MOAB; PALESTINE. C. VON ORELLI.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The commentaries on Genesis deal with the
subject, as do some of the works on Old Testament the
ology. Consult: DD, iii. 150‑152; EB, iii. 2824‑25;
JE, viii. 185‑186. The Koran has many passages ',,w°hich
embody traditions, partly of Talmudic Origin, fGp~ IA.
LOTS, HEBREW USE OF.
Urim and Thummim (§ la.. Methods of Employment (§ 2). The Lot in Common Life (§ 3).
Apart from prophecy, the lot takes the first place
in ancient Israel as a means of seeking counsel of
the deity. In early times there existed various
methods of casting lots, as by means
r. Urim of wooden staves or arrows (rhaband domancy, Hos. iv. 12; cf. Ezek. xxi.
Thummim. 21), employed also by Babylonians and by Arabs. But this and other methods of questioning the deity (necromancy, the conjuration of spirits, etc.) gradually fell into disrepute as heathenish magic, and the only legitimate form in the religion of Yahweh was that practised by the priest, tile casting of lots by means of the Urim and Thummim (q.v.). The way in which these lots were handled shows that they stood in the closest connection with the priestly Ephod (q.v.). When therefore Saul or David wished to ask counsel of Yahweh through the casting of lots, they said to the priest: " Bring hither the ephod " (I Sam. xiv. 18, Septuagint; A. V. " Bring hither the arkof God"; cf. xxiii.9, xxal.7). From I Sam. xiv. 37 aqq., Septuagint, it appears that the two lots bore the names Urim and Thummim. Saul prays before questioning the oracle: " If the sin is upon me or upon Jonathan, let Urim appear: if it is upon the people, then let Thummim appear " (cf. S. R. Driver, Hebrew Text of . . . Samuel, p. 89, Oxford, 1890). The proper explanation of the words Urim and ThW4" M no
most probable one is that the Maim L
two lots symbolized
the two divisions of the earth's rotation, light and
darkness, life and death, yea or no. Urim is light
i or the full moon or the upperworld; Thummim
(from a word meaning perfection) means sunset or under‑world. Worn upon the breast, on the high priest's vestment, Urim and Thummim may be compared with the Babylonian tablets of fate which were given to Marduk, who wore them upon his breast.
Of what the lots consisted is nowhere stated.
The principal facts concerning their use appear in several accounts in the Old Testament. The questions present a simple alternative which the lot
Lots, Hebrew Use of THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
is expected to decide. Sometimes they are simple
questions to which Yahweh is expected to an
swer yea or no (cf. I Sam, agiii. 9
3. Methods eqq., xxx. 8; II Sam. ii. 1, v. 19;
of Em‑ Judges ax. 23). At other times, the lot
ployment. moat decide between two possibilities;
if, however, one possibility moat be
determined from among a number, by the exclu
sion of one possibility after another the number is
reduced to two. An example of this is when Saul
wishes to discover among the whole people the
guilty one. Lots are first cast between the entire
army on one aide and Saul and Jonathan on the
other (I Sam. aiv. 38 aqq.; similarly in I Sam. ax.
20 eqq.; Josh. vii. 16 eqq.). Hence the lots con
sisted of two objects, of some sort (staves, atones,
or similar objects), one of which signified yea and
the other no. In special cases, however, any ap
propriate significance was attributed to one or the
other. It may possibly be concluded from II Sam.
aiv. 18 eqq. that Urim signified the affirmative,
and Thnmm;m the negative. Inquiry was made
as to the sin of Saul and Jonathan; if Urim came
out, the sin was proved, if Thummim came out, it
signified a negative answer and therefore that the
sin rued upon the army. From the prophetic
books it has been conjectured that Urim and Thum
mim were two small idols, possibly teraphim, since
teraphim are often mentioned in connection with
the ephod (Hoe. iii. 4; of. Judges avii. 5); they also
appear alongside of spirits and ghosts as employed
in the consultation of oracles (H Kings asiii. 24).
If Yahweh were angry, he did not reply; when,
from certain happenings during the casting of the
lots, the priest drew the conclusion that the divin
ity was not willing to answer, he ceased further
questioning. By II Sam. v. 23‑24 it is indicated
that the priest, on his own initiative, added cer
tain explanations which he perhaps deduced from
some of the accompanying circumstances.
