The signification of the word Litany. AFTER the order of the morning and evening prayer in our present Liturgy, as well as in all the old ones, stands the confession of our Christian faith, commonly called the Creed of Athanasius, which hath already been spoken to: and then followeth the Litany or general supplication to be sung or said after morning prayer, upon Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and at all other times whem it shall be commanded by the ordinary. The word Litany, as it is explained by our present Liturgy, signifies a general supplication; and so it is used by the most ancient heathens, viz. "for an earnest supplication to the gods made in time of adverse fortune; and in the same sense it is used in the Christian Church, viz. for a supplication and common intercession to God, when his wrath lies heavy upon us." Such a kind of supplication was the fifty-first psalm, which may be called David's litany. Such was that litany of God's appointing in Joel, where, in a general assembly, the priests were to weep between the porch and the altar, and to say, Spare thy people, O Lord: (in allusion to which place, our Litany, retaining also the same words, is enjoined, by the royal injunctions still in force, to be said or sung in the midst of the church, at a low desk before the chancel door, anciently called the falled stool.) An such was that litany of our Saviour, which he thrice repeated with strong crying and tears.
§.2. The antiquity of litanies in this form. As for the form in which they are now made, viz. in short requests by the priests, to which the people all answer, it appears to be very ancient; for St. Basil tells us, that litanies were read in the church of Neocaesarea, between Gregory Thaumaturgus's time and his own. And St. Ambrose hath left a form of litany, which bears his name, agreeing in many things with this of ours. For when miraculous gills began to cease, they wrote down several of those forms, which were the original of our modern office.
§.3. Litanies used in procession. About the year 400 they began to be used in procession, the people walking barefoot, and saying them with great devotion; by which means, it is said, several countries were delivered from great calamities. About the year 600, Gregory the Great, out of all the litanies extant, composed that famous sevenfold litany, by which Home was delivered from a grievous mortality; which hath been a pattern to all the Western Churches since; and to which ours comes nearer than that in the present Roman Missal, wherein later popes had put in the invocation of saints, which our reformers have justly expunged. But here we must observe, that litanies were of use before processions, and remained when they were taken away. For those processional litanies having occasioned much scandal, it was decreed "that the litanies should for the future only be used within the walls of the church;" and so they are used amongst us to this day.
§.4. Why said on Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. In the Common Prayer Book of 1549, (i.e. in the first book of king Edward) the Litany was placed between the communion office, and the office for baptism, with this single title, The Letany and Suffrages, and without any rubric either before or after it. But at the end of the communion office the first rubric began thus: Upon Wednesdays and Fridays the English Litany shall be said or sung in all places, after such form as is appointed by the king's Majesty's Injunctions: or as it shall be otherwise appointed by his Highness. What this form was I shall mention presently from the Injunctions themselves: but first I must observe, that Wednesdays and Fridays are here only mentioned, which were the ancient fasting-days of the primitive Church: the death of Christ being designed on the Wednesday, when he was sold by Judas, and accomplished on the Friday, when he died on the cross. As to Sunday, I find no direction relating to it; though I conclude from two other rubrics, which dispense with the use of it on some particular Sundays, that it was generally used on all the rest. For among the notes of explication at the end of that book, the two last allow that upon Christmas-day, Easter-day the Ascension-day, Whit-Sunday, and the feast of Trinity, may be used any part of holy Scripture, hereafter to be certainly limited and appointed instead of the Litany, And that if there be a sermon, or for other great cause, the curate by his discretion may leave out the Litany, the Gloria in Excelsis, the Creed, the Homily, and the Exhortation to the Communion. But in the review of the Common Prayer in 1552, the Litany was placed where it stands at this time, with direction at the beginning, that it should be used on Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays; and at other times when it shall be commanded by the ordinary. And the order for Sunday has continued ever since; I suppose partly because there is then the greatest assembly to join in so important a supplication, and partly that no day might seem to have a more solemn office than the Lord's day.
