Cease, then, ye graceless, spiritless poets, ye shadows of those lofty German geniuses who drank deeply at the Castalian fountains; ye admirers of our gray antiquity, who discern not its productive elements; ye historians, with ponderous tomes of chaotic learning, and words upon words without soul or spirit, cease to malign the mother which has nourished the greatest and best of our native poets, and which proffers the same nutriment and fostering influence to the intellect and heart of every gifted youth who will subject himself to her discipline. He will, if he follow in the tracks of his great predecessors, find himself on the true road to distinction, and will be able to sustain the honor and the fresh vigor of our national literature.

To sum up these remarks in a few words, modern civilized nations have not become what they are through themselves. Our religion, laws, science and refinement have descended to us from antiquity, and are inseparably connected with it. Classical literature is not only the necessary medium through which this connection is to be kept, but is in itself the direct instrument for upholding and perfecting all the sciences and all the culture that grows out of them. As the direct object of education, the formation of the intellectual character, is best attained by this means, so also the foundations and pillars of the whole fabric of our culture are thus most securely fixed, and those who would remove this study from its present prominent position in our learned schools, would so far as in them lies, obscure the light which has blessed the world. The consequence of such an outrage against the highest interests of humanity would be the relapse of science, and the loss of that vigor which the revival of letters gave to Europe.

But we must not close without noticing the objections of those who do not directly deny the good effects of a classical education, but think that it is hazardous to Christianity and good morals.

"Continued and close intimacy with the works of impure heathens," it is said, "weakens and destroys Christian feelings and sentiments, corrupts the morals and blunts the sensibilities. By bringing the youth into close contact with paganism with all its attractions, this study tends to alienate their hearts from revealed religion, and

to fill the imagination with seductive images, which can be contemplated only at the expense of piety."

The accusation, you observe, is like that of Anytus against Socrates; "he introduces new gods and corrupts the youth," an appeal to the passions to strengthen the force of argument.

That many teachers and dignitaries of the church have openly declared against "heathen" writers, is undeniable. But their voice is lost amid the concurrent declarations of others of equal talent and piety, who maintain that classical study is at the same time an aid and an ornament to the church. *

*

*

The fables of the ancient mythology do, indeed, present many poetical charms; but how any one can be in danger of adopting the belief of such a fabulous religion in the place of Christianity, is inconceivable. The supposition is opposed to all experience. On the contrary, the moment these fables cease to be regarded as poetical fictions, they appear as ridiculous to the student as they did to the philosophers before the introduction of Christianity, and only make him the more strongly feel the necessity of the latter. This very consideration operated upon the early Christians in such a way as to strengthen their attachment to the Christian faith, and led many pagans, who were seeking after truth, to the adoption of Christianity. That must be a weak intellect, indeed, that can see more divinity in those fantastic traditions than in the character of Christ and his apostles, or sooner repose its confidence in the former than in the latter.

As to the moral influence of the writings of the ancient Greeks and Romans, the more offensive parts cannot justly be presented by themselves as a sufficient reason for abandoning ancient literature altogether. Every age has its corruptions, which in innumerable forms spread among every people and in every country. In regard to schools, the question relates to the seductions of vice as depicted in books. Ancient literature has its share of such productions. So the literature of every modern nation contains works which no one can safely put into the hands of the young. If such an objection were valid against ancient literature, it would, if carried out to its legitimate results, proscribe all literature, the German not excepted. All teachers of youth agree in this, that books of immoral

VOL. V.-NO. XIX.

45

tendency are not to be given to the young. No one would recommend that the whole of Petronius or Martial should be put into a student's hands. Such authors should be passed by entirely; or at most only selections from them, in the form of a Chrestomathy, should be read. But, alas! the corrupting influence of bad books of all kinds and in all languages, which have no connection with the schools, is so great, that any danger arising from classic text-books is not to be named in comparison. Besides, there are the temptations of the theatre, of profligate associates and of pernicious example. Every step of the young man of ardent passions is liable to plunge him into ruin. The best safeguard is that of moral principle, which must be assiduously instilled, so that a young man may have within himself the antidote of corruption. "The virtue," says an English writer, "which can never be trusted, is not worth watching over."

ARTICLE IV.

ON THE PREJUDICE AGAINST PIETY AS HOSTILE TO OUR PRESENT HAPPINESS.

