L U T 



L U T 



can calm the paflions, and render the heart more fit for 

 fpiritual and pious purpofes ; particularly when united with 

 language, and the precepts of religion. It has been faid, 

 not improperly, that " Mufic, confidered abftradledly, is in 

 itfelf a language;'' and we may add, that it is more uni- 

 verlaliy underltood by mankind in general, whofe nerves 

 vibrate in unifon with its feleflcd tones, than any other lan- 

 guage among all the dialedls of the earth. That articula- 

 tion mud be rough and violent indeed, which, without 

 finging, can eafily be comprehendt-d in buildings fo vail as 

 fome of the Chriftian churches; in fujh, it is the Jl>'irh, 

 not the letter of fupplication or thanlifgiving, which mull 

 employ the mind. St. Paul fays, " I will fing with the 

 /pint, and I will fing with the undirjlandh:g alfo.'' As 

 there never was a national religion without mufic of fome 

 kind or other, the difpute concerning that which is mod 

 fit for fuch foIeiTinities, is reduced to one fhort cjuedion. 

 If mufic be admitttd into the iervice of the church, is that 

 fpccies of it which the moll polifhcd part of mankind re- 

 gard as good, or that which they regard as bad, the moil de- 

 ferving of fuch an honom- ? 



That metrical pfalmody, in flow notes of equal length, 

 had its origin in Germany, and was brought thence by re- 

 formers to other parts of Europe, is dem.jnflrable : for the 

 1 iS'Ji Pfalm, " Beati omnes qui timent Dominum," had been 

 tranflated into German verfe, in order to be fung in this 

 manner, by John Hufs, in the beginning of the fifteenth 

 century ; which tranfiation was afterwards modernized in 

 the fame meafure, and to the fame tune, by Luther. And 

 the fame melody which we fing to the loodth pfalm, is 

 not only given to the 134th, in all the Lutheran pfalm- 

 book?, but by Goudimel and Claude le Jeuue, in thofc of 

 the Calvinifts ; which nearly amounts to a proof that this 

 favourite melody was not produced in England. It is faid 

 to have been the opinion of Handel, that Luther himlelf 

 was its author ; but of this we have been able to procure no 

 authentic proof. Tradition, liowever, gives to this cele- 

 brated Hereliarch, as he is called by the Roman Catholics, 

 feveral of the ancient melodies which are ilill ufcd in Ger- 

 many. 



LUTHERANISM, m Ecchfmfical Hlflory, the fenti- 

 ments of Dr. Martin Luther, and his followers, witii regard 

 to religion. See the biographical article Luther, under 

 which article we have given an account of the life and 

 labours of this eminent reformer ; and of the commenee- 

 ment and foundation of that memorable rupture andTevolu- 

 tion in the church, which humbled the grandeur of the lordly 

 pontiffs, and eclipied fo great a part of their glory. Sec Re- 

 formation'. 



It has been faid indeed by F. Paul, in his Hillory of the 

 Council of Trent, p. 5, and after him by M''. Hume, in 

 his Hiftory of England, vol. i. p. 1 19, as well as by others, 

 that the Auilin fiiars had been ufually employed in preach- 

 ing indulgences in Saxony ; but that Arcemboldi, a Ge- 

 noefe merchant, who was employed by Magdalen, the 

 filler of Leo, to whom he had granted the profits arifing 

 from the fale of indulgences in Sa.'iony, to colletl the 

 money which fiiould be raifed, and his deputies, hoping 

 to gain more by committing this trufb to the Dominicans, 

 had bargained with Tetzcl ; and that Luther was prompted 

 at firll to oppofe Tetzel and his affociates, and to deny 

 indulgences, by a defire of taking revenge for tins injury 

 ofiered to his order. Such was the reprcfentation of 

 IjolTuet ; and other writers, mifled by his authority, have 

 circulated a fimilar opinion. It is proper, therefore, to 

 obferve, that the profits arifing from indulgences in Saxony 

 and he adjacent countries were granted, not to Magdalen, 



Voi„ XXI. 