It follows from the foregoing that the privilege
of casting the lots belonged exclusively to the priest,
whose characteristic duties were precisely the
wearing of the ephod and the casting of the lots.
In Deuteronomy the care of the Urim and Thum
mim is designated se an essential charge of the
priest (Deut. xsxiii. 8). This possession may have
contributed largely to make the priestly office
hereditary, the knowledge and ability to handle
the oracle being transmitted from father to son.
In ancient times, the casting of lots played s
prominent part in the life of the Israelites. It may
be safely assumed that often the Israelites. sought
counsel of the deity is reference to
3. The possible eventualities just as they
Lot in made use of the service of the seers
Common (cf. I Sam. is. B sqq.). According to
Life. the priestly writer, Joshua was di
rected to ask an answer from the lots
by means of the priest (Nom. agvii. 21; cf. Josh.
la. 8 eqq.). In jurisprudence also the lots played a
part; in intricate cases they were used to discover
the guilty (Josh. vii. 18 aqq.; I Sam. aiv. 38 aqq.),
and decisions in other cases were reached by their
aid (Esek. ariv. 8; Prov. aviii. 18, zvi. 33; Matt.
savii. 35). After the time of Solomon, the his‑
torical narratives cease to mention the lots of Urim and Thummim; internal evidence favors the resumption that they lost their importance. The prophets became more and more numerous, and it is to them that, for example, Alias turns with questions that David would have sought to solve by the sacred lots (I Kings aaii. 5). According to Jewish tradition, the Urim and Thummim no longer existed in the second temple. Alongside of the liturgical lots, secular lots (if this expression be permitted) were always in favor; booty taken in war was always divided by means of lots (Joel iii. 3; Nah. iii. 10; Ob. 11). In controversies regarding possession s decision was reached by casting lots (Prow. aviii. 18) and in similar ways (cf. also Zeah. ii. 1). The lots, usually small stones, were shaken is the bosom, ~ that is, in the fold of the dress in front, until one fell out (Prow. avi. 33). At the time of the second temple, the casting of lots was still resorted to; for example, in the selection of the two goats on the Day of . Atonement (Lev. avi. 7‑10), in the division of the days of office among the priests (Luke i. 9; cf. I Chron. aaiv. 5 sqq.), and in apportioning the contribution of wood for the altar (Neh. a. 34). I. B>trrznva»a.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Consult the literature under IhvnJeaZOx; EPHOn; Uses AND 'lHoannr; the articles under those words in the Bible Dictionaries; also the works mentioned under l,BCHEOL(M:, Brsnrcer., by Nowaok sad Benainger, sod others.
LOT2, late, WILHELM PHILIPP FRIEDRICH FERDINAND: German Lutheran; b. at Cassel Apr. 12, 1853. He was educated at the universities of Leipaic (Ph.D., 1879; lie. theol., 1883) and Gbttingen, and in 1883 became privet‑docent at the former institution. In the same year he went to Erlangen as privet‑docent and tutor, but in 1884 accepted a call to Vienna as associate professor of Old‑Testament exegesis in the Evangelical theological faculty. He was promoted to a full professorship there in 1884, a position which he held until 1897, when he was appointed to his present post of professor of Old‑Testament exegesis at Erlangen. He has written: Die Iraschriftcn Tiglathpilener'a 1. in tranaadiberlem aaayriachem Grundtext mit Ueberaetzung und Ifomme>bEar (Leipaie, 1880); Quaationea de hiatoria sab6ati (1883); Gesch"te and O,$'erebarung im Alten Testament (1891); Die Bundest«le (1901); Dan Alts Testament trnd die Wiaaerrschaft (190b); Die bibliache Urgeac7iichle in ihre7n Verhdltnia zu den Urzeitaagen anderer V blker, zu den iaraelitisclMn Volkserzdhlungen uad zum Ganzert der Heiligen Schrtft (1907); and Heiirdiache Sprachlehre (1908).
