cate this. It does not say that parturition was painless before, but may refer chiefly to the increased cares and anxieties with which a mother brought her child into a world of trouble and temptation. The pains of child-bearing are greater in women than in animals, on account of their more delicate organization; and as this delicacy is increased, and with it the perils of child-birth, by a life of artificial luxury, so it is possible to conceive that these pains before the fall were light, compared with what they afterwards became. The serpent may have been originally created with the same organization as he now possesses, but yet his creeping posture may not have caused the same loathing and disgust in the minds of men as it did afterwards. That the serpent should have been punished simply because Satan made use of him, is no more a difficulty than the withering of the barren fig-tree, or the destruction of the herd of swine. If we seek for difficulties we may find them everywhere, and the only preservative against them is, a meek and obedient heart.

Mr. Quarry admits that there is an undercurrent of history running through the narrative, but how to separate what is allegorical from what is historical is a problem to which he gives no satisfactory solution. With the fourth chapter however he makes the real history of mankind begin, but if the former chapters are to be reduced to allegory, we cannot see why Mr. Quarry's system should not be applied by other hands to the entire book. We have not space to follow out his arguments, and must therefore be contented with saying that, with something very like inconsistency, he vindicates the rest of the Book of Genesis from Dr. Colenso's objections, far more ably than he has given up to the rationalists the first three chapters. One thing, however, we must mention by the way, and that is, that he considers the confusion of tongues as the natural consequence of the dispersion of mankind, instead of the dispersion as the consequence of the confusion, thus eliminating from the narrative all that was miraculous. According to his view dissensions arose while Babel was building; the work was abandoned, and men dispersed: and the consequence of this was the divergence of dialects, which resulted at length in the formation of distinct languages. By such an interpretation, not only is the authority of Scripture weakened, but the beautiful parallelism is destroyed which may be observed between the confusion of languages at Babel and the gift of tongues on the day of Pentecost.

So much space has been allotted to the earlier portion of Mr. Quarry's book, that little remains for comment on his second dissertation, which treats of the use of the names of GOD in the Book of Genesis, and of the unity of its authorship. The supposition with which he starts is that we do not possess the original text of the Pentateuch, but only a modernized form, which was revised after the Captivity. This would account for anachronisms of a verbal

nature on which Dr. Colenso has laid so much stress. The Book of Genesis is divided into sections and sub-sections for convenience of recitation or reading, and therefore while the narrative of an event is fully given in one section, it is briefly referred to in another, in order that the events related may be understood. As an instance of this we quote the following:

"The next instance of similar repetition offers itself at the close of chapter xvi. There we have it stated, in v. 15, that 'Hagar bare Abram a son, and Abram called his son's name, which Hagar bare, Ishmael.' Moreover the narrative has already given sufficient indication of Abram's age at this time. His union with Hagar took place, as we are told in verse 3, after he had dwelt ten years in Canaan, his age at his removal to that country from Haran having been previously said to have been seventy-five. Thus the connexion with Hagar was formed at eightyfive, and in due course Hagar conceived and bare Ishmael. But though all this is quite clear, still at the end of the chapter, immediately after the preceding statement of the birth of this son, Abram's age at his birth is specified; and even if it might have occurred to the writer to repeat the age, there was no sufficient reason for adding the clause When Hagar bare Ishmael to Abraham.' Accordingly this repetition has been made a ground of assigning the last verse to a different author from the writer of the preceding. It is a better ground, however, for detaching it from the preceding section, and placing it as a prefatory commencement of the next sub-section with the customary recapitulation. This will then commence with the renewed mention that 'Abram was fourscore and six years old when Hagar bare Ishmael to Abram,' and the mention of this event being, as in the note of time in the other instances already mentioned and to be remarked hereafter, given in the allusive form,'Abram was fourscore and six years old at Hagar's bearing Ishmael to Abram,'-this event having been just before stated directly, and therefore now only alluded to as already known. And then the narrative proceeds to say that when Abram was ninety years old and nine, JEHOVAH appeared unto him. The reference to Abram's age at Ishmael's birth in the commencement of this new section was conducive to its completeness and independence, inasmuch as Abram, doubtful of the prospect of a son by Sarai, refers to Ishmael as more likely to fulfil the promise, and says, 'O that Ishmael might live before Thee.' And then in connexion with this, the mention of Abram's age in xvii. 1, serves to indicate the age of Ishmael when he was circumcised, within the limit of the 23rd verse, which, as we shall presently see is the conclusion of this section, that age being again mentioned in verse 24."-P. 331, 332.

