made to me by respectable and religious persons, as to the incovenience of having servants from home in the evening, and the actual mischiefs which arose from it, that I returned to the afternoon, still preaching a sermon. My congregation fell off a little, but still it was a considerable improvement upon what I had formerly reckoned. In talking, however, with some of my people, I found they said that the service concluded too late for them to be able to be present, on account of the necessity of attending to the milking of their cows; I therefore curtailed both the singing and my sermon, so as to reduce the whole service to about an hour's duration. The result of this has been, that one farmer's family regularly attends; but there is no improvement in the average attendance; at least, I cannot perceive any: lately some individuals attend more frequently, but others less so; and I sometimes see persons sleeping, which I never did at my catechising. My evening sermons will be dropped sometime in November, and will not be resumed till Easter; and meanwhile I am desirous of determining what to do for the next year. There are three courses open -1. To go on as I am doing-2. To preach a sermon of the usual length, with the ordinary proportion of singing-3. To catechise throughout the year. I am anxious to have the opinions of your correspondents, at least such of them as live in agricultural parishes, and where the people have been mostly in the habit of contenting themselves with one service. And as my own opinion is in favour of catechising, I should be glad of the experience of those of your correspondents who have practised catechising for a series of years, and in scattered agricultural populations, and particularly where there is no choir, no organ, and very imperfect singing. I should be glad that your pages might be open, with as little restriction as possible, to replies, for it appears to me that they might be of very general benefit, at least in this neighbourhood; but if that is inconvenient, I should be glad if, through you, any opening could be made for a private correspondence, and particularly with the author of the letter, p. 37, 38, and of that in p. 265, 266, in the second volume of this magazine. I may add, that my bodily strength does not admit of my doing much in the Sunday-school, in addition to my other duties, and that there are impediments to my doing anything at all on the week days. I am, Sir, yours, &c. J. B Leigh, Sept. 20th, 1836. -N. SERVICE FOR PRISONERS. SIR,-In the August number of the "British Magazine," your correspondent "L. M. N." wishes to know if it be lawful for a clergyman, officiating in prisons, to make any selection from the book of common prayer, as he considers the daily service unfit for prisoners. Allow me to acquaint him that, for two reasons, it is decidedly unlawful. 1st. Because it is a clergyman's duty to read the prayers only as he is ordered, without either omissions or additions. If he think that they require correction, let him apply to the proper authorities; but one who has sworn "to conform to the liturgy of the VOL. X.-Nov. 1836. 4 B church of England, as it is by law established," is not at liberty (in my opinion) to make a single alteration. 2nd. It may be well to observe that the church of Ireland, in the convocation held in Dublin in the year 1711, composed a service expressly for prisoners, entitled, "A Form of Prayer for the Visitation of Prisoners." As the Irish and English churches are united, I suppose that this form ought to be used in the English prisons. It is exquisitely beautiful, and the use of it in Ireland has been productive of much good. I should like to know if it is to be had in England. It is (I think) in the appendix of the abridged edition of Bp. Mant's prayerbook. Oxford, 1824. I remain, Sir, your humble servant, W. G. EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. DEAR SIR,-Will you allow me respectfully to submit to your correspondent "T. K.A.," whether the parallelisms which he has discovered in the epistle ascribed to St. Barnabas go far towards establishing its genuineness, unless it can be shewn that this form of composition is peculiar to the writers of the New Testament? Now, in the second volume of the Life of Bishop Jebb, p. 286, that prelate, in a letter to Dr. Nash, brings forward instances of parallelism from Virgil, (Æn. ii. 56, 324, 483; iv. 2; which had been previously adduced by Archbishop Newcome;) from Seneca, (Thyest. Act iii. 607-616); from Eschylus, (Choeph. 