E. The Litany.] Our sacred addresses and applications to God are quadripartite, fourfold, all comprehended in one verse of the Apostle, 1 Tim. ii. 1, where first there is δέησις, “supplication,” deprecation, a praying to be delivered from dangers ghostly and bodily, such as is the litany. Secondly, προσευχὴ, petition, apprecation, an invocation of “divine blessings and benefits upon ourselves. Thirdly, ἔντευξις, “intercession,” an importuning the throne of grace in the behalf of others. Lastly, εὐχαριστία, thanksgiving for blessings received either by ourselves or others. Did not this sufficiently warrant sacred litanies, we might derive authority from the last petition of the Lord’s Prayer, “Deliver us from evil.” To which pattern of our Saviour, and precept of His Apostle, the primitive Church began early to conform. The τὸ νῦν and first moment of their admission into the classis of divine offices is difficult to define; that these litanies made a distinct part of the liturgy in St. Augustine’s time is evident, for enumerating the several parcels thereof, he expostulateth, Quando non est tempus cantandi in Ecclesia, nisi cum legitur, aut disputatur, aut antistites clara voce deprecantur, aut communis oratio voce diaconi indicitur? “What space is free from singing of psalms in the Church, unless it be when the lessons are reading, or the sermon preaching, or the priests are rehearsing the litany aloud, or common prayer is enjoined by the mouth of the deacon?” To ascend up unto St. Cyprian he testifieth as much of his time. Pro arcendis hostibus et imbribus impetrandis, et vel auferendis, vel temperandis adversis, rogamus semper et preces fundimus: “for deliverance from our enemies, for rain in time of droughts, for the removing or moderating of our afilictions we constantly pray.” Senior to St. Cyprian, Tertullian: Quando non geniculationibus nostris, et jejunationibus nostris siccitates sunt depulse? “Tell me the time when by our kneelings and fastings droughts are not changed into moisture?”
In the Greek Church they moved somewhat slower, not entering until about the year 300. In the days of Gregory Thaumaturgus, who flourished about the year 260, St. Basil tells the Neocesarians there were not any such things as litanies known, and his telling them so, implieth that in his own time they had made their entry. By what hath already been said, Mr. Cartwright’s mistake seems gross enough in founding the first rise of litanies upon Mamercus, bishop of Vienna. He, if he did any thing in their establishment, probably went no further than the reviewing of antecedent litanies, and disposing them into a form agreeable to Vienna’s sad condition, and the assigning three days before Ascension for that service. As did also the council of Aurelia after him, can. xxii.
Next Mamercus comes in Gregory the Great, the supposed author of the great litany, (that of Mamercus being styled the less,) and most probably so he was; but the sneezing sickness being decried by all learned men as fabulous, and so it was no motive or inducement to the work, some other cause must be assigned, which perhaps might be some rage of contagious pestilence, or else it may be conjectured to have been compiled upon the general score of reformation. For Gregory, observing in the several offices of divers Latin Churches many things which give cause of dislike, some being vain, some unapt, some scarce making out sense, he presently applied himself to consider of, and compare them all together, and so to compile a liturgy of the most choice pieces extracted from them, which he performing left as a legacy to his successors, which was at first owned as the proper service of the Romish Church. Part of this liturgy was the great litany, which contained the very quintessence of all former models, with additions of his own, some for the better, and some for the worse, and these rather the blemishes of his times, than of himself. That age wherein he lived was none of the learnedest, but declined much towards ignorance, which is worthily styled the mother of blind devotion, or superstition. This ignorance soon brought in the invocation of saints, an error which began to be whispered in the writings of others some few years preceding, but never durst shew itself γυμνῇ τῇ κεφαλῇ, “bare-faced,” in the service of the Church, until this Gregory led it in; who over facile to credit misreported miracles (as his Dialogues demonstrate) was made susceptible of any error which presented itself under the shape of devotion, and consequently of invocation of saints. He there imbibing this fallacious opinion, acted agreeable to its principles, and after the address to the sacred Trinity inserted in the litany an application, first to the Virgin Mary, next to the Archangels and Angels, then to the Apostles, martyrs, confessors, and virgins, bestowing upon every one an ora pro nobis, nominally applied.
