to set it again most crookedly. How then can any of our clergy assert the orthodoxy+ of these writers, merely stating that there are parts in their writings of which they disapprove? Are these the parts? If so, are they not sufficient to disprove the orthodoxy of the authors?sufficient to rouse the whole Church, and to excite its opposition? These additions are plainly designed as improvements to our present Liturgy: else, why were they offered to us? Mr. Russell says, "it is one thing to maintain against Romanists that our present communion-service contains all that is essential to its validity, and another, to desire its further improvement.— Let the candid reader compare the offices of the first Prayerbook of Edward VI. and of the Reformed Church in Scotland and America, with the primitive Liturgy of Jerusalem, and he will see how much nearer they correspond with that venerable service than our own." Is it with the object of introducing these improvements, that the Tracts commenced with stating the various objections which have been made to separate parts of our services? We, however, fully agree with the words of the Tract No. 40, in the wish, "that people, who are so much wiser and more delicate, than the Prayer-book, would look a little into their Bibles too. And when they have well reformed both, we shall see how purely the word will go on :"-also with those of No 3, " My dear Brethren, I beseech you to consider, with me, whether ought not to resist the alteration of even one jot or tittle of it, (viz. THE LITURGY)--on looking back, after the mischief is done, what excuse shall we be able to make for ourselves for having encouraged such proceedings?" (viz. the alterations). But the plan is more developed in the sequelthe plan, as we have described it, peeps out of its Jesuitical envelopment, not only where the Burial-service is concerned, but where, even under the plea of defending our services against innovations and alterations, things, which may possibly require an emendation, are pointed out. It is much like the plan of defending a city by disclosing to the enemy every part that is imagined to be a weak point. you In No. 9, the devotional hours of the ancient Christians are strangely identified with the Hore Canonica or the Roman Catholic Hours; and David's custom of praising God seven times a day is claimed in evidence of the deep antiquity of them: but there is no authority that there were seven stated diurnal periods of Jewish prayer. David may privately have praised God seven times a day; but he was not bound to that definite number by the Mosaic + See Dr. Hook's Sermon. Law. So, as to the worship of the early Christians, Justin Martyr, the earliest of the Post-Apostolic Fathers, mentions not these hours; and Casaubon (Exercit. xvi. No. 41.) has clearly shown, from the Fathers themselves, that the preces matutina, et vespertina, the εσπεριναὶ καὶ εωθιναὶ λειτουργίαι in the Acts of the Council of Ephesus were those that they observed. Thus the morning and evening prayers of our Prayer-book are defended by the very ecclesiastical antiquity to which such constant appeal is made; but no solid plea is given for the admission of supernumerary services. The animadversions which have been made on our offices, and the insidious hints at defects and required improvements which we have noticed, are strangely irreconcileable with other parts of the Tracts, and can only be explained on the principle which we stated at the commencement of this article. For instance, in the woluujris Richard Nelson (No. 22. p. 6.), we read— "Now, sir, it seemed to me such a thing for a clergyman, who had signed the Articles and Prayer-book, and had his maintenance from the Church, and had taken an oath before God and man to teach the truth to his flock, according to his Prayer-book; that a Church minister ... should speak so slightingly of what he had solemnly assented to, and even worn to: this seemed to me to be astonishing, and, I must confess to you, even shocking.” So, in No. 43, p. 16, we read : "We cannot stand by and see the noble old Prayer-book pulled to pieces, just to humour a mob of Tiptops, Gapes, and Yawns." Can a more biting satire or a severer criticism be pronounced on the party