lower orders of both protestants and Roman catholics? I grieve from my heart to tell you, Sir, that it has been the case to a great extent. That they have supplied the tract shops in various towns and cities with it, and pasted it up conspicuously in the windows to be read by those who could not afford to buy. Some really good men, when expostulated with upon the subject, answered, that they circulated the tract without reading it. And really (you will ask) are we come to this, that we are in such haste to distribute food, that we actually administer poison to the lambs of Christ's flock, and then excuse ourselves by saying we had not time to look whether it was food or poison? But, Sir, I have a further statement with which to shock your feelings. For some of these clergymen actually believed the charge to be true, until the falsehood was pointed out to them,—and those, not stupid, indolent men, who cared not for the interests of religion, but laborious and highly-respected parish clergymen.

The fact is, Sir, our clergy in this country seem, in numberless instances, to know nothing of the nature or necessity of episcopal succession; and I cannot but fear it will continue to be so until all divinity students in Dublin University are compelled to read something more full upon the subject than Mr. Maclaine's notes to his translation of Mosheim, or Bishop Burnett's Annotations on the Twenty-third Article. Pray pardon my troubling you with this long letter, and allow me to subscribe myself, your humble servant,

Innishannon, March 20th, 1837.

AN IRISH COUNTRY CURATE.

THE CONCLUSION OF THE MORNING PRAYER BY A DEACON. SIR, Since being ordained deacon, in the month of December last, I have several times been requested to do duty in parish churches during the absence of the minister, and on such occasions have been in great doubt how to conclude the morning service. If you will allow me room in the pages of your Magazine to state my difficulty, I will do so as briefly as I can, and shall feel very much obliged to any of your correspondents who may favour me with an opinion upon the subject.

It is directed in the rubric, that "upon the Sundays, &c., (if there be no communion,) shall be said all that is appointed at the communion to the end of the prayer for the whole state of Christ's church militant, together with one or more of the collects before rehearsed, concluding with the blessing." The expression "shall be said," does not of itself imply that he who "says" must necessarily be a priest. But still the word priest is so used throughout the rubrics of the communion service as may well seem to justify such an inference, and to establish a distinction between that service and the morning prayer with the litany, which may undoubtedly be read by a deacon. In the rubrics of the morning prayer, the term minister is generally used; and, in one instance, (before the absolution,) he is so distinguished as the priest alone, as to shew that all the rest may be read by a

minister of the inferior order. A custom, uniform and constant, originating no doubt in necessity as early as the Reformation, authorizes the deacon to read alone, omitting the absolution. There is nothing in the nature of the service itself to raise a doubt, and the custom which exists is so far from being inconsistent with the rubric, that there is an express order prefixed to the morning and evening prayer which enjoins upon all deacons, as well as priests, to use it every day, either openly or in private. But in the communion service, on the contrary, the rubrics are so far from contemplating the ministration of a deacon at the altar alone, that they do not even distinguish those places where he may legitimately assist the priest, but leave them to be collected from other sources. Besides this, there are parts in the service itself which of themselves would make one hesitate; for instance, if the offertory is read and a collection made, (which there is no authority for omitting, and bishops in their charges have repeatedly enjoined,) is it not inconsistent with the office of deacon to offer? Is he not expressly named as the proper person to collect the alms and oblations, while it is the priest who is humbly to present and place them on the holy table, and afterwards to offer them with the prayers of the congregation? Again, no one will contend that a deacon should pronounce the blessing as directed by the rubric; and custom, in this instance, interprets the word priest exclusively; yet, if he does not, he is left without any other conclusion to the service than such as his own judgment may supply. But above all, it may be asked, is there any authority or precedent in the early church, either Latin or Greek, for a deacon offering or reading part of the communion service alone at the altar, in the absence of the priest? And, since the Reformation, has there been always such a custom in our own church? Even if there has, still it is quite necessary that we should know precisely what was at first and what ought still to be the custom; for common practice now is so uncertain, and so much more negative than positive, that it will scarcely afford us any definite and intelligible rule. I believe it is not the custom for a deacon officiating alone to conclude with the litany and a homily or sermon; and it is not the custom for a deacon to pronounce the blessing; but what part or parts of the communion service to read, and whether in the desk or at the altar, and how to conclude, these are points with respect to which deacons (and priests, too, I am afraid,) do every man according to that which is right in his own eyes. For myself, as I am unwilling, without further information, to omit any part of the proper service for the day, I have hitherto read all according to the rubric, as if I were a priest, trusting to chance and the general neglect that there should be no alms or oblations, and substituting, in place of the blessing, the short prayer which concludes the litany. At the same time, the considerations which I have stated above incline me very strongly to think that the proper course would be to end with the litany, and then read a homily or sermon, not as part of the communion service, but as an adjunct to morning or evening prayer, for which there is full and sufficient authority.

