"In the other Vatican MS. I have discovered various works, equally precious; but what is most singular, this second Vatican MS. contains those parts of the same authors which were wanting in the Milanese MS. The occurrence demands an explanation which literary history here suggests. Part of the MSS. of the celebrated monastery of St. Colombano, in Bobbio*, went to Rome in the beginning of the 16th century, and part to Milan, in the beginning of the following: the remaining part of these MSS. was dispersed in the last revolutions. There is a memorandum on the title page of the two Vatican MSS. above-mentioned, that they belonged to St. Colombano, in Bobbio. There is the same memorandum on the Milanese MSS. which I published. This is the manner in which these identical works, buried in the Palimsesti (twice written), have been found part in Milan and part in Rome.

fragment in Milan, together with the Sage of Ulfila.

"Thus these authors, anciently inverted in Bobbio, and divided indiscriminately into two volumes, for the purpose of writing on them the materials of later ages, were sent, strangely altered and dismem bered, part to Milan, and part to, Rome; and now, through my care, they shall be seen reunited in the Roman edition, which I will make no delay in producing.

"I will not now request your attention, most holy father, towards other minor fragments, which I have observed in the same manuscripts, although worthy of being mentioned and brought to light. I have been graciously permitted to express, at the foot of your throne, my satisfaction in fulfilling, according to my feeble powers, the wise designs of your sovereign clemency. "I humbly pray for the Apestolic Benediction."

of Fronto with Marcus Aurelius, as Cæsar and Emperor: it is instruclive, interesting, and very affecting. In Milan, the two first books of the Epistles to Marcus Aurelius were published: we meet with the 3d, 4th, and 5th, in the Roman MS. as well as the supplements of the 2d, and some other Greek and Latin writings, by Fronto.

"2. The beautiful, unpublished commentary of the ancient Scho. liast, which I begun to publish in Milan, and which now extends to the other five orations of Cicero, with the two supplements already printed in Milan.

"3. Part of an unknown Speech of Q. Aurelius Simmacus, with the supplements to two others, by the same orator, which I have already published.

"4. The Supplements to the Omilia, or Comment, Gotico-Ulflano, of which there is a similar

"Observe how flat these occasional

prayers are that are now composed, in comparison with the old ones."GEO. III.

There were giants in the earth in

those days."-Ibid.

ITRUST, Mr. Editor, it is not from uncharitableness, or bigotry, that I feel inclined to reiterate the above remarks of our late revered Monarch. It seems as if there were a fatality in our modern state prayers; for it so happens that there is scarcely one composed, for years together, that will bear the test of the most friendly criticism, Some have already been animadverted upon in your pages*; and I fear that some of those which have escaped, have done so rather from accident than because they merited

commendation.

My attention has been called to this subject, on the present occasion, by the "Form of Prayer and

• See your volume for 1812, p. 638; and for 1814, p. 774, &c.

Thanksgiving to Almighty God," for the recovery of the king from his short, but severe, indisposition. This formulary runs as follows:"Accept, we beseech thee, Almighty God, the praises and thanksgivings of our Sovereign Lord the King, for thy great mercies recently vouchsafed to him.

"In the hour of sickness, and under the severest domestic afflictions, his trust was in Thee, O God; and thou hast holpen him.

"Let thy protecting hand, we implore Thee, ever be over him; let thy Holy Spirit ever be with him and so lengthen his days, O God, that they may bring down upon him and his people, the abundance of thy blessings and mercies, through Jesus Christ, our Lord; to whom, with Thee and the Holy Ghost, be all honour and glory, now, and for ever. Amen."

Now, among all the defective modern formularies which every sincere well-wisher to the church has had to lament, scarcely one is more defective, or more incorrect, than the foregoing.

One defect, in the very first sentence, is, that no intimation is given of what the mercies are for which thanksgivings are returned. It is true, that the fly-leaf of the paper tells us, what neither the prayer nor its title distinctly does, that it is for his majesty's recovery: but this ought to have been explicitly mentioned in the prayer itself; and, if it had been so, it would have prevented the misconception of many of the poor (and I believe some of the rich also), who actually mistook it for a thanksgiving to God for his majesty's accession to the throne!

But, a still greater defect in this sentence is, that it only prays God to accept his majesty's thanks; not a word is said of the nation joining in them. We are not taught to thank God for restoring his majesty as a public blessing; but we simply take the place assigned in the Romish Church to the saints and the Virgin Mary, of mediators or

offerers of the prayers of others; and we pray God to accept the thanks of the king as if we had no concern in him ourselves. Did an affectionate child, grateful for the recovery of his parent, ever offer up his petitions in such terms as, "Accept the praises and thanksgivings [not of myself, but] of my father, for thy great mercies recently vouchsafed to him?" And why should his Majesty's faithful subjects be forced to utter their gratitude to God in this constrained and unmeaning manner?