486-493,) and from Xenophon, (Memorab. I. i. 8; ii. 10.) "The parallelisms," says the Bishop, "between Eschylus and the scriptures, are surprising and delightful." Ernesti says, "Multa plura vestigia Hebraismi sunt in poetis Græcis antiquioribus. In Homero quidem tam multa, &c; haud pauca et in aliis, in Pindaro, in Tragicis, &c." I conclude, therefore, that, as there are instances of this style of composition in writings not apostolical, their being found in the epistle which goes by the name of St. Barnabas affords but slight evidence that it is apostolical. As Xenophon was a prose writer, the examples which Bishop Jebb has brought forward from him appear most to the point with regard to this epistle; and they are, besides, so remarkable, that I trust I shall have your pardon for quoting them at length :— ούτε γαρ τῳ καλως ἀγρον φυτευσαμενῳ δηλον, όστις καρπώσεται· οὔτε τῳ καλως οἶκον οἰκοδομησαμένῳ δηλον, ὅστις οἰκησει· ούτε τῷ στρατηγικῳ δηλον, εἰ συμφέρει στρατηγειν οὔτε τῳ πολιτικῳ δηλον, εἰ συμφερει της πολεως προστατειν ούτε τῳ καλην γημαντι, ἵνα εὐφραίνηται, δηλον, εἰ δια ταυτην ανιασεται οὔτε τῳ δυνατους ἐν τῇ πόλει κηδεστας λαβοντι δηλον, Οἱ μεν γαρ βιασθέντες, ὡς ἀφαιρεθέντες μισουσιν· I remain, dear Sir, yours, with sincere respect, OMEGA. REV. SIR,-It has been frequently asserted and denied that the church of England has an authorized version of psalms, and this to the exclusion of everything else of the same nature. If it be so, which is the authorized version?—that of Sternhold and Hopkins, or that of Tate and Brady? The former is used, I believe, at Oxford, the latter at Cambridge, in the churches in which the University congregation assemble. Again, how is it to be accounted for that the Christian Knowledge Society issue hymns with the psalms ?—one, for instance, by Dr. Doddridge, "My God, and is thy table spread;" others attributed to Madan, as, "Hark, the herald angels sing;" and "Jesus Christ is risen to day;" and other copies of the liturgy have appended to them selections from the old and new version without hymns. The Society also sanctions extracts from the new version only, and this compilation differs in the 119th, 139th, and other psalms, from the selection from the new version published by the same Society, in company with a selection from the old. If the old, or new, or both versions form the only true and authorized psalmody of the church, why these selections, and that too with variations? And again, touching variations, does not the present new version differ considerably from the oldest editions of Tate and Brady? And, as different hymns are printed together with different editions of the new version, so the same want of uniformity in regard of the older hymns exists. Different copies of the old version are printed with different hymns at the end. Certainly, episcopal opinion and sanction seem opposed to the doctrine of an uniform standard of psalmody at present existing. Bishops Tomline and Kaye, the Bishop of London, and the Archbishop of York, have all permitted the dedication of various selections of psalms and hymns to them. There are, in the compilation to which your correspondent, signed "A Lay Subscriber," (p. 47, in your July number) alludes, some alterations which I think may be regretted, and many hymns of very different degrees of merit; but, looking at the psalms altogether, I think that a candid comparison of them with the new version would induce any reader to give the decided preference to this. PRESBYTER CANTABRIGIENSIS. SINGING AT CHURCH. MR. EDITOR, I rejoice to see that the subject of our church psalmody is at length brought before the public in your Magazine. It is, indeed, a subject which demands the attention of the bishops and clergy in general. Is it not lamentable that this part of our most holy worship should be left in its present divided state? One church sing Brady and Tate; another, Sternhold and Hopkins; this, a selection from both-that, with some additions; these have a promiscuous selection-and those (it is a fact, Sir, in some country churches) sing not at all. Is it right, now-I ask the question feelingly, as a faithful member of the church-is it right that the church should be thus left? Dissenters have their regular and approved psalmody; and why should not churchmen? This defect, I fear, is a stumbling block to many, and it would be well if it was removed; but let us have something officially sanctioned, and not adopt that which any single individual may put forth, though it may lay claim to high sanction. With regard, however, to the sanction of the selection your lay correspondent names, I think we may fairly call it in question. Indeed, the editor himself, in his preface, denies it; he says he is bound to acknowledge with gratitude the condescension of the distinguished prelate to whom the volume is inscribed, in permitting the sheets to be laid before him, BEYOND WHICH, he would not be understood as claiming the sanction of his Lordship's approval. I cannot therefore for a moment believe that sanction in private. It would ill become me, Sir, in the shape of a letter, to offer a critique on that selection.