We recognize great merit in some designs submitted by Mr. Withers for cemetery chapels, lich-house, &c. Some of his ideas are able embodiments of the hints suggested in the Instrumenta Ecclesiastica.

The Berne Competition.-Owing to the political excitement in Switzerland, the time for receiving the competingd esigns was extended for a fortnight. The jury has been appointed, and consists of Monsignore Bovieri, the Papal Chargé d'Affaires as president, a delegate from each of the Swiss Bishops, the Abbat of Einsiedeln, two architects selected respectively by the clergy and the cantonal authorities of Berne, and the German architect, Hübsch, of Carlsruhe, as representative of foreign competitors. The designs were to be publicly exhibited at Berne for ten days from the 20th of March, and then to be taken to Einsiedeln, where the jury will meet.

It is not without regret that we must decline inserting a courteous, but somewhat irrelevant, communication from Mr. W. V. Pickett, in which he expresses his opinion that we have not done justice to his designs for an iron system of architecture, upon which we expressed a final opinion in our last number. Our course respecting this gentleman has been most straightforward. He made himself known to us by a criticism on Mr. Slater's design for an iron church in the Instrumenta Ecclesiastica, and asserted his claims to be considered as the inventor of a new style of architecture suitable to a metallic developement. We expressed our willingness to examine his designs; and after our examination we formed the conclusion which was published in our last number, to which Mr. Pickett now objects. That opinion must be final on our parts. It is not our business to discuss any claims to priority of invention—especially in the case of designs in which (as we said) we could discern nothing markedly different from the obvious conclusions at which all must arrive, who study the problem which is to be solved by the more extensive use of iron or other metals in buildingconstruction. Still less is it our province, or within our power, to assist any designer to such patronage as may enable him to give a material illustration of his theories or projects. It was open to Mr. Pickett to compete for the Constantinople Memorial Church along with other architects; and had he done so, he would doubtless have had his claims duly weighed by the judges in that competition. In making this final reference to this subject, we desire once more to express our kind feelings towards Mr. Pickett, and our appreciation of the pains and skill exhibited in many of his designs. Should he be so fortunate as to succeed in the actual construction of any building which would illustrate his principles, we shall be most willing to give to that work, as to any other work, our impartial consideration and criticism.

Erratum in our last number: page 72, line 7, for C3 read c3.

Received: H. T. E., 0, J. H. A., G. G. Place, W. W., E. S., “The cards for the Consecration of S. Andrew's, Croydon, from the Rev. J. H. Randolph."

THE

ECCLESIOLOGIST.

"Surge igitur et fac: et erit Dominus tecum."

No. CXX.-JUNE, 1857.

(NEW SERIES, NO. LXXXIV.)

THE THEORY OF THE PRAYER-BOOK.

LETTER IV.

To the Editor of the Ecclesiologist.

MY DEAR MR. EDITOR,-It is with extreme regret that I have found myself prevented by circumstances from again addressing you, since the August of last year; and the more so, since that number also contained certain strictures by Q. G. on one of my former letters. Nos hæc novimus esse nihil; but there was a plausibility about some of the remarks therein contained, which makes me sorry to have been unable sooner to reply to that communication. The delay has this advantage, however; it obliges me partly to go over my ground again, and to bring forward fresh proofs and illustrations of what, if it seemed so to Q. G., might also have seemed to others too nakedly and briefly asserted.

I must first, however, protest against the charge of "a certain spirit of animosity," as applied to those who, like myself, are unable to see perfection in the English Prayer-Book, who believe that it was originally compiled in a hurry, with the full intention on the part of the compilers of further amplification and development. I never wish to deny that, taken as it is, it has been the inestimable gift of God to the land, and that even its very faults may hereafter be the means of correcting opposite faults in other rituals. And where I seem to myself to see marks of hurry, and downright mistakes, I have no objection that others, more ingenious than myself, like Mr. Freeman in his "Principles," and our old friend, Richard Nelson, ò távv, in the "Tracts for the Times," should discover depth of meaning, and beauty of design. Only if I bear with what seems to me their transcendentalism, they must bear with what may seem to them my "animosity." It is thus that we may each assert our own opinions on such details as the

omission of proper lessons for Ash Wednesday, the omission, again, of the history of the Tower of Babel, in the Ferial lessons, as also of the Vision of Dry Bones, the passing over the Apocalyptic Epistles, notwithstanding the especial blessing promised to those who shall read that book, the original device of supplying the Epistle for Candlemas Day from the preceding Sunday, and many other things of the same kind.

Q. G. proceeds to say, that "far from recalling us to the ampler model, I seem bent on clipping down what we have, closer still; that I wish to take away all the prayers, except the three collects, the greater part of the lessons, and all the introduction to the service." Were this so, he might well conclude, "so slender a modicum of devotion will never be acquiesced in as a rule for the Church." I should hope not. Of the additional collects which we ought to have, I have not yet had occasion to speak; I had not touched on any of the additional hours-except Compline-which surely we may some day hope for; but the addition I had proposed would, I think, so far as size goes, have far more than made up for the dozen prayers which I called then, and in spite of Q. G.'s remonstrance, still call, the most uninteresting part of the service. However, at all events, we have this admission from an optimist like Q. G.-"I am not now saying a word for the sentences or the exhortation, nor contending for the particular form of the confession." Come; we are beginning to move the crane on the top of Cologne Cathedral.