itself? However these wrea Beλn may be intelligible to themselves, confessedly 'es tò nâv ερμηνέων χατίζει. It now remains to direct our attention to the ancient Liturgies, which are claimed as the authorities for the desired improvements. Our remarks will be brief, since we have not space fully to discuss the subject; but the object will be answered, if they suffice to show how little credibility may critically be attached to these services. To this inquiry we are particularly led by the article on them in No. 63, which proceeded from Mr. Froude's pen. The Liturgy of Jerusalem is unscrupulously denominated primitive. Its very title, however, is suspicious, which is Oei'a λειτουργία του ἁγίου ̓Αποστόλου καὶ ἀδελφοθέου Ἰακώβου; for the words belong not to the primitive age of Christianity. St. Paul (Gal. i. 19.) called James not ådeλpoleòr, but Tov doeλpov του κυρίου. Expressions in ecclesiastical use long after the days of James, and never occurring in the genuine remains of the Apostolic Fathers, are copiously scattered through it: the epithets are such as formed the delight of subsequent times. Christ is called διφύης ἄνθραξ ; and ὁμοούσιος, a word which was the subject of later controversy, is several times repeated in it; nor are they phrases which the other writings of the apostolic age would induce us to assign to St. James. Can any one defend many words in the following prayer from the charge of having been written very long after the decease of the Apostles? Ŏ Κύριος εὐλογήσαι καὶ ἀξιώσαι ἡμᾶς σεραφικῶς δωροφορῆσαι, καὶ προστᾶσαι τὴν πολυύμνητον ᾠδὴν τῶν ἐνθεαστικῶν καὶ τρισαγίου, τῷ ἀνενδεει καὶ ὑπερπλήρει πάσης τῆς ἁγιαστικῆς τελειότητος, νῦν καὶ ἀεὶ. When we are expressly informed in Scripture that the dead rest from their labours and their works do follow them, is it likely that an apostle, or the immediate disciple of an apostle, would have written ὑπὲρ . . . . αναπαύσεως τῶν προκεκοιμημένων, πατέρωντε, καὶ ἀδελφῶν, τῶν Κυρίου δεηθῶμεν? Is it likely that in the writings of the apostolic age we should see idolatrous laudations and supplications to the Virgin ? such as τῆς παναγίας, ἀχράντου, ὑπερενδόξου, δεσποίνης ἡμῶν, θεοτόκου καὶ ἀειπαρθένου Μαρίας, μετὰ πάντων τῶν ἁγίων καὶ δικαίων μνημονεύσαντες, ἑαυτοις καὶ ἀλλήλοις καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν ζωὴν ἡμῶν Χριστῷ τῷ Θεῷ πα ραθώμεθα, to which, in another part, where it is repeated, are added the words ὅπως εὐχαῖς καὶ πρεσβείαις αὐτῶν οἱ πάντες ελεηθῶμεν. This commendation to the Virgin Mary and the saints, and this petition for their intercession; then either assure us, that the Liturgy of St. James was composed in a late age, or was so greatly corrupted, that even if it should contain portions of early worship, we cannot point them out, much less establish their authenticity. This Liturgy contains also such a decided imitation of the formula in the Pagan mysteries-(e. g. ἑκὰς, ἑκὰς, ὅστις αλιτρὸς, Procul, O, procul, este profani,) that it is impossible to allow its primitive apostolic character. The passage is, μήτις των κατηχουμένων, μήτις των αμυήτων, μήτις τῶν μὴ δυναμένων ἡμῖν συνδεηθῆναι. ̓Αλλήλοις ἐπιγνωτε, Τὰς θύρας. Ορθοὶ πάντες. Ἐπὶ του Κυρίου δεηθωμεν. This is such a very close imitation, that no one can mistake it; and those who are desirous of further examples will find this Liturgy in the British Museum, under the title of Liturgia SS. Ap. Basilii, &c.* It may be also seen in Renaudot's Collection and Assemanni Codex Liturgicus. * Also with an English translation, under the title of the Ancient Liturgy of the Church of Jerusalem. The Liturgy, which goes by the name of St. Mark, is also corrupt and Liturgies are extant which are severally ascribed to St. John, St. Peter, the twelve Apostles, Ignatius, and many more. That on which we have been commenting is supposed, by some, to have been introduced into the Church of Jerusalem about the time of the first Council of Nice: this is, however, unimportant, since it contains intrinsic evidence of not having been written by St. James. Various attempts have been made at expurgation, so as to restore it to its imagined primitive state : for this purpose it has been compared with other Liturgies, such as the Clementine, Basil's, &c., and