As for the litany used in our Church, a very near resemblance it hath with that devised by St. Gregory, if he were the author of the “Sacramentary,” as I am prone to believe he was. The first part of it, whose responsory terminations are “Have mercy upon us,” seems to be an exemplification of the most ancient forms, for in those liturgies extant under the names of misreputed authors, which nevertheless retain some relics of remote antiquity, Κύριε ἐλέησον is the great ingredient into the litanies: between these and the deprecatory part, immediately before “Remember not Lord our iniquities,” &c. grew that excrescence of misguided zeal, and the forementioned address to the saints, which our Church worthily expunged. Those answers of “Good Lord deliver us,” vary little from the ancient mode. Those of “We beseech Thee to hear us, good Lord,” pretend a near conformity to that model mentioned in the Clementine Constitution, and which answereth in substance to our prayer for the whole state of Christ’s Church: for that συναπτὴ καθολικὴ, or “Catholic Collect,” as it is styled in the old liturgies, which was a prayer for the Catholic Church, was essentially the same with ours in the Communion Office, and differed in fashion only, being rehearsed litany-wise. Part of that prayer, so far as may conduce to make good my title, or may declare the alliance of that service with our litany, I shall here subjoin, and the rather, because to my apprehension those ancient Constitutions have not many parcels of farther extraction.
Ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ταυτῆς καὶ τοῦ λαοῦ δεηδώμει.
Let us pray for this Church and for the people.
Ὑπὲρ πάσης ἐπισκοπῆς; παντὸς πρεσβυτερίου, metsτῆς ἐν Χριστῷ διακονίας, καὶ ὑπηρεσίας παντὸς τοῦ πληρώματος τῆς ἐκκλησίας δεηθῶμεν ὅπως 6 Κύριος πάντας διατηρήσῃ καὶ διαφυλάξῃ.
Let us pray for the whole Constitut. order of bishops, for all presbyters, for all deacons and ministers of Christ, and for the whole family of the Church, that God would preserve and keep them.
Ὑπὲρ βασιλέων καὶ τῶν ἐν ὑπεροχῇ δεηθῶμεν, ἵνα εἰρηνεύωνται τὰ πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὅπως ἥρεμον καὶ ἡσύχιον βίον ἔχοντες, διάγωμεν ἐν πάσῃ εὐσεβείᾳ καὶ σεμνότητι.
Let us pray for kings, and all in high places, that under them being peaceably and
quietly governed, we may spend our days in all godliness and honesty.
Ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐν ἀῤῥωστίᾳ ἐξεταζομένων ἀδελφῶν ἡμῶν δεηθώμεν. ὅπως ὁ Κύριος ῥύσηται αὐτοὺς πάσης νόσου καὶ πάσης μαλακίας, καὶ σώους ἀποκαταστήσῃ τῇ ἁγίᾳ αὐτοῦ ἐκκλησίᾳ.
Let us pray for our brethren afflicted with sickness, that the Lord would please to free them from their diseases, and restore them in perfect health to His Church.
Ὑπὲρ πλεόντων καὶ ὁδούπορούντων δεηθώμεν.
Let us pray for those that sail by water or travel by land.
Ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐν μετάλλοις, καὶ ἐξορίαις, καὶ φυλακαῖς καὶ δεσμοῖς ὄντων διὰ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Κυρίου δεηθῶμεν.
Let us pray for those that are condemned to mines, to banishment, to imprisonment and bonds for the name of the Lord.
Ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐν πικρᾷ δουλείᾳ καταπονουμένων δεηθῶμεν.
Let us pray for those that are oppressed.
Ὑπὲρ τῶν διωκόντων ἡμᾶς διὰ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Κυρίου δεηθῶμεν ὅπως ὁ Κύριος πραὔνας τὴν καθ᾽ ἡμῶν ὀργὴν.
Let us pray for those that persecute us for the Lord’s sake, that He would abate their rage, and confound all their devices against us.
Ὑπὲρ τῶν ἕξω ὄντων καὶ πεπλανημένων δεηθῶμεν, ὅπως ὁ Κύριος αὐτοὺς ἐπιστρέψηη.
Let us pray for all those that err and are deceived, that God would bring them into the way of truth.
Ὑπὲρ χηρῶν καὶ ὀρφανῶν δεηθώμεν.