* You will permit me, however, as one who has made sacred poetry his study for many years, to say, it does not please me. Many pieces which are beautiful as they stand in the original, the editor has altered, much, as I think, for the worse; and even if it was an elegant selection, it ought not, and it never can, supply the place of the Psalms. The Psalms, as Bishop Horne remarks, 66 are an epitome of the Bible," and we need only peruse his excellent preface to his Commentary to be convinced of their superiority over all human compositions. That the old and new versions are very defective is not only my opinion, but the opinion of very many clergymen and members of the establishment, who have expressed a wish that some one would write a new version; and I do consider it a very singular coincidence, that a new version of the Psalms should be announced, by advertisement, to the public, in that very Magazine in which the article on singing in church appeared. That version I now have, and I consider it entitled to the attention of the bishops and clergy, and calculated to supply that desideratum in the church of Christ. The author has divided the Psalms into subjects, taking them in the order they stand in the original; and I think with him, that the beauty of the Psalms is lost without such a division, and I perceive by this division we have themes for all the festivals of the church, and that not from man's invention, but from the oracles of God. From the time that the Psalmist penned his inimitable productions, they have been used to set forth the glory of God in all his adorable perfections; and we have every reason to believe that the hymn sung by our blessed Saviour himself, on the Mount of Olives, was one of those inspired themes. Shall we, then, throw them aside? Oh, let us reflect ere we do this; and if we reflect, I am sure we shall not act thus rashly. We shall prize the Psalter, as our pious ancestors did, and retain it in our service, as one of the richest blessings God has bestowed upon his church. With these sentiments, I remain, Mr. Editor, very faithfully yours, A LOVER OF THE CHURCH. There * The Editor is not very clear to which selection reference is here made. have been a great many lately. But he is pretty sure that no selection dedicated to a bishop has been sent to the office.-ED. TURNING FROM THE CONGREGATION. SIR,-The circumstances to which I allude below have excited the attention, and have formed the subject of the conversation, of several of my brethren. We enjoy the privilege of attending divine service every morning, in one of the churches of the city, in which we reside. It is solemnized in the chancel. There being no reading pew, the vicar makes use of a moveable reading-desk, which is placed at the foot of the steps of the communion-table. In praying, it is his practice to kneel on a low cushion, placed on the step of the communion-table, and to turn from the congregation, with his face towards the communion table, in which position he continues during the prayers. A chapel-of-ease to this same church has recently been consecrated, and the curate adopts precisely the same practice: reading the lessons from a small moveable desk, which just contains the Bible, and offering the prayers from a small 8vo Prayer Book, kneeling on the step of the communion-table, with his face turned from the people, towards the east. The use of the desk may be satisfactorily accounted for, in the first instance, by the fact of there being no reading pew in the chancel; in the second instance, it would probably be justified by the small size of the chapel, which would lead to the adoption of every allowable arrangement for economising space. But is there any authority for the practice of turning the back on the congregation during the prayers? I cannot find any instructions to this effect in the Rubric, and the custom of the church is almost universally (I might say quite) in favour of turning towards the congregation. Surely, it is our duty to adhere closely to common order, even in minute details, however any practice may fall in with our own particular views or wishes. For myself, I believe that I could pray with more uninterrupted attention, and with more serious devotion, if I were to turn from the congregation, but is such a practice either one of those in use by the primitive church before the fifth century, or is it authorized or sanctioned by the Rubric, or by the common usage of our church? I shall feel greatly indebted for any information which may serve to throw light on this subject, which is, perhaps, not so unimportant as it may appear on first view. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, A. O. V. CONCLUSION OF THE SERVICE. SIR,-Will you allow me to call the attention of your clerical readers to the following extract from the Bishop of Hereford's recent charge, printed, but not published : "Here let me observe, that, when the communion service is appointed, yet no administration of the Lord's Supper to follow, and the sermon is preached after the Nicene Creed, the service should be concluded at the altar with one or more sentences for the offertory, the prayer for the church militant, a collect, or collects, at |