LOTZE, let'se, RUDOLF HERMANN: German philosopher; b. at Bautaen (31 m. e.n.e. of Dresden), Saxony, May 21, 1817; d. at Berlin July 1, 1881. He studied philosophy and medicine at the University of Leipaic, taking degrees in both subjects, and became extraordinary professor of philosophy there in 1842. He was called to G8ttingen in 1844, and to Berlin in 1881, but here he was able to lecture only a part of one semester. Lotze was one of the moat influential philosophers of the second half of the nineteenth century, and he has many followers, particularly among theo‑
J. b1lfEelet, W ippe‑I upuste et S. Louie, ib. n.d.; A. Lecoy de la Marche, S. Louis, son pouverneneeat et as politique, ib. 1887; E. Berger, S. Louis et Innocently., ib. 1893; 8. de Froiesart, S. Louie et lea croiaades, ib.189B; M. Fromman, Land" Ludwig 111. der Fromme, Jena, 1907; and the literature under Cnoeenas.
LOURDES: A city of France in the department of the Hautes‑Pyr6ll6es, situated near the river Gave‑du‑Pau about 22 miles s.e. of Pau. Lourdes was a fortified town as far back as the time of the Caesars and still possesses a ch5teau fort. The inhabitants number about 5,000. During the last half century Lourdes has become famous throughout the Roman Catholic world in consequence of
the aeries of alleged apparitions of the Virgin Mary to Bernadette Soubirous, a child of the town in
1858. The ga l n0 at tilt i11rie was fourteen
Years . of age, is described as being somewhat infirm in health, and inferior both in physical and mental development to the average child of her
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The lives of Louis are very numerous; the
moat noted is by Le Nain de Tillemont, ed. J. de Gaulle,
8 vole., Paris, 1848‑51. Others are by A. Mignon, ib.
1853; J. A. Faure, 2 vole., ib. 1885; F. P. G. Guiaot,
Great Christians of France. St. Louie and Calvin, London.
1889; Hermitte, ib. 1876; V. Verlaque, ib. 1885; C. V.
Langlois, ib. 1888; H. Wallon, 2 vole., ib. 1887; M. f3epet,
ib. 1898; M. H. F. Delaborde, ib. 1899. Consult further,
P. Viollet,~ ~Lee~ ‑0~tabliaaementa de S. Louis, 4 vole., ib. 1881‑
Louis was canonized by Boniface VIII., Aug. 11, 1297; his day is Aug. 25. From his earliest childhood he was of a pious disposition and delighted in prayers and penances. Although naturally gentle, Louis was intolerant toward heretics and infidels, and was accustomed to say that the only way to deal with a Jew was to strike him with your sword. He was also superstitious; he brought back from the Holy Land the crown of thorns and a portion of the true cress, for which he built the Sainte‑Chapelle in Paris. The authenticity of the famous Pragmatic Sanction of 1269 (q.v.) has been questioned. In this document he asserts the independence of the Gallican Church against the claims of the pope.
with an army of 40,000. The next spring he set sail for Egypt, and landed at Damietta June 4, 1249. He took the town without a blow, then defeated a Mohammedan army and advanced up the Nile to Mansurah, whence he had to retreat, after fighting a battle with the Saracens. The king and his whole army were taken captive, but after tedious negotiations were set free for a large ransom. With the remnant of his army, scarcely 6,000 men, Louis sailed to Acre and stayed in the Holy Land four years, only returning to France when recalled by the death of his mother whom he had left as regent (Nov., 1252). He undertook a pilgrimage to Nazareth in thankfulness for his release from captivity. In 1270 he led another crusade to Tunis, landing in July at the site of Carthage, where a pestilence broke out in his army to which the king himself succumbed. His son Philip III. made peace with the emir and returned to France, carrying the ashes of his father.
logians. This is explained by the fact that in his
speculation ethical and religious needs come into
their full rights. His philosophy represents a re
action against the ideological pantheism of Hegel,
which seemed to sacrifice all individuality and va
riety in existence to a formal and abstract scheme
of development. Lotze characterized his philo
sophical standpoint as teleological idealism, and he
regarded ethics as the starting‑point of metaphys
ics. While enforcing the mechanical view of na
ture, he sought to show that mechanism, the rela
tion of cause and effect, is incomprehensible,
except as the realization of a world of moral ideas.
