In that drear twilight, herald of the dayOn which new faith, new hope, new love were born,And while my heart still pressed against the thornOf unbelief, like some fresh matin layOf forest warbler in his own loved May,Broke, Montalembert, on my trance forlorn,Elizabeth's young voice, which sang death's scornIn carols with celestial transports gay.Now, when cool evening's earliest pensive shadeCreeps o'er my life, as clear and jubilantAs that wild mocking-bird's, is heard the chantOf mighty abbots, whose processions fadeInto the dark of ages, made by theeNew themes for thought and holy minstrelsy.
In that drear twilight, herald of the dayOn which new faith, new hope, new love were born,And while my heart still pressed against the thornOf unbelief, like some fresh matin layOf forest warbler in his own loved May,Broke, Montalembert, on my trance forlorn,Elizabeth's young voice, which sang death's scornIn carols with celestial transports gay.Now, when cool evening's earliest pensive shadeCreeps o'er my life, as clear and jubilantAs that wild mocking-bird's, is heard the chantOf mighty abbots, whose processions fadeInto the dark of ages, made by theeNew themes for thought and holy minstrelsy.
Looking over an old jewel-case, the other day, I found a ring; no treasured heirloom orgage d'amourof by-gone days, but a simple black circlet, whose sole ornament was a silver heart, on which were engraved in rude fashion the letters VA. The sight of it recalled a stormy day during the winter of 1864, when a pale and emaciated Confederate soldier knocked at our door and asked for shelter. Of course, it was cheerfully granted.
On questioning him we learned that he had suffered the rigor of prison life for two years; had just been released, and wasen routeto join his regiment before Petersburg. Upon leaving, he thanked me for our hospitality, and begged my acceptance of this little ring, the making of which had served to while away the tedium of captivity. I put it carefully aside, and the lapse of time and other more stirring events had almost obliterated the circumstance from my mind, until it was thus revived.
As I gazed upon it, how many memories were revived by it! In it I traced the life of the donor, and in him the vain hopes and aspirations of his comrades and the ruin which befell them. I heard the call to arms; saw the leave-taking and departure for the field; followed him amid the sanguinary contests of battle; till at length defeat, like a black cloud, lowers over his decimated legions, and he finds himself within a prison's walls. There, chafing against captivity, listening eagerly for tidings of release, and sick with hope deferred, I see him beguiling the weary hours in fashioning this little trinket. At last the hour of liberty arrives, and with bounding pulse, to the tune of "Home, sweet home," he turns his back on prison-bars. Once again he is a soldier of the army of Northern Virginia; but gone are the high hopes which animated his breast, and gone are most of the brave comrades who once stood shoulder to shoulder with him; hardship, hunger, and death have done their work, and the end is near; a few more suns, and he and his cause fall to rise no more!
Such is the story that I read in that little hoop of black horn. How many startling events, how many passions of the human heart crowded into a tiny compass!
And this, methought, is not the only ring about which might be woven a tale of joy or sorrow. The "lion-hearted" king, notwithstanding his pilgrim guise, by means of one was betrayed to his relentless Austrian foe; and, centuries later, the gallant Essex entrusted his life to such an advocate. Trifling baubles as they are, which may be hid in the hollow of a baby's hand, they have, from their first introduction to the world, acted a conspicuous part in its history.
The Persians maintain that Guiamschild, fourth king of the first race, introduced the ring. Whether this be true or not, it is certainly of ancient date, since mention is made of it in Genesis as being worn by the Hebrews as a signet. It was also in use among the Egyptians; for we are told that, after the interpretation of the dream, "Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it on Joseph's hand," as a mark of royal favor. The Sabines used this ornament during the time of Romulus, and perhaps the glittering jewels on the fingers of the women may have enhanced their attractions in the eyes of the bold Roman youths when they so unceremoniously bore them off. But it is not certain at what precise period the Romans adopted rings; for there are no signs of them on their statues prior to those of Numa and Servius Tullius. They were commonly made of iron, and Pliny says that Marius wore his first gold one in his third consulate, the year 650 of Rome. Senators were not allowed to wear them of this metal unless distinguished as ambassadors in foreign service; but in after days golden rings became the badge of knighthood; the people wearing silver, the slaves iron.
In tracing its history, we can readily imagine that the ring was invented merely as an accompaniment to bracelet and necklace; afterward it became a badge of distinction; and finally, when the art of engraving and cutting stones was introduced, it attained an importance which no other trinket can boast of. Ornamented with initials, armorial crests, or mystic characters, it has been used for centuries as a seal for state documents and secret despatches, a sort ofgage de foiof their authenticity. There are numerous instances in the sacred writings of its peculiar significance when thus employed. For example, when Ahasuerus, giving ear to the counsels of his favorite, consented to exterminate the Jews, it is recorded that "the king took his ring from his hand, and gave it unto Haman;" and, concerning the proclamation, "in the name of King Ahasuerus was it written, and sealed with