THE most effectual way to vindicate the truth is sometimes to explore the sources of the error which stands opposed to it, and then leave the truth, after having thus removed the misconceptions which hung around it, to shine by its own light. We shall apply this principle, in the remarks which we are about to offer on the subject named in the title of this article. We need not delay, to prove to our readers the existence of the error to which we ask their attention. Every person can bear witness to it, either from his present consciousness of what is still true respecting himself on this subject, or from his recollection of what has been at some past period of his life. Every Christian minister, in particular, can testify how widely it prevails, and how powerfully it resists his efforts to convince men of their duty and interest. Of no class is this more true than of the young; it is the grand delusion by which they are more liable to be ensnared than by any

other, this disposition, that is, to regard religion as the enemy of their present happiness: as a gloomy service; as desirable only in affliction and sickness and death; and hence not to be embraced and submitted to, till there is nothing else left for which they can live.

As already intimated, we shall not attempt, in opposition to this error, to trace the direct operation of piety upon. the present welfare and happiness of men; the exemption which it brings from anxious cares and corroding passions -the victory which it gives over the fear of death-the glorious and infinite future which it spreads out to the eye of faith-its power to exalt and refine our joys, to alleviate our sorrows, and arm us against all the inevitable ills of life. Upon this more positive aspect of the subject we shall not dwell, but turn to another, which, although less frequently exhibited, vindicates not less strongly, we think, the claim of religion to the happy tendencies which the above description attributes to it. Our design, in other words, is, to examine some of the principal sources from which the prejudice in question seems to have sprung; and thus to show, from their insufficiency to warrant it, how groundless and unauthorized is the prejudice itself.

1. We cannot doubt that those, who regard religion as a system of restraints to which they could not submit and be happy, are influenced more or less in this opinion by the consciousness of a want of sympathy between the duties of religion and their own hearts. A person, who is a stranger to the practical obligations of piety, may yet have a very clear and accurate perception of their nature and extent. If he has been instructed in the truths of the gospel, and has heard them preached faithfully, and has a conscience in some degree enlightened, he may form such exact ideas of the Christian service, that he can not only see what it requires of himself, but detect the slightest external deviation from it in those who profess to have entered upon it and to be performing the duties which it involves. Hence it is, that none are so ready to observe and censure the inconsistencies of Christian professors, as many of those who live, and boast that they live, in open exemption from the restraints of the gospel. Regardless as they are of the self-denial which it requires them to practise, and pursuing as they do with engrossing

eagerness, the objects of this life, they yet know that to be a real Christian, a man must moderate and subdue his inordinate desires, and, dying to the world, have his life hidden with Christ in God. They know that he must delight in communion with God, in meditation upon his word, in fellowship with his people; that he must look upon all temporal objects with a manifestly subordinate regard, must have full sympathy with Christ's spirit, must live not for himself, must make God's will the rule, and God's favor the reward, of all his actions. But to such a course as this every feeling of the irreligious heart is strongly opposed. The unconverted man sees this the moment he considers what the requirements of religion are. He perceives at once, that there is no correspondence between them and the state of his own heart; that his affections cling to other objects; that his inclinations impel him for happiness to other sources; and hence, in his ignorance of the manner in which Christianity compensates for the sacrifices it requires, he infers, that by submitting to its authority, he would both lose the means of enjoyment at present within his reach, and bind himself to obligations, which must prove to such a heart as his a burden only and a weariness. Thus he judges as to himself. He supposes the same must be true as to others. He thinks of Christians as possessed of his own feelings, and thence draws the conclusion, that they must be as wretched as he is conscious that he himself would be in their situation. It is in this way, perhaps, more than in any other, that we are to account for the world's error in regard to the present value of a hope in Christ. The source of the mistake here, who does not see? This reasoning from a state of impenitence to one of grace overlooks a most important fact in the argument. The Christian's duties, it should be remembered, are not performed with a sinner's heart. If this were so, then the sinner's inference would be also true, that those duties are a burden and only a burden to those who perform them. But it is not so. If a person be a Christian, he is such for the very reason, that he has been inspired with dispositions which had no place in his heart before, and which call into existence there desires and cravings, which can find their appropriate gratification in God only. If any man be in Christ Jesus, he is a new creature.