he reads it, or dispense with the care and study that may be required for his doing so efficiently. Mistakes in reading, as has before been mentioned, often show a want of understanding; and in these days of advancing education the clergy can by no means afford to throw away the advantage they have hitherto enjoyed, of being considered, as a body, more learned than their hearers; at least, in their own department of learning. At any rate, they are bound to avoid, as far as possible, faults which might give refined, but careless, hearers a pretext for neglecting their ministrations, and make earnest ones grieve over their inefficiency.

It is true that these remarks apply more strictly to some congregations than to others, according as they are more or less critical. But even in the rudest parish it can never be right for a clergyman to content himself with a standard of excellence lower than he is capable of attaining. The dignity of his office demands of him his very best efforts; and though they may not be appreciated by his own people, he knows not when he may have to officiate before others; or what contempt he may bring on his order by imperfections allowed in himself, till they have grown inveterate. On the other hand, the consciousness of performing this part of his duty properly will help to sustain his self-respect; which is one of the legitimate and

inalienable prerogatives of knowledge, in all its different branches; and which, in an age of selfwill and contention like the present, many things will combine to render at once valuable and beneficial to him. It will give him the comfort of thinking, that the noblest forms of Divine Service ever compiled by the wit of man have lost none of their power through his mode of celebrating them. His lot may be cast, perhaps, amongst the poor and illiterate, who can value none of the good points in his reading but its clearness; and only the worse half of the poet's request may seem granted to him, in an audience more "few" than "fit." But he may still console himself with the reflection, that those who despise the beautiful prayers and sober truthful teaching of the Church, cannot plead his defects as their excuse. And so, in spite of all such vexations, he may still realize in his feelings the words which describe the duty and the privilege of every Christian man, indeed, but especially of every Christian clergyman, to

1

"Still suspect, and still revere himself,

In lowliness of heart 2."

Let, then, all who are preparing for the Ministry of the Church, or who have newly entered it, con

1 "Fit audience find, though few." Milton.

2 Wordsworth.

sider well these things; and resolve to grudge neither the study which might make them, like Apollos, "mighty in the Scriptures "-the sense, as well as the letter of them-nor the care which might enable them to express intelligently to others the knowledge they had themselves acquired.

APPENDIX.

SINCE the preceding pages were written, a friend has kindly put into my hands a little work on the same subject by Mr. Champney, in which remarks are made on the reading of some of the same passages as are here noticed, though fewer than might have been expected. In the part written by himself (for it is mainly a compilation), there are several suggestions the soundness of which appear, to say the least, very doubtful. The preface states that " some of them are offered with diffidence to the better judgment of the reader,” and no harm therefore can be done by their being examined by one who is only anxious to prevent mistakes being made by others, and would feel sincerely obliged to any one who would in the same way correct his own. The following seem most open to question :

Page II. "In the first Prayer for the Queen in the Communion Service, the reading should certainly be 'in Thee, and for Thee,' and not 'in Thee, and for Thee.'"

This seems but half true; for though the first preposition may, possibly, require no emphasis, the second surely does, as expressing a new and distinct idea. Compare Rom. xi. 36, "For of Him, and by Him, and to Him, are all things."

"In the Nicene Creed, say, of course, 'Very God, of very God,' and not, as in a thoughtless moment, Very God, of very God.'"

6

This direction seems wholly wrong; for besides omitting the proper stress on "of," it also entirely ignores the fact, that the difference between this clause of the Creed and a preceding one consists of the word "very;" which must therefore necessarily be emphatic. The original Greek of the two clauses (quoted above) clearly proves this: Θεὸν ἐκ Θεοῦ, Θεὸν ἀληθινὸν ἐκ Θεοῦ ἀληθινοῦ.

"In a subsequent prayer in the Communion. Service" (why not call it the " Absolution," as the rubric does?) "read, 'pardon, and deliver you from, all your sins;' not, 'pardon and deliver you, from all your sins; which is bad grammar."

Though it is certainly a mistake which is pointed out, it does not seem quite so certain that the best correction of it is the one here given. A pause after "pardon" would less interrupt the run of the sentence; while the grammar of it would be preserved by understanding after that verb the "you" which is subsequently expressed. But this is a