W. P.

CONDUCT OF CLERGY DURING THE PLAGUE.

REV. SIR,In the "History of the Plague," on the Society's Supplementary Catalogue, p. 33, occurs the following passage:-" Many of the best and most valuable ministers and preachers of the dissenters were suffered to go into the churches where the incumbents were fled away as many were, not being able to stand it; and the people flocked, without distinction, to hear them preach, not much inquiring what opinion they were of." Is this correct to such an extent as the writer would lead us to infer? Undoubtedly, persons of all descriptions, lay and clerical, would be unable to support the terrors of such a fearful visitation. But is the above statement so far true as to warrant the society in allowing an assertion to go forth without explanation or contradiction, calculated to leave a direct impression upon people's minds that, during one of the most awful periods of our history, a number of the metropolitan clergy fled from their posts, and left their places to be supplied by nonconformists?

I am, Rev. Sir, your most obedient servant, J. E. M.

W- -n, April 11th.

JUDAS ISCARIOT.

It

SIR,-Allow me to make a few remarks on a letter of your correspondent "M. A.," in reference to the death of Judas Iscariot. seems to me that he first creates the difficulty, and then perplexes himself with answering it. It is surely neither unnatural nor improbable that, as Judas was his own executioner, he might not be able to secure the rope with which he hung himself, (allowing for a moment the usual interpretation of anhyčaro,) and that, the rope breaking, the fall, possibly from some height, might, by the special judgment of God, (for there seems in St. Peter's account to be an interposition of Divine Providence in the matter,) cause the bowels to burst, and gush out. At any rate this difficulty seems less than doing so much violence to the word anуaro, which is in the middle voice, as first to render it passively, for which I see no authority, and secondly to give it a metaphorical sense, of which we have scarcely any examples. Looking into Suicer's "Thesaurus," I find that Origen, Epiphanius, Jerome, and others of the fathers, understood it in the usual way, and I cannot doubt that Chrysostom did the same. The latter author repeatedly uses the word aπýуžaro, and never, as far as I can discover, in the metaphorical sense. E. G., Hom. xxiv. in Ep. ad Hebr. p. 220, ed. Bened., he says, πολλοὶ δὲ καὶ προληφθέντες την αισχυνην ου φέροντες, καὶ annуžavтo, have even hung themselves; and Hom. 31, on the same epistle, p. 288, contrasting the repentance of Peter with that of Judas, he says of the latter, μετανόησε καὶ ὁ Ιούδας, ἀλλὰ κακως, ἀπήγξατο γάρ, where surely it is more natural to translate he hung himself, than he was suffocated with grief. In the Homilies on the Epistle to the Galatians the word ayxórn occurs in the same sense. Οὕτω δε ὁ βιαίῳ θανατῳ, και δι ἀγχόνης, ἢ δι ̓ ἄλλων τινῶν καταλύων το ζῇν. κ. τ. λ. P. 664, ed. Bened.

Both Suicer and Schleusner have abundantly shewn that this is the ordinary use of the word in profane writers, and the Septuagint have used the same expression in reference to Ahitophel, 2 Sam. xvii. 23, where the Hebrew will bear no other meaning. And as Ahitophel seems clearly to have been a type of Judas, as appears from the Psalms, this would confirm the sense of ȧrývkuro. With regard to the place in Tobit which our translators have rendered, "she thought to have strangled herself," it is not, I conceive, of sufficient force to outweigh the evidence on the other side.

Truro, March, 1837.

I remain, Sir, your obedient servant, J. M.

THE WORD "CATHOLIC."

SIR, Will you allow me to express my admiration of Mr. Le Bas's letter* upon the word "Catholic," and at the same time to lay before your readers two extracts from a Roman-catholic writer which appear to be very applicable to the subject:

"Steam Voyage down the Danube." By M. J. Quin.