Thus, each causal series becomes at the same time
a teleological series. Lotze worked out this recon
ciliation of mechanism and teleology by com
bining with the monads of Leibnitz (q.v., § 2) the
absolute substance of Spinoza (q.v.), in which in
dividual things (monads) are grounded, and through
whose all‑inclusive unity interrelation is possible.
Some of Lotze's more important works are: Meta
Phys2:k (Leipsie, 1841); Logik (1843); Mediziniaehe
Psychologie oiler Physiologic der Seete (1852); Mi
krokosmus. Ideen xur Naturgeachichte and Ge‑ 'I
achichte der Menschheit (3 vole., 1856‑64; Eng.
transl., 2 vole., Edinburgh, 1885), his principal
work; Geschichte der Aesthetik in Deutschland
(Munich, 1868); and the unfinished System der
Philosophic (vol, i., Logik, Leipsic, 1874; vol. ii.,
Metaphysi,(c, 1879; Eng. transl. of both, 2 parts,
Oxford, 1884). After Lotze's death appeared
Diktats, notes from his lectures on the various
philosophical disciplines (8 parts, Leipsic, 1882‑$4;
Eng. transl. by G. T. Ladd, Outlines, 6 vole., Boston,
1884‑1887); also Kleine Schriften (3 vole., Leipsie,
1885‑1894). HUBERT EvANs.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: An excellent bibliography, including ref
erences to material which appeared in periodical litera
ture, is in J. M, Baldwin, Dictionary oJ!Philoeophy and
Psychology, III., i. 347‑350. Consult: E. von Hart
mann, Lotu's Philosophic, Leipeie, 1888; L. $tAhlin,
Karat, Lobe and Ritachl, ib. 1888, Eng. tranal., Edinburgh,
1889; G. Vorbrodt, Prineipien der Elhik and der Re
lipionaphiloaophie Lotus, Dessau, 1891; H. Jones, A
Critical Account of the Philosophy 0j 1441 WOW, 1686;
g. C. Ring, An Outline of the Microcoamua of Hermann
Lotze, Oberlin, 1895; G. T. Ladd, Lotus Influence on
Theology, in The. New World, iv (1895), 401‑421; A.
Tienee, LoEze'a Gedanken zu den PrinzipienJragen der
Ethik, Heidelberg, 1898; W. Wallace, Lectures and Ea
eaya on Natural Theology and Ethics, Oxford, 1898; G.
Page, Lotze'a religtoae Weltanschauung, Erlangen, 1599;
V. F. Moors, Ethical Aspects of Lotu's Metaphysics, New
LOUIS IX.: King of France and Roman Catholic
saint; b. at Poissy (12 m. n.w. of Paris) Apr. 25,
1215; d. before Tunis Aug. 25, 1270. His father,
Louis VIII., died when he was only eleven years
old, and he ascended the throne under the regency
of his mother, Blanche of Castile (Nov. 16,
1226). His mother, a pious and very capable
woman, had him educated by brothers of the Fran
ciscan and Dominican Orden. During the fir9t
of of his reign his nobles and later the bishops
gave him much trouble, but he at last
restored order in his kingdom.
In fulfilment of a vow made on a bed of sickness
he undertook a crusade (1248). In August he
reed for Cyprus, the rendezvous of the crusaders,
47 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Lots, Hebrew Use of
age. She belonged to a poor peasant family, and was simple and ignorant, knowing neither how to read nor write, and unable to speak French‑‑her language being the patois of the locality. The
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 48
story of the apparitions, which were seen only by
Bernadette, is se ‑follows: On Thursday, Feb. 11,
1858, in company with her sister Marie and Jeanne
Abadie,, a playmate of about the same age, she
went to gather sticks for fire‑wood along the banks
of the Gave in the suburbs of the town. Arriving
at a mill‑race near a grotto in the mountain side,
the two companions crossed over, and Bernadette,
intending to do the same, remained behind a few
minutes in order to remove her shoes and stock
ings. While thus occupied she was startled by a
noise as of a great wind, though the atmosphere
was at the time quite calm. In a moment her at
tention was drawn to a briar‑bush growing beneath
s kind of natural niche at the opening of the grotto.