Let us pray for all widows and orphans.
Ὑπὲρ τῆς εὐκρασίας τῶν ἀέρων, καὶ τελεσφορίας τῶν καρπῶν δεηθῶμεν.
Let us pray for seasonable and temperate weather, that we may receive the fruits of the earth.
The gesture proper to this service must be kneeling. This is manifest by the rubric belonging to Commination, where the litany is appointed to be read “ after the accustomed manner,” implying thereby both the place and posture formerly used. Now the accustomed place was the midst of the church, and the accustomed posture was kneeling, for so was it appointed in the queen’s injunctions‘, and in those of Edward VI., “The priests shall kneel in the midst of the church, and sing or say plainly and distinctly the litany.” Indeed, what fitter posture can there be than kneeling? Excellently saith St. Chrysostom’, ἱκέτου σχῆμα καὶ γνώμην καὶ φρόνημα τὸν εὐχόμενον ἔχειν δεῖ, “it is fit that he who applies himself to prayer should put on the outward garb and deportment, as well as the inward mind of a supplicant.” What scheme suits a supplicant better than lowly kneeling, and can we kneel too low at such supplications as these? The motions of the body ought to keep pace with the affections of the soul; when this is most transported with zeal, the members of the body must move at the same rate; the higher the spirit soars in prayer, the lower falls the body. When our Saviour prayed in the garden, His first posture was, Gels τὰ γόνατα, “fallimg upon His knees,” Luke xxii. 41; but γενόμενος ἐν ἀγωνίᾳ, “being brought to His agony,” and to pray ἐκτενεστέρως, “ more ardently,” ἔπεσεν ἐπὶ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ, “He cast Himself prostrate upon His face,” Matt. xxvi. 39. Now if the litany be, as certainly it is, our most fervent resort to God, fit it is it should be made in the most significant, that is, in the lowest posture of supplication.
As for the exceptions made against this litany, they are so few, and so contemptible, as I disdain to honour them with a reply, and shall end in this true character of it; that in all concernments, so excellently is it contrived in accommodation to our general wants, so full of Christian rhetoric and pious raptures, as it justly deserves to be accounted a noble parcel of our liturgy. Nor can all the cavils of malevolent spirits balance the honour it hath acquired abroad. For Gilbertus Cognatus (a German, and amanuensis to the famous Erasmus) very near a hundred years since, under this title, Litania veteris Ecclesia, “The Litany of the ancient Church,” presents us with a form precisely the same with ours, as then established by act of parliament.
F. On Wednesdays and Fridays.] These were, in the primitive times, days of solemn assemblies, in imitation of the Jewish practice, “I fast twice a week,” said the Pharisee, Luke xviii. 1], and the Christians did disdain to be short of them in what might promote the honour of God. The reason given why these two days were chosen, is, because on the one (Wednesday) Judas conspired to betray his Master, and our Saviour Christ: and on the other (Friday) He suffered death upon the cross. And this is that which Clemens Alexandrinus intendeth in these words, οἶδεν αὐτὸς καὶ τῆς νηστείας τὰ αἰνίγματα τῶν ἡμέρων τούτων, τῆς τετράδος, καὶ τῆς παρασκευῆς, 1. 6. “He knows the mystical sense of those days, the fourth and the parasceve:” and he is the first Greek author wherein it occurreth, unless we will resort to those Constitutions of the Apostles recorded by Epiphanius, whence he borroweth so much, and to which in all probability he referreth, where he saith συνάξεις ἐπιτελούμεναι ταχθεῖσαι εἰσὶν ἀπὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων τετράδι καὶ TpocaBBatw: “the Apostles ordained that there should be sacred conventions on the Wednesdays and Fridays.”