The second sentence enunciates a fact which, however well it may be known to the writer of the prayer, must necessarily be beyond the personal knowledge of the great body of his majesty's subjects; who are, nevertheless, required solemnly to affirm it, as if it were perfectly known to them. I will not, however, dwell upon this

as it may have been consoling to many to be informed, even in this irregular and unsuitable way, that his majesty, in his deep affliction, was enabled to place his trust where alone true joys are to be foundexcept to remark, that a fact, intended to be affirmed before the Almighty by every tongue in the nation, should be one rather of public notoriety than of private anecdote. I here take it for granted, that the words are intended to record the precise fact; for it would be most indecent to suppose that they were inserted merely for a compliment.

The use of the epithet "severest," in this sentence, seems to me to be also objectionable. In an address to the Almighty, we ought not, I think, to speak of any of his dispensations towards his creatures as

severe," however innocently we may use the term in our intercourse with each other. Our Father in heaven doth not willingly afflict, or grieve the children of men: he correcteth us for our profit, and, in the midst of judgment, remembers mercy. Before Him, therefore,

our language should be, "I was dumb; I opened not my mouth, because it was thy doing." "Shall we receive good at the band of the Lord, and shall we not receive evil?" But I object further to this epithet, because it is used in the superlative degree. Deeply painful as were his majesty's afflictions - his brother and his venerated parent lying dead, and his own life in dangerstill the superlative epithet is not allowable, at least in prayer, where there should be no appearance of exaggeration. What, if the late afflictive dispensation at Claremont had been reserved to the same day that deprived his majesty of his revered parent, would not this have been a still more aggravated calamity? I do not insist upon the objection; but I merely mention it because the sentence, as it stands, seems rather an oblique panegyric on the king, for his trust in God in the midst of such afflictions, than a direct thanksgiving to God himself.

In the concluding sentence, the first and the last clauses of which seem liable to no particular exception, we are taught to pray, so lengthen his days, O God, that they may bring down upon him and his people the abundance of thy blessings and mercies." But what are we to understand by praying that the king's days may bring down blessings, and then that they are so to be lengthened as to do this? I really can affix no clear meaning to the words. They appear, in fact, to convey none.

The foregoing strictures are confined to particular faults; but, in fact, the whole structure of the prayer is singularly unhappy. The Almighty is twice addressed, out of three times, in the words "O God; a form of invocation, which, from its abruptness, ought to be but sparingly employed. The other invocation, "Almighty God," is Almighty God,” is unexceptionable in itself, but, like almost every part of this prayer, it

wants a specific application to its object. In returning thanks to God for mercies received, it is not the mere circumstance of his being "Almighty" that should have been adverted to. The thanksgivings in our regular service, usually run in some such form as 66 Almighty God, Father of all mercies," " God, our heavenly Father," "O most merciful Father," "O eternal God, our heavenly Father." The exceptions to this rule may generally be accounted for, from the circumstances of the case; as "O Lord God, who hast justly humbled us," "O Lord God, who hast wounded us for our sins, &c." The writer of the formulary in question does not seem to have sufficiently considered that the invocations used in prayer and praise, should vary according to the nature and circumstances of the thanksgiving or petition ".

The involution of phrase which runs through this prayer, deviates widely from the simplicity which becomes such compositions. However familiar this practice in ordinary writing, it is to be but sparingly admitted in prayer, especially as it renders the uneducated less capable of understanding the structure of the period. I might object also, as inconsistent with simplicity, to the sing-song style even of the clauses which in other respects are the least exceptionable. "Let thy protecting hand ever be over

bim.

"Let thy Holy Spirit ever be with him."

* I might say the same of the epithets applied to our earthly monarch. "Our sovereign lord the king" is a phrase so much oftener heard at the bar than in the reading desk, that it is strange it should have been selected by the writer for the present occasion. Surely it is an offence against "our sovereign lord the king," his crown and dignity, to exa loving subjects " pose him to hear and sanction, and his form of words as this misnamed Thanksto repeat, such a giving.

A man truly in earnest in prayer will scarcely affect this libratory species of collocation.,

The mixture of classical and colloquial, of Latin and Saxon words in this prayer, has moreover an awkward effect. Take, for an example, the phrase" in the severest domes tic afflictions thou hast holpen him." Here the obsolete Saxon word holpen " falls like a discord upon the ear after the Roman words "severest" and " domestic ;"

ut nec pes, nec caput uni

Reddatur formæ.