§.5. What time of the day it is to be used. The particular time of the day when it is to be said seems now different from what it was formerly: in king Edward's and queen Elizabeth's time, it seems it was used as preparatory to the second service. For by their Injunctions it was ordered, that immediately before high mass, or the time of communion of the sacrament, the priests with others of the quire should kneel in the midst of the churchy and sing or say plainly and distinctly the Litany which is set forth in English, with all the suffrages following. And even long afterwards it was a custom in several churches to toll a bell whilst the Litany was reading, to give notice to the people that the communion service was coming on. And indeed till the last review in 1661 the Litany was designed to be a distinct service by itself, and to be used some time after the morning prayer was over; as may be gathered from the rubric before the commination in all the old Common Prayer Books, which orders, that after morning prayer, the people being called together by the ringing of a bell, and assembled in the church, the English Litany shall be said after the accustomed manner. This custom, as I am informed, is still observed in some cathedrals and chapels: though now, for the most part, it is made one office with the morning prayer; it being ordered by the rubric before the prayer for the king, to be read after the third collect for grace, instead of the intercession al prayers in the daily service. Which order seems to have been formed from the rubric before the litany in the Scotch Common Prayer Book, which I have transcribed in the margin. And accordingly we find that, as the aforementioned rubric before the commination office is now altered, both the morning prayer and Litany are there supposed to be read at one and the same time.
§.6. One out of every family to attend the Litany. By the fifteenth canon above mentioned, whenever the Litany is read, every householder dwelling within half a mile of the church, is to come or send one at the least of his household fit to join with the minister in prayers.
§.7. The minister to kneel. The posture, which the minister is to use in saying the Litany, is not prescribed in any present rubric, except that, as it is now a part of the morning service for the days above mentioned, it is included in the rubric at the end of the suffrages after the second Lord's prayer, which orders all to kneel in that place, after which there is no direction for standing. And the Injunctions of king Edward and queen Elizabeth both appoint, that the priests, with others of the choirs shall kneel in the midst of the church, and sing or say plainly and distinctly the Litany, which is set forth in English, with all the suffrages following, to the intent the people may hear and answer, &c. As to the posture of the people, nothing need to be said in relation to that, because whenever the priest kneels, they are always to do the same.
§.8. The irregularity of singing the Litany by laymen. The singing of this office by laymen, as practised in several cathedrals and colleges, is certainly very unjustifiable, and deservedly gives offence to all such as are zealous for regularity and decency in divine worship. And therefore (since it is plainly a practice against the express rules of our Church, crept in partly through the indevout laziness of minor canons and others, whose duty it is to perform that solemn office; and partly through the shameful negligence of those who can and ought to correct whatever they see amiss in such matters) it cannot surely be thought impertinent, if I take hold of this opportunity to express my concern at so irreligious a custom. And to shew that I am not singular in my complaint, I shall here transcribe the words of the learned Dr. Bennet, who hath some time since, upon a like occasion, very severely, but with a great deal of decency, inveighed against this practice; though I cannot learn that he has yet been so fortunate as to obtain much reformation.
"I think myself obliged (saith he) to take notice of a most scandalous practice, which prevails in many such congregations, as ought to be fit precedents for the whole kingdom to follow. It is this; that laymen, and very often young boys of eighteen or nineteen years of age, are not only permitted, but obliged to perform this office, which is one of the most solemn parts of divine service, even though many priests and deacons are at the same time present.
"Those persons upon whom it must be charged, and in whose power it is to rectify it, cannot but know that this practice is illegal, as well as abominable in itself, and a flat contradiction to all primitive order. And one would think, when the nation swarms with such as ridicule, oppose, and deny the distinction of clergy and laity; those who possess some of the largest and most honourable preferments in the Church, should be ashamed to betray her into the hands of her professed enemies, and to put arguments into their mouths, and declare by their actions that they think any layman whatsoever as truly authorized to minister in holy things as those who are regularly ordained. Besides, with what face can those persons blame the dissenting teachers for officiating without episcopal ordination, when they themselves do not only allow of but require the same thing?"