the filler of Leo, but to Albert, archbilhop of ^^entv■, 

 who had the fole right of nominating thofc who publiflied 

 them : moreover, Arcemboldi never had any concern in the 

 publication of indulgences in Saxony ; becaufe his dillrift 

 was Flanders and the Upper and Lower Rhine. Bcfides, 

 the publication of indulgences in Germany was not ufually 

 committed to the Augullinians : froni the year 1229, that 

 lucrative conimiffion was principally intruiled with the Do- 

 minicans ; and tliey had been employed in the fame office a 

 (hort time before the prr^fent period : the promulgation 

 of them, at three different periods under Julius il. was 

 granted to the Francifcans, and the guardian of the Fran- 

 cifcans was joined in the trull with Albert on this occa- 

 fion, though he refufed to accept it : and it is remarkable, 

 that for half a century before Luther, u/z. from 1450 to 

 IJ17, the name of an Aullm friar employed in this (ervice 

 occurs but once. To ihefe fafts it nay be added, that it 

 is far from being probable, that Luther would have been 

 folicitous about obtaining for hirafelf or his order, a com- 

 mifiion of this kind, at a time when the preaching of in- 

 dulgences was become very unpopular ; infomuch that all 

 the princes of Europe, and many bilhops, as well as other 

 learned men, abhorred the traffic ; and even the Francifcans 

 and Dominicans, towards the conclufion of the fifteenth 

 century, oppoled it publicly, both in their difcourfes and 

 wriringb ; nor was this commiflion given to the Domini- 

 cans in general, but folely to Tef/.el. Finally, Luther 

 was never accufed of oppofing the publication of indul- 

 gences from refentment or envy, either in the edifts of 

 the pontiffs of his time, or in the reproaches of his con- 

 temporary writers, who defended the caufe of Rome from 

 the year 15 17 to 1546, and who were far from being fparing 

 of their inveClives and calumnies. The reader may find this 

 matter fully Hated by Dr. Maclean, the traallator of Mo- 

 (heim's Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, in vol. iv. p. 31. note (p) Svo. 

 edit. 1790, and by Dr. Robertfon in- his Hift. of Ch. V. 

 vol. ii. p. 121;. note (*), 8v(j. edit. 



Lutheranilm was formed in the manner ftated under the 

 article Luther ; the adherents to which were called Lu- 

 therans, from Lntherus, a name which has a Greek turn, 

 and which this great reformer alTumed in lieu of his family 

 name Loiter, or Lauther ; it being the cuftom of thofe days 

 for men of learning to give themfclves Greek names; fuch 

 were Erafmus, Melanfthon, Bacon, Sec. 



For a full and accurate account of the rife and progrefs 

 of Lutheranifm, the reader may confult Molheim and Ro- 

 bertfon, ubi fupra. See Protestants and Reform.v- 



TlON. 



Lutheranifm has undergone fome alteration fince the time 

 of its founder. Luther rejefted the epiftle of St. Jam.es, 

 as inconliflent with the doitrine of St. Paul, in relation to 

 juftification ; he alfo fet afide the Apocalypfe ; both which 

 are now received as canonical in the Lutheran church. 



Luther reduced the number of facraments to two, via. 

 baptifni, and the eucharift ; but he believed the impanation, 

 or confubftantiation : that is, that the matter of the bread 

 and wine remain with the body and blood of Chrift ; and it 

 is in this article, that the main difference between the Lu- 

 theran and Englifh churches confifts. 



Luther maintained the mafs to be no facrifice ; he ex- 

 ploded the adoration of the hoft, auricular confefTion, meri- 

 torious works, indulgences, purgatories, the worfliip of 

 images, &c. which had been introduced in the corrupt times 

 of the Romilh church. He alfo oppofed the dodlrine of 

 free-will ; maintained predellination ; afferted that we are 

 neceffitated in all we do ; that all our adions done in a Itate 

 of fin, and even the virtues themfelves of heathens, are 

 4 P crimes j 