The bush seemed agitated; a " golden cloud " ap
peared above it, and above tha cloud in front of
the niche appeared the form of a woman. She was
youthful and beautiful in appearance, robed in
white with a blue sash around her waist. Her feet
were bare but on each was a gold‑colored rosette,
and in her hands was a rosary of white beady
strung on a golden chain. She smiled graciously
and beckoned to Bernadette to approach. The
latter obeyed and at the same time, began instinc
tively to recite her beads. The lady then assumed
an attitude of silent prayer, reciting, however, with
Bernadette the Gloria PaLri at the end of each
decal. In the mean time the other two com
panions had returned. They were naturally sur
prised to find Bernadette on her knees praying in
such a place, and seeing nothing themselves to so
count for her enraptured gaze, they laughed at her
and brought her home. Here the experience was
treated as an illusion and the girl was forbidden to
return to the grotto. On the following Sunday,
however (Feb. 14), she obtained permission to re
visit the place in company with s few children of
her own age. She again saw the same vision and
soon went into an ecstasy from which she was
aroused by a woman living near, who was attracted
to the scene by the other girls who, though seeing
nothing, were amazed and alarmed at the changed
appearance of their companion. After this eape
rienoe she was again restrained from going to the
grotto, but a few ladies of the town moved by
curiosity brought her back on Feb. 18. The mys
terious lady appeared as before, and speaking to
Bernadette asked her to return to the place daily
for a fortnight. She promised to do so, and on
the three following days (Friday, Saturday, and
Sunday) the same experiences were enacted at the
grotty in the presence of an ever‑increasing crowd
of spectators. Nothing was seen by any of them,
but they were all deeply impressed by the ecstatic
expression on the features of the little girl. In
deed, so great had become the crowd of onlookers
that the civil authorities saw fit to interfere, and
the day following a couple of policemen were do
tailed to accompany Bernadette to the grotto,
but on this occasion nothing was seen. The next
day, however, the vision again appeared and also
on the following day (Feb. 24) on which occasion
Bernadette received a command from the lady to
dig a hole in the ground at the entrance of the
grotto. This she did with her hands, and at once
a stream of water appeared (the place had previously been perfectly dry) which gradually increased in volume until it became a settled perennial spring furnishing water in abundance for the piacinas sad taps used by the pilgrims (about 33,000 gallons per day). The apparition was seen again on Feb. 26, and on the 27th, when Bernadette received the command to " go and tell the priests to build a chapel " at the spot. On Sunday, Feb. 28, the experience took place in the presence of more than 2,000 spectators. The phenomenon recurred on the two following days, but on Mar. 3 nothing was seen. Mar. 4 was the last of the fifteen days on which Bernadette had promised to visit the grotto. A multitude of 15,000 expectant persons crowded about the place; the vision came as usual, but nothing extraordinary occurred. Bernadette returned on the following days but nothing appeared until Mar. 25 (feast of the Annunciation), when in answer to Bernadette's request that the mysterious lady tell her name, she received the reply: " I am the Immaculate Conception." Twelve days passed without any further manifestation, but on Apr. 7 the vision was renewed, and still again three months later, July 16. This was the eighteenth and last apparition. From the outset the local ecclesiastical authorities held aloof and showed themselves scarcely less skeptical than the civil functionaries. Bernadette was put through long and trying interrogatory ordeals on the part of both, but~ahe maintained her story even to its details without contradicting herself under severe cross‑examination, and it remained the conviction of her examiners that she was truthful and sincere in relating her experiences. In this connection it is worth noting that she never sought notoriety or any pecuniary advantage as a result of the visions, and besides, it was freely admitted se inconceivable that one so young and so mentally deficient could concoct and successfully carry out a deceptive scheme of such magnitude. Shortly after the events above related she went to live with the Hospital Sisters established in the town, and it was only when she was eighteen years of age that she finished learning how to read and write. She later became a member of the order at the age of twenty‑two and went to live in the convent of Nevers, where she died at the age of thirty‑five. Apart from the apparitions at the grotto she never had any extraordinary psychic experience.
