"I admit," said Mr. Stanley, "that it is frequently pleaded by the despisers of learning, that the Apostles were illiterate. The fact is too notorious, and the answer too obvious to require to be dwelt upon. But it is unfortunately adduced to illustrate a position to which it can never apply, the vindication of an unlettered clergy. It is a hackneyed remark, but not the less true for being old, that the wisdom of God chose to accomplish the first promulgation of the gospel by illiterate men, to prove that the work was his own, and that its success depended not on the instruments employed, but on the divinity of the truth itself. But if the Almighty chose to establish his religion by miracles, he chooses to carry it on by means. And he no more sends an ignorant peasant or fisherman to instruct men in Christianity now, than he appointed a Socrates or a Plato to be its publisher at first. As, however, there is a great difference in the situations, so there may be a proportionate difference allowed in the attainments of the clergy. I do not say it is necessary for every village curate to be a profound scholar, but as he may not always remain in obscurity, there is no necessity for his being a contemptible one." Sir John remarked, that what has been said of those who affect to despise birth, has been applied also to those who decry learning; neither is ever undervalued except by men who are destitute of them; and it is worthy of observation, that as literature and religion both sunk in the dark ages, so both emerged at the same auspicious era.