"Thus marriage is accounted an honourable thing both by us and by those without; and it is honourable."—Hom. XII. (1 Cor. ii.), Oxf. T., vol. iv. p. 160.

2. St. Augustine:

"Hear what God saith; not what thine own mind, in indulgence to thine own sins, may say, or what thy friend, thine enemy rather and his own too, bound in the same bond of iniquity with thee, may say. Hear then what the Apostle saith: 'Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled. But whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.'"—Hom. on N.T., Serm. xxxii. [82 B], Oxf. T., vol. xvi. p. 263.

"'Honourable, therefore, is marriage in all, [he had just before been speaking of married persons] and the bed undefiled.' And this we do not so call a good, as that it is a good in comparison of fornication," &c.—Short Treat. de Bono Conjug., Oxf. T., vol. xxii. p. 283.

3. St. Jerome, to whose authority perhaps CEPHAS will sooner bow on a version of Holy Scripture than to Hammond's:

"Illi scriptum est: 'Honorabiles nuptiæ, et cubile immaculatum:' Tibi legitur, 'Fornicatores autem et adulteros judicabit Deus.'"—69. Epist. ad Ocean. Hier. Op., vol. i. f. 325. Basileæ. Ed. Erasm. 1526.

In all these passages the words are quoted affirmatively, as is evident from the context; and it seems more likely, as well as more charitable, to believe that our translators were induced to adopt the present version in deference to such authorities, than to impute to them paltry motives of party purposes, which at the same time they have themselves taken the surest means to get exposed, by printing the inserted word in Italics. Can CEPHAS adduce any Father who quotes the text as he would read it, in the imperative mood, and with the sense of "all things," not "all persons?" There may be such, but they require to be alleged in the face of positive and adverse testimony. It is evident that the mere substitution of ἔστω for ἐστι, without an entire change of the rest of the passage, will make no difference; for that which was an assertion before will then have become a command.

II. CEPHAS proposes another version, and observes, "H. WALTER mistakes the adjective feminine ἐν πᾶσι as meaning 'all men,' whereas it signifies here 'in all things.'" Probably this is the first time that MR. H. WALTER and your other readers ever heard that ἐν πᾶσι was a feminine adjective. Your learned critic must surely have either forgotten his Greek grammar, in his haste to correct the translators of the Bible, or else is not strong in the genders; for he has unluckily hit upon the very gender which πᾶσι cannot be, by any possibility. But let it pass for a "lapsus memoriæ." However, he supports his version of "all things" by one other passage, 2 Cor. xi. 6., where yet it may be translated, as Hammond himself does in the margin, "among all men" (cf. v. 8.): and I will offer him one other:

ἵνα ἐν πᾶσι δοξάζηται ὁ Θεὸς διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ—.1 Pet. iv. 11.

[Scil. χαρίσμασιν.]