The great sensation produced by the apparitions, and the repeated assertion that miracles were being wrought at the grotto, made it necessary for the local church authorities to make an investigation, and an episcopal commission to that effect was appointed by Mgr. Laurence, bishop of Tarbes, in July, 1858. The inquiry referred not only to the apparitions, but also to the alleged miraculous occurrences, and the results were embodied in a report submitted to Mgr. Laurence four years later. It was favorable throughout to the miraculous and supernatural character of the episodes, and in Jan., 1862, the bishop issued a decision to the effect that: " these apparitions have all the charaeteristics of truth, and that the faithful are justified in believing them to be true. We humbly submit our
decision to the judgment of the Sovereign Pontiff
who governs the Universal Church." No official
decision in the matter has been rendered by papal
authority, but the three popes Pius IX., Leo XIII., I
and Pius X. are known to have expressed their per
sonal belief in the reality of the apparitions and sub
sequent miracles. Official approbation has, how
ever, been secured to the extent of allowing the
liturgical office of Our Lady of Lourdes to be in
serted in the breviary for certain localities, while
churches bearing that name have been erected in
many parts of the world. Lourdes soon became a
rendezvous for pilgrims from all parts of the world,
and in 1872 the national pilgrimages, viz., from the
different provinces of France, were begun. These
take place every year about Aug. 15, and on such
occasions the town often receives at once as many
as 60,000 pilgrims. The beautiful basilica, which
stands above the grotto was consecrated in 1376,
and the Church of the Holy Rosary which stands
on a lower level directly beneath the basilica, was
finished in 1901. [Before these churches is a park,
the broad )pace in the middle of which is the scene of
the procession of the Blessed Sacrament which takes
place daily. The sick in all stages of disease are lined
up on the edge of this space and so are passed by the
consecrated Host and the attendant clergy and pil
grims, and then it is that miraculous cures are alleged
to be performed.] JAMES F. DRISCOLL.
is to use improper language. Self‑love is also an
To speak of love for animals or of love for a thing,
True love can exist only between rational bejng8,
parallel between conjugal love and the "great mystery " of Christ's love for the Church should treat married life so realistically (I Cor, vii.).
no tewofthp that !be apo$1
who drew such a close
Love manifests itself in the two great directions, toward God and toward our neighbor, or in the contemplative and in the practical form; the former seen in Mary of Bethany, the latter in her sister Martha (Luke x. 38‑42). Our Lord gave his preference to the former. It shows itself in prayer, meditation, worship, and in the communion. The practical form manifests itself in all works of benevolence and beneficence, far and near. It is incumbent upon the Christian to unite the two. The hardest burden our Lord lays upon his disciples is to love their enemies (Matt. v. 44). Among human relationships controlled by love, marriage occupies the first place (Eph. v. 22‑$31) 11 ~
Love is a basal principle in creation, in redemption, and in Christian ethics. God created the world in order that he might have a field for the exercise of his love; not that the world was necessary in any way; but it delighted him to make the world and to fill it with creatures whom he could love; and God so loved the world that he sent his Son to die for it (John iii. 16). The Son, out of his free, divine love, laid down his life for our salvation (Matt. ax. 28). God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself (II Cor. v. 19); and this love of God in Christ is the only and exclusive ground of our salvation and of our sanctification (Acts iv. 12). Love is the source and center of the development of the new life in Christ. It is the chief of the Christian virtues. Our Lord set his approval upon the Mosaic summary of the law in the form of love to God and man (Matt. axii. 3740; cf. Dent. vi. 5; Lev. aia. 18), and gave his followers the " new commandment," that they should love one another (John aiii. 34). Paul calls love " the fulfilling of the law" (Rom. x111. 10), and "the end of the commandment " (I Tim. i. 5); Peter exhorts to love as the fruit of holy living (I pet. i. 22; II Pet, i, 7); John ig particularly full open love (I John ii. 5, iv. 7, 8), and James calls love of our neighbors "the royal law" (Jas. ii. 5, 8).
posed scheme, the persons of the Godhead are not sufficiently distinguished. Yet it is undoubtedly true that love is a large element of the divine essence; and later theologians, as, for instance, Dorner, in discussing the problem of the Trinity, give it much space.