Nor was this observation peculiar to the Greek Church; for Tertullian expressly mentions, stationes quarte et sexte ferie, “the stations of the fourth and sixth days of the week.” The very nomination of these days may be enough against all contenders, to decipher to us what this ancient meant by stations, viz. days of humiliation, and the context of the place will not hear of any other construction, where pleading hard for Montanus against the Catholic Church in the point of fasts, he appeals to herself, whether the Apostles did ever yoke her to any such observances, and whether the days she hath assigned for those intents were not of her arbitrary choice: so that it being indisputably evident that the father here intended days of humiliation, I cannot think it probable, though very learned men have so opined; that the word should be capable elsewhere in this author of a sense diametrically opposite, or that it should import days of the highest festivity and rejoicing. For where he saith,
similiter de stationum diebus non putant plerique sacrificiorum orationibus interveniendum, quod statio solvenda sit accepto corpore Domini. Ergo devotum Deo obsequium Eucharistia resolvit, an magis obligat ? nonne solemnior erit statio tua, si ad aram Dei steteris ὁ Accepto corpore Domini et reservato utrumque salvum est, et participatio beneficii, et ewxecutio officii: “so also of days of station; many think they must then forbear to come to the prayers of the sacrifices, because the station is to be dissolved by the receiving of the body of the Lord : what then, doth the Eucharist countermand the duty due to God ? doth it not rather oblige us to it? Shall not thy station he the more solemn if performed before God’s Altar? the body of our Lord being taken and reserved, both are secured, the participation of His blessed Son, and the discharge of the duty:”
here I say some understand by stations, those days, viz. all Sundays of the year, and all the interval between Easter and Pentecost, on which, according to primitive custom, it was not permitted to kneel at prayers, and these days were noted as of singular contrariety to humiliation. The custom is acknowledged, and so also is it that statio properly signifieth standing, but both these concessions will be improved no further, but only to render their interpretation a specious fallacy. For, to my reading, statio is never by any author of those early ages applied in reference to that custom: not in Tertullian I am certain, no, notwithstanding his ad aram Dei steteris. For (not to reinforce the absurdity of one word denoting in the same author two things so contradictory as fasting and feasting) Tertullian tells us statio is of military extraction, de militari exemplo nomen accipit ; “it borroweth its name from military example;” if so, then not derived from the pretended custom of standing. Now the military mode was this; so many soldiers were ordered to be upon the respective guards, there were they to continue completely armed, and on horseback ready to receive any impression of an assaulting enemy ; in that posture were they to abide anciently from morning to night, until Paulus Amilius’ observing it to be too great a burden both for horse and man, appointed these guards should at noon be relieved with fresh both men and horses. Now because, according to the martial discipline, none was permitted to depart the guard until the time prefixed, Christians, who on the days of humiliation tied themselves as strictly to religious duty, did aptly enough impose upon those days the name of stations. And this will conclude sufficiently for the figurative, against the proper sense of stations.
Further to illustrate Tertullian by Tertullian; elsewhere remonstrating the mischievous consequences of unequal yokes, where a Christian woman matcheth with an infidel, he delivereth himself thus: si statio facienda sit, maritus eo die conducat ad balnea: si jejunia observanda sunt, maritus eadem die convivium exerceat; “if a station be to be kept, the husband may the same day lead her to the baths. If a solemn fast must be observed, the husband may the same day make a feast; where statio must necessarily denote a day of humiliation. For Tertullian’s design is to shew that the Church and the husband may be at cross purposes, and to command things contrary to each other. And the bath being, as the mode was then, applied to luxury, was as opposite to humiliation as a feast to a fast. But here it seems, say some, Tertullian did not consider both these under a real identity, but as different things, for else one instance would have served. To which I answer, true it is Tertullian doth somewhat distinguish them, the difference being this, that stations signified the less, and jeunia the more “ solemn fasts,” these continued from morning to night, and they only to the ninth hour, or three in the afternoon, whence it is that Tertullian calls them in a scoff stationum semi-jejunia, “half-fasted stations.”
Having thus, I hope, made a clear prospect into Tertullian’s dark mind in reference to these stations, the construction of the former passage is very facile, viz. that whereas many were scrupulous of coming to the Eucharist upon Wednesdays and Fridays, lest the receiving of the elements should prove a breaking of their fasts, which were to be continued until three in the afternoon, Tertullian tells them they were in the wrong, and that the Eucharist is so far from dissolving the duty of fasting, as it makes the work more valuable in God’s sight. But if they would not credit him, then there is another expedient will salve both sores, viz. the taking of the body, and reservation of it to be eaten at home ante omnem cibum, “fasting,’' as he in the same book doth hint, whereby neither the fast will be interrupted, nor the other duty neglected.