I will first speak of that which I feel most strongly, the whole system of our lessons. My critic says,-" H. S. L. also treats as absurd the presenting of a variety of parables and narratives in one lection, or at one time, Does H. S. L. remember Who it was that at first delivered the parables one after the other, e.g., the seven in the 13th of S. Matthew? Did our LORD, or did He not, teach at great length at one time?" I cannot understand what this argument proves, except it be that we are always in the Service of the Church to read at one time that which it pleased our Blessed LORD to deliver at one time. By this rule, our Prayer-Book is sorely to be condemned for breaking up the sermon on the Mount into three portions; and, as I pointed out, for interrupting the sequence of the Passion, by dividing it in every case into two. It is exactly because the Calendar does join together different events which our LORD did not join, 'does heap up a mass of facts, doctrines, and histories, which were knit together, not by our SAVIOUR, but by the printer, that I could wish to revert to the earlier-for it was the earlier-system, of reading one portion at one time, be that portion long or short. I know very well that in the Primitive Church, the lessons often seem to have been of considerable length: but everything shows that one subject was taken, and that finished, another was not lumped on to the first. Q. G. seems to prefer the good old times when Charlemagne was accustomed to express his opinion that enough had been read "by a slight hissing noise or whistle." I confess, for my part, I should prefer a definitely arranged system of lessons, each, so to speak, self-contained, even though they were short, than hearing, if I happened to attend divine

worship in the private chapel of Buckingham Palace, Prince Albert hiss when he thought a sufficient portion of Scripture had been read.

Q. G. refers me to the Mozarabic Office. I thank him for it, and I am going to dwell at some length on it. It exactly corroborates what I urged; its lessons, which I have now been more attentively examining than I ever did before, come up precisely to my beau idéal of what lessons ought to be. But there is nothing like a good bold assertion. There," says Q. G. "the Prophecy, Epistle, and Gospel, are fully as long as, often longer than, our two lessons." Everybody may not have the Mozarabic Liturgy at hand. We will see how far Q. G.'s assertion is correct. I turn, by way of specimen, to the Easter week of this year. I there find the number of verses read in our two morning lessons as compared with the Mozarabic Office to be as follows.

And be it observed, it would hardly be possible to find a week in which the lessons of the English Church are shorter. For example we have one of 13, one of 12, and one of 18 verses. But, our lessons are nearly double the length of those in the Mozarabic rite.

And yet

there the Prophecy, Epistle, and Gospel, are fully as long as, often longer than, our two lessons. What can H. S. L. say to this?" Why, that a table of comparative lengths is sometimes useful.

Let us take another example, and try those for the Sundays between Easter and Whitsuntide.

And so here again, the Mozarabic lections scarcely exceed half the length of ours. I do not deny that in Lent they are of considerable length; yet, even then, on the whole, I doubt if they are so long as our own office.

I almost wonder that instead of referring to the lections in the Mozarabic Liturgy, Q. G. did not refer to those in the Hours. The

Spanish ritual provides varying lessons during a great part of the year for all of these. And probably where they are longest, in Lent, the sum of them all taken together, might bear a comparison with, though it would not nearly attain to, the length of our four lessons. But then they are divided into five or six different offices; and they most fully carry out what I have so strongly urged, the limiting each lesson to one history, or one subject. I will please my critic, however, by pointing him to one day, in which the lessons would clearly be longer than with us: Monday of the second week in Lent. Here at Lauds we have for the lesson, Genesis xli. 46 to the end; xlii. and xliii. 1-14: at Tierce, the first lesson, Prov. xxiii. 19-22; the second lesson, Genesis xliii. 15 to the end; xliv. and xlv. 1-16. At Sexts, Isaiah lxv. 1-9. At Nones, first lesson, Prov. xxiii. 12-18; second lesson, Gen. xlv. 17-28. Thus in all, we have about 160 verses: which I confess to be longer than the generality of lessons in the English calendar. But then it must be remembered that this is a prodigy among the Mozarabic lessons: and it would be easy to find many days in our calendar which exceed even it in length. Thus, on January the 29th we read 163 verses; on the 14th of February, 168; on the 17th of June, 157; on the 3rd of February, 165, &c., &c.

But it is worth while to consider the subject a little further. I said that our lessons were not like those of the earlier Church, because of their length, in the first place; and because of their embracing so many subjects, in the second. Q. G. asserts that the use of the early Church was so to read the Bible. I have shown you how unfortunate was Q. G.'s reference to the Mozarabic ritual. Let me further show you how completely that office bears out what I said about the division of the sense. There can be no doubt of its very great antiquity: and though of course it is possible that a ritual may be extremely ancient, while every single one of its Missæ are comparatively modern, yet all those who have studied it most deeply, as Arevalus and Leslie, have given the most convincing reasons to believe that most of these also are of extreme antiquity: say from the middle of the fourth to the middle of the seventh century. Let us then see how those old Spanish Christians, emerging from the fury of the persecutions, read their Bibles in church. On the first Sunday in Lent, their Epistle was 2 Cor. v. 20, to vi. 1-10:— :—a beautiful sequence, beginning in the former chapter, "Now then we are ambassadors for CHRIST," and proceeding with the latter to show how that embassy was to be carried out. We ruthlessly cut that connection into pieces, reading one part of it on February 9, the second on February 10, one on June 7, the other on June 8, &c.; nay, even when taking that passage for the Epistle, we begin it, so to speak, in the middle. The Gospel for that same Sunday is the history of the Samaritan woman. It begins at the beginning, and ends at the end, thereby making a perfect whole. We tack on the story of the Ruler's Son, of which Q. G. cannot say that we are only following our LORD's example in taking both together, for there was an interval of two days between the two miracles. On the first Wednesday in Lent, when the Prophecy is from the Book of Proverbs, it begins at chapter xiii. 22, and ends at chapter xiv. 11,