Vol. i. p. 58. "After hearing mass in one of the Roman-catholic churches, which was attended by a respectable, and apparently a very devout, congregation, I went to the church belonging to the Greek catholic form of worship."

Vol. ii. p. 81. "I am, I must confess, very much disposed to think, that the Armenian form of religion, which is Roman catholic, will sooner or later prevail over both the Greek and the Mahometan in that country."

I should hope that these extracts will prove, even to those who have hitherto been deterred from using the word Roman for fear of giving offence, that their scruples are groundless; and, in confirmation of this, I have myself been assured by a respectable Roman-catholic layman, that he could see no just cause of offence in the appellation.

In some instances, such as the first extract supplies, it is absolutely necessary; and, in all cases, it is proper for the sake of distinction. I remain, yours obedient, WM. RILAND BEDFORD.

Sutton Coldfield, Dec. 14, 1836.

REV. J. MENDHAM'S "INDEX EXPURGATORIUS OF SIXTUS V."

SIR, AS I am indebted to you for such a notice of my different works as would leave me inexcusable if it were not responded to by very sensible gratitude, I beg the additional favour, that you will give insertion in your journal to a fresh and not very obvious proof, which I have discovered, of the official condemnation, or rather apprehended condemnation, of Cardinal Bellarmine by his own church. His name, indeed, actually appears under the letter R, (Roberti Bellarminii, &c.,) in the prohibitory and suppressed Index of Sixtus V. In the preface I had given some intimations to that effect, which had escaped from

See No. LIX., p. 571. This letter ought to have appeared some time ago, but the press of other matter has interfered with it.

different writers not very friendly to the fact. Since the publication of the reprint, I came in possession of a volume of tracts, a duplicate of the British Museum, among which occurs, by the celebrated Abraham Scultetus, as the substance of the work discovers, (for it does not appear in the title,) "De Curriculo Vitæ imprimis verò de actionibus· Pragensibus Abrah. Sculteti, &c. Narratio Apologetica, &c." Emdæ, 1625. At page 59, where he is speaking of Isaac Casaubon, he proceeds: "Idem mihi sanctè contestabatur; Frontonem Ducæum Jesuitam Gallum appellasse Bellarminum de scriptis ipsius super auctoritate Papæ in temporalibus, cùm spiritualis Papæ autoritas labora- · ret: respondisse autem Bellarminum. Si esses Roma, aliter judicares: oportuit me ita scribere: parum abfuit, quin libri mei in inquisitionem venirent." This testimony, indeed, is not decisive, as to the actual fact of the temporary proscription of the cardinal; but it throws some curious and unexpected light upon it. I will avail myself of the present communication to notice two errors in my reprint-the first, p. iii., line 19, of nonulli for nonnulli, which, of course, is my own; and I am sorry to say the other is so likewise, p. viii. line 4, where sive ought to be sine. I exercised the most scrupulous attention; but even a corrector of the press sometimes follows the example of Homer, and aliquando dormitat. JOSEPH MENDHAM.

Sutton Coldfield, Feb. 22nd, 1837.

PENNY SUNDAY READER.

SIR,-In justice to the Publisher of the Church of England Magazine, I beg to state that he has disclaimed all intention of depreciating the Penny Sunday Reader in those expressions against which I protested; and has offered to make any reparation in his power for a statement inadvertently put forth.

I am, Sir, &c. &c.

H. N. MOLESWORTH.

EPISCOPACY.-COLONIAL BISHOPS.

MY DEAR SIR,-There is a point of primitive ecclesiastical polity which appears not to be generally understood, or efficiently followed, in our community. I mean the appointment of a bishop as the pastor of every church considerable in numbers, and detached locally from any episcopal see already constituted. Some approximation has indeed been made towards a system conformable to the apostolic model; but our church seems to be still infected with that timidity which, in former times, made her shrink from declaring openly the necessity of episcopacy, for fear of offending some foreign protestant communities. In the Christian Knowledge Society's Family Bible, we find, at Tit. i. 5, the following explanatory note:

"That by thine episcopal authority thou mightest ordain presbyters in every city of that populous island."-Bp. Hall.

VOL. XI.-May, 1837.

4 A