with Cyril's catechism :but it is manifest that, however much may be expunged from it, this expurgation will not prove the remaining parts to be authentic. Nor can Cyril's catechism be admitted in proof of any thing beyond the state of the copies in this day. Let any one read St. Mark's Gospel, then the Liturgy which passes under his name, St. Peter's Epistles, and then the Liturgy which is named from him, and the difference between the inspired compositions and these will be so very apparent as to preclude the necessity of a long argument on the question of authenticity. The apocryphal Gospels would naturally induce an expectation, that there would be also apocryphal liturgies: and if at a very early age apostolical constitutions were invented, why might not apostolical Traditions have been equally forged? Apocrypha soon became very numerous. From the Greek let the inquirer proceed to the Oriental Liturgies:-if he so proceeds, he will be further convinced of their general apocryphal character. Yet we would not be understood to affirm, that they may not contain parts of primitive service, or to deny that there are many excellent parts in them: but we affirm that these parts cannot be positively ascertained, that the Liturgies were not written by apostles, that the good has already been appropriated by our Church, and that if one of these Liturgies, as it is, be compared with our Communion-service, it will be abundantly clear to every unprejudiced person that the desired improvements would really be deteriorations. These Liturgies may decidedly be enumerated among the Pseudepigrapha. The New Testament leaves an impression on our minds that the Divine services of the primitive Christians were simple; and what history has recorded to us of the Judaizing-Christians and early heresies is quite sufficient to account for spurious productions given to the world under apostolic names. That Liturgies should exist, as those of Basil, Chrysostom, and Ambrose, is far from surprising us; for since every bishop had formerly the power of forming a Liturgy for his own diocese, provided he adhered to the analogy of faith and doctrine, such might naturally be expected to have reached our day :-but having been so formed, and having reached our day, how do they become arguments as to the contents of primitive Liturgies? Probably on some future occasion we may examine these Liturgies and others, which are in manuscript, more diffusely; and show that Mr. Froude, in No. 63, and Mr. Palmer, who has been his principal authority, have not rightly judged them. At present, having exceeded our limits, we conclude with a repetition of the Apostle's advice to all, be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines ;" and the advice of the 43rd Tract, not to let the noble old Prayer-book be pulled to pieces, just to humour a mob of Tiptops, Gapes, and Yawns. ART. II. A Digest of the Evidence taken before Select Committees of the two Houses of Parliament, appointed to inquire into the State of Ireland; 1824-1825. With Notes, historical and explanatory and a Copious Index. By the Rev. WILLIAM PHELAN, B.D., and the REV. MORTIMER O'SULLIVAN, A.M. 2 vols. 8vo. Cadell. 2. The Achill Mission, and the general State of Protestantism in Ireland; being the Statement delivered by the REV. EDWARD NANGLE, at a Meeting of the Protestant Association, held in Exeter Hall, Friday, Dec. 28th, 1838. London. 8vo. pp. 28. Protestant Association. 3. Letters from Ireland, MDCCCXXXVII. By CHARLOTTE ELIZABETH. 8vo, pp. 436, Seeley and Burnside. 4. Authentic Reports of the two great Protestant Meetings held at Exeter Hall, London, on Saturday, June 20, and Saturday, July 11, 1885, to prove to Protestants of all denominations, by authentic documents, the real tenets of the Church of Rome, as now held by the Roman Catholic Priests and Bishops of Ireland. 8vo. pp. 72. Hatchards. 5. The uses of the Established Church to the Protestantism and Civilization of Ireland. By J, C. COLQUHOUN, Esq. M.P. Svo, pp. 20. Hatchards. 6 Evils of the State of Ireland; their Causes and their Remedy-a Poor Law. By JOHN REVANS, London. pp. 152. Hatchards.. 7. Ireland; its evils traced to their JAMES R. PAGE. 12mo. pp. 172. source. By the Rev. |