many abo-year 1472, obtained a solemn minable hypocrites, who enter- bull from pope Sixtus IV, ordertertained the most ridiculous opi-ing that the Cellites, or Lollards, nions, and concealed the most should be ranked among the religi enormous vices under the specious mark of this extraordinary profession. Many injurious aspersions were therefore propagated against those who assumed this ous orders, and delivered from the jurisdiction of the bishops. And pope Julius II granted them still greater privileges, in the year 1506. Mosheim informs us, that name by the priests and monks; many societies of this kind are so that, by degrees, any person who covered heresies or crimes under the appearance of piety was called a Lollard. Thus the name was not used to denote any one particular sect, but was formerly common to all persons and sects who were supposed to be guilty of impiety towards God or the church, under an external profession of great piety. However, many societies, consisting both of men and women, under the name of Lollards, were formed in most parts of Germany and Flanders, and were supported partly by their manual labours, and partly by the charitable donations of pious persons. The magistrates and inhabitants of the towns where these brethren and sisters resided gave them particular marks of favour and protection, on account of their great usefulness to the sick and needy. They were thus supported against their malignant rivals, and obtained many papal constitutions, by which their institute was confirmed, their persons exempted from the cognizance of the inquisitor, and subjected entirely to the jurisdiction of the bishops; but as these measures were insufficient to secure them from molestation, Charles duke of Burgundy, in the still subsisting at Cologne, and in the cities of Flanders, though they have evidently departed from their ancient rules. Lollard and his followers rejected the sacrifice of the mass, extreme unction, and penances for sin; arguing that Christ's sufferings were sufficient. He is likewise said to have set aside baptism, as a thing of no effect; and repentance as not absolutely necessary, &c. In England, the followers of Wickliffe were called, by way of reproach, Lollards, from the supposition that there was some affinity between some of their tenets; though others are of opinion that the English Lollards came from Germany. See WICKLIFFITES. LONG SUFFERING OF GOD. See PATIENCE OF GOD. LORD, a term properly denoting who has dominion. Applied to God, the supreme governor and disposer of all things. See GOD. LORD'S DAY. See SABBATH. LORD'S NAME TAKEN. IN VAIN, consists, first, in using itlightly or rashly, in exclamations, adjurations, and appeals in common conversation.-2. Hypocritically in our prayers, thanksgivings, &c. -3. Superstitiously, as when the Israelites carried the ark to the be, can be held guiltless, or be ex-soned with religion, may yet be always our duty to pray that Christ's kingdom may be advanced in the world, and to profess our daily dependence on God's providential care. Nevertheless, there is no reason to believe that Christ meant that his people should always use this as a set form; for if that had been the case, it would not have been varied field of battle, to render them successful against the Philistines, 1st Sam. iv, 3, 5.-4. Wantonly, in swearing by him, or creatures in his stead, Matt. v, 34, 37.-5. Angrily, or sportfully cursing, and devoting ourselves or others to mischief and damnation.-6. Perjuring ourselves, attesting that which is false, Mal. iii, 5.-7. Blasphemously reviling God, or causing others to do so, Rom. ii, 24. Perhaps there is no sin more common as to the practice, and less thought of as to the guilt of it, than this. Nor is it thus common with the vulgar only, but with those who call themselves wise, humane, and moral. They tremble at the idea of murder, theft, adultery, &c., while they forget that the same law which prohibits the commission of these crimes, does, with equal force, forbid that of profaning his name. No man, therefore, whatever his sense, abilities, or profession may only swearing, but, perhaps, in some respects, swearing of the worst sort; as it is a direct breach of an express command, and offends against the very letter of that law which says, in so many words, Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.' It offends against politeness and good breeding, for those who commit it little think of the pain they are inflicting on the sober mind, which is deeply wounded when it hears the holy name it loves dishonoured: and it is as contrary to good breeding to give pain, as it is to true pity to be profane. It is astonishing that the refined and elegant should not reprobate this practice for its coarseness and vulgarity, as much as the pious abhor it for its sinfulness. " I would endeavour to give some faint idea of the grossness of this offence by an analogy, (oh! how inadequate !) with which the feeling heart, even though not sea onerated from the charge of being a wicked man, while he lives in the habitual violation of this part of God's sacred law. A very celebrated female writer justly observes, that "It is utterly INEXCUSABLE; it has none of the palliatives of temptation which other vices plead, and in that respect stands distinguished from all others both in its nature and degree of guilt. Like many other sins, however, it is at once cause and effect; it proceeds from want of love and reverence to the best of Beings, and causes the want of that love both in themselves and others. This species of profaneness is not touched. To such I would earnestly say-Suppose you had some beloved friend, -to put the case still more strongly, a departed friend,-a revered parent, perhaps, whose image never occurs without awaking in your bosom sentiments of tender love and lively gratitude; how would you feel if you heard this honoured name bandied about with unfeeling familiarity and indecent levity; or, at best, thrust into every pause of speech as a vulgar expletive? Does not your affectionate heart recoil at the thought? And yet the hallowed name of your truest Benefactor, your heavenly Fa ther, your best Friend, to whom you are indebted for all you enjoy; who gives you those very friends in whom you so much delight, those very talents with which you dishonour him, those very organs of speech with which you blaspheme him, is treated with an irreverence, a contempt, a wantonness, with which you cannot bear the very thought or as it is by the two evangelists, mention of treating a human Matt. vi, Luke xi. It is true, infriend. His name is impiously, deed, that they both agree in the is unfeelingly, is ungratefully sin-main, as to the sense, yet not in gled out as the object of decided the express words; and the doxoirreverence, of systematic con-logy which Matthew gives at large tempt, of thoughtless levity. His is wholly left out in Luke. And, sacred name is used indiscrim- besides, we do not find that the inately to express anger, joy, grief, surprise, impatience; and what is almost still more unpardonable than all, it is wantonly used as a mere unmeaning expletive, which, being excited by no temptation, can have nothing to extenuate it; which, causing no emotion, can have nothing to recommend it, unless it be the pleasure of the sin." Mrs. Moore on Education, vol. ii, p. 87; Gill's Body of Div., vol. iii, page 427; Brown's Syst. of Relig., p. 526. disciples ever used it as a form. It is, however, a most excellent summary of prayer, for its brevity, order, and matter; and it is very lawful and laudable to make use of any single petition, or the whole of it, provided a formal and superstitious use of it be avoided. That great zeal, as one observes, which is to be found in some Christians either for or against it, is to be lamented as a weakness; and it will become us to do all that we can to promote on each side more moderate sentiments concerning the use of it. See Doddridge's Lectures, lec. 194; Barrow's Works, vol. i, p. 48; Archbishop Leighton's Explanation of it; West on the Lord's Prayer; Gill's Body of Divinity, vol. iii, p. 362, 8vo.; Fordyce on Edification by Public Instruction, page 11, 12; Mendam's Exposition of the Lord's Prayer. LORD'S SUPPER is an ordi LORD'S PRAYER, is that which our Lord gave to his disciples on the Mount. According to what is said in the sixth chapter of Matthew, it was given as a directory; but, from Luke xi, 1. some argue that it was given as a form. Some have urged that the second and fourth petition of that prayer could be intended only for temporary use; but it is answered, that such a sense may be put up-nance which our Saviour instituted on those petitions as shall suit all as a commemoration of his death Christians in all ages; for it is and sufferings. I. It is called a VOL. II. E : |