I fear this petty criticism may appear like trifling; but I am persuaded that much of the awkwardness of our modern state prayers arises from this incongruous mixture. The writer seems to compose the body of his prayer in the usual language of modern literature, but in order to give it a more venerable air, he throws in two or three antiquated terms, which ill assort with the texture of the piece. The effect is always bad: it is like Gothic window in a Corinthian saloon. To make a modern prayer resemble our regular services, it is not enough to adopt a few half-obsolete words; there must be a much larger infusion than we have of late witnessed of what the French call onction; there must be the spirit as well as the mantle of Elijah.

a

A question naturally arises here: Who can have composed this extraordinary prayer? If the framer of it had wished to expose the Church to the derision of her enemies he could not have done it more effectually than by such a form. We implore our bishops to exercise a more vigilant superintendance over this department of ecclesiastical regulation, and to withhold the sanction of their venerable names from such crude compositions as these, which have no other effect than to degrade our excellent Establishment in the eyes of the country and of the world. I have heard it said, that there is scarcely

a Dissenting or Methodist Preacher in the kingdom, who would not have produced extemporaneously a more suitable prayer for the occasion, than that which is tauntingly but doubtless most unfairly represented as embodying the united wisdom and piety of the Church of England.-I am, &c.

AN EPISCOPALIAN.

ON INJUDICIOUS ADVERTISE

MENTS.

[WE readily admit the following communication, especially as it gives us another opportunity of declaring what we have often mentioned before, and what our correspondent wishes to be "distinctly understood," that we do not hold ourselves responsible for the language of the advertisements which appear on our cover. It requires some vigilance to keep clear of those of an immoral kind, or which offend against right principles; as, for instance, lottery puffs and quack medicines; but to exclude an advertisement on the mere score of bad taste or undue assumption would be impracticable, without closing this vehicle of intelligence altogether. We take care, as far as possible, not to admit any but good company in the inside of our pages; but our outside passengers are less under our control. We shall be glad to find that the strictures of AMICUS produce their due effect. In a majority of cases, however, we believe, that the advertisements on our cover are as unexceptionable as can well be expected, under all the circumstances of the case; and, we think, we may fairly congratulate our readers on the general good taste and modesty of our advertising correspondents.

Contrary to our usual custom, we shall give our correspondent's letter, compliments and all; not because we are sanguine in believingall the kind things he thinks fit to utter, but partly because his compliments are in some measure interwoven

with his argument, and partly because he might think, that by their total excision, we had given an objurgatory tone to his paper, which it was not his intention to assume.]

To the Editor of the Christian Observer. I TRUST that your candour will induce you to receive as well meant a few remarks upou an advertisement which appeared on the blue cover of your monthly publication for January last. The advertisement purports, that a curate is wanted, and part of the qualifications that it requires are, "that he must be of decidedly evangelical principles; and that, if he is married, his wife must be a Mary and a Dorcas." I confess, sir, that I was sorry to see such an advertisement appear, in however remote a degree, as an appendage to your truly valuable work; as the parts of it that I have above quoted appear to me to be highly exceptionable. In the first place, the term Evangelical, in its primary sense, signifies what clergymen of every persuasion profess themselves to be, namely, expounders of the Gospel as delivered by our Saviour; while in the sense in which it is usually understood in these days, and in which it is evidently used in the advertisement that I have alluded to, it is a mere party term, and, like other party terms, used in so indefinite a manner, that it is sometimes made expressive of every thing that enobles man, and, at others, of every thing that degrades him. This is the term by which Piety is hailed amid her labours of love, and the Antinomian in his work of destruction. It is a term which all eagerly clain, and all indignantly reject; for it has now so extensive a signification, that it may be used in any sense which its utterer chooses. Under these circumstances, it appears to me to be utterly inconsistent with common sense and Christian wisdom, to comprehend the required qualifications of a curate under a term of such an in

definite meaning; that, though it might put a stop to the applications of many a humble Christian, it would be no check to those of a religious empiric.

With regard to the other requisition of the advertisement, that the wife of the curate must be both a Mary and a Dorcas, I can only say, that I can conceive nothing more grating to the feelings of a woman of real charity than to have her virtues blazoned abroad in answer to a public call. The delicacy of such persons, though it never obtrudes on them amidst the most disgusting scenes of poverty, makes them shrink from publicity, and nauseate their own applause. So far from being the heralds of their good acts, their right hand may almost literally be said not to know what their left hand doeth. Through out the whole of the advertisement little attention appears to be paid to the honest feelings of a Christian minister; but in this latter paragraph there is peculiar indelicacy.

"I am not, sir, aware, whether your superintendance over the work you conduct extends to the adver tisements which are printed on its cover. Believe me, this letter is not in the least intended to call in question the propriety of the conduct of the Editor of the Christian Observer, but merely to suggest, that great advantage would accrue to the public, if the writers of advertisements like the present were to desire the benefit of your good sense, good taste, and good feelings. Nothing can be more unfair or more unwise, than to form an opinion of a work from the advertisements of which it is made the vehicle; but nothing can be more certain, than that the generality of readers are but too apt to do so. All monthly publications are liable to such uncandid judgments; but yours is pe culiarly so, because it is considered as the best specimen of the standard of taste, feelings, and principles, of what is denominated the Religious