Respecting the use of the words Jehovah and Elohim, and the theory of different origins which have been assigned to the passages in which they occur, Mr. Quarry satisfactorily shows that the peculiarities of the supposed Jehovist and Elohist writers are no such peculiarities as would indicate a difference of authorship; and also that the terms Jehovah and Elohim are equally used by both,

sometimes when the sense required the use of one or the other, and sometimes merely for the sake of euphony to avoid repetition of the same word. From all these arguments he concludes―

"That the unity of the book rests on an unbroken tradition, which even in the time of the LXX. appears to have been as unquestioned as it was in subsequent ages, if indeed they had not more satisfactory evidence as to its authorship than any mere tradition, however uninterrupted. The burden of proof rests, therefore, on those who now maintain the plurality of authorship; and those who advocate the unity are only called on to rebut or debilitate such proof as may be adduced. If they are successful in this, they are not obliged to produce any positive proof in support of the traditionary character of the book, which may well claim to hold its prescriptive rights until they have been disproved. That the arguments relied on as proof of the plurality of authorship have in some cases been wholly rebutted, in others so much weakened, as to be of little force in proof of the conclusion drawn from them, and that the residue are quite insufficient to establish these conclusions is, the least that may be claimed as the result of the foregoing examination. It is hoped, however, that many positive proofs of the unity of authorship have been presented from time to time, and that whatever has been thus adduced as direct evidence of the unity will be found not wholly destitute of weight."-P. 631.

The inquiry into these several arguments is full and patient, and shows evidence of a careful and laborious investigation. We can only wish that the value of the latter part had not been diminished by the fanciful theories in the former into which the author has been apparently led by ignorance of the Sacramental doctrines of the Christian Church, and by the harmony which exists between them and the revelation which God has given us respecting His dealings with Adam in Eden. If it should happen, as we trust it may, that Mr. Quarry may be led to examine these things, we believe there is much that in a future edition he will be glad to retrench, and that this retrenchment will add greatly to the value of his second dissertation on the Unity of the Book of Genesis.

CERTAIN SERVICES OF THE CHURCH OF SARUM, TRANSLATED WITH NOTES.

I. VIGILS OF THE DEAD.

It was

THE "Vigils for the Dead" was known by various names. sometimes called "Placebo" from the initial word of the first antiphon at Vespers at other times "the Dirge," from "Dirige," the first word of the corresponding antiphon at Matins. In the

1 Compare the Highland "draigie."

Hereford Breviary it was styled the "Service for the Dead." In the Roman rite it is " Officium Mortuorum." It will be observed to consist of first Vespers, Matins, and Lauds only. Hence it will be seen that, in the ordinary ferial recitation, there was no Sunday Service for the Dead; i.e. Vespers were not said on Saturday after the Saturday Vespers, nor Matins after the following Matins; but Vespers of the Dead followed the ordinary Sunday Vespers, because they were the first Vespers of the Monday's Service. Similarly the first Vespers of a double feast hindered the ferial recitation of the Vigils of the Dead, but not the second Vespers; the " Placebo" that followed counting as part of the morrow's service.

