Sometimes this affects the translation. Thus, the Revisers propose in the parable of the prodigal son,--'And I perish _here_ with hunger!' But why '_here_?' Because I answer, whereas in the earliest copies of St. Luke the words stood thus,--[Greek: EGODELIMOAPOLLYMAI], some careless scribe after writing [Greek: EGODE], reduplicated the three last letters ([Greek: ODE]): he mistook them for an independent word. Accordingly in the Codex Bezae, in R and U and about ten cursives, we encounter [Greek: ego de ode]. The inventive faculty having thus done its work it remained to superadd 'transposition,' as was done by [Symbol: Aleph]BL. From [Greek: ego de ode limo], the sentence has now developed into [Greek: ego de limo ode]: which approves itself to Griesbach and Schultz, to Lachmann and Tischendorf and Tregelles, to Alfoid and Westcott and Hort, and to the Revisers. A very ancient blunder, certainly, [Greek: ego de ode] is: for it is found in the Latin[67] and the Syriac translations. It must therefore date from the second century. But it is a blunder notwithstanding: a blunder against which 16 uncials and the whole body of the cursives bear emphatic witness[68]. Having detected its origin, we have next to trace its progress. The inventors of [Greek: ode] or other scribes quickly saw that this word requires a correlative in the earlier part of the sentence. Accordingly, the same primitive authorities which advocate 'here,' are observed also to advocate, above, 'in my Father's house.' No extant Greek copy is known to contain the bracketed words in the sentence [Greek: [en to oiko] tou patros mou]: but such copies must have existed in the second century. The Peshitto, the Cureton and Lewis recognize the three words in question; as well as copies of the Latin with which Jerome[69], Augustine[70] and Cassian[71] were acquainted. The phrase 'in domo patris mei' has accordingly established itself in the Vulgate. But surely we of the Church of England who have been hitherto spared this second blunder, may reasonably (at the end of 1700 years) refuse to take the first downward step. Our Lord intended no contrast whatever between two localities--but between two parties. The comfortable estate of the hired servants He set against the abject misery of the Son: not the house wherein the servants dwelt, and the spot where the poor prodigal was standing when he came to a better mind.--These are many words; but I know not how to be briefer. And,--what is worthy of discussion, if not the utterances of 'the Word made flesh?'