Besides for its intrinsic value, this service is here reproduced as a specimen of three of the Breviary Services,-Vespers, Matins, and Lauds. It must be borne in mind, however, that while following a similar arrangement, these offices in their ordinary recitation differed in several matters of detail from the manner in which the Church recited them for the departed. Thus, Vespers and Lauds began with the V. "O GOD, make speed," &c., and the Gloria was sung after each of the five Vesper Psalms, and after each of the five Psalms and sets of Psalms at Lauds; and after the Canticles, Benedictus, and Magnificat; the choir facing east. Similarly, after the Psalms were placed a Little Chapter (capitulum,) followed by the R. "Thanks be to God," and a hymn, with its V. and R.; then the collect of the day, and sundry memorials, each composed of an antiphon, V. R., and collect. Similarly, Matins began with the V. "O LORD, open Thou my lips," followed by "O GOD, make speed," as above. Then followed the Psalm Venite, with its invitatory, alternated between the choir and the precentor, or two, three, or four rulers of the choir, according as it was a feast marked in the calendar as having "simple," "double," "triple," or "quadruple," Invitatory;2 and after that the hymn appointed for Matins. Each lesson (of which there were three in the ferial service, and on certain minor feasts called thence "of iij lessons," and at other times nine) was prefaced by a benediction, the reader first saying to the officiant, "Sir, be pleased to bless," (Jube, domine, benedicere :) when the priest bestowed the blessing in a low voice, standing at the first benediction of each Nocturn, but sitting at the rest. The "rationale" of this rule is thus given in the " Myrroure:" Then cometh the reader and asketh leave of God Almighty, and help of

"This verse is only said at Mattyns, that is the beginning of God's service, in token that the first opening of your lips should be to the praising of GOD, and all the day after they should abide open and ready to the same," says "The Myrroure," (fo. xli.) It is to be regretted that the Reformers, in providing a vernacular service book, did not respect this symbolism.

2 See the Kalendar prefixed to Mr. Walker's translation of the "Liturgy of the Church of Sarum." 66 Quadruple Invitatories" were confined to " principal double feasts," and so are not expressed in the Kalendar.

your prayer that she"-the treatise is addressed to the nuns of Sion monastery-" may read to our LORD's worship, and say the 'Jube,' &c., LORD, bid me say well,' as if she said, 'LORD, give me leave, and bid me say or read, for else I dare not presume to open my mouth to these holy words; and give me strength and grace to read and say well, and so well that Thou be pleased, and the reader be edified, and my soul unhurt.' And though these words be said principally to GOD, yet they are also said to her (him) that giveth the blessing, which therein occupieth GoD's stead, that she (he) should in His Name bless and give her leave to read; for blessing is understanded giving of leave: wherefore she saith, Jube,' &c., that is, 'LORD, bid her bless."" But at Lauds, &c., "the chapter is not begun with 'Jube, domine,' nor ended with 'Tu autem,' because it is always said of an hebdomadary, which occupieth an office of perfection, to whom it longeth rather to give blessing than to ask it in that office; and, by the same way, it is presumed that she (he) should not lightly offend in so short a reading that she should need to ask mercy with 'Tu autem.' > ""1 And again: "The lessons are heard and the responses are sung sitting, for knowing of truth and right ruling of the will may not be but in a restful soul. But the verse is sung standing: for good deeds may not be done without labour. The response is sung of all for every man may have a good will; but the verse is sung but of few, for all men may not fulfil their good wills in deed. The lesson is read of one, and heard of all; in token that each congregation ought to live under one governor: but after the last response, ye sing 'Gloria Patri:' for after the last end of these times that shall be after the day of doom, all the chosen of GOD shall sing glory and praise to the Blessed Trinity without end."2 Lastly, on Sundays and feasts of nine lessons, the Te Deum followed the ninth responsory, except in Advent, and from Septuagesima till Easter, and on Vigils and in the Ember weeks out of Pentecost; when the ninth responsory was repeated in its stead.

It must be added, however, that the three last days of Holy Week furnished an exception to all the above; the service then beginning with the antiphon, and the Gloria being omitted in the Psalms, and the hymns and little chapters at the hours as in the Service for the Dead. And similarly throughout Easter Week, i.e. till the first Vespers of Low Sunday the antiphon, "This is the day which the LORD hath made: we will rejoice and be glad

1 "Myrroure," fo. lxvii.

2 Ibid. The full title of this very curious and valuable tractate is, "The Myrroure of our Lady, very necessary for all Relygyous: imprynted," as the colophon tells us, "at the desyre and instance of the worshypful and devoute Lady Abbesse of the worshypful monastery of Syon, and the reverende father in GOD, General Confessoure of the same,' ," in the "suburbs of the famous citye of London, without temple barre, the yeare of our LORD GOD, mcccccxxx." It is hoped to furnish the reader shortly with a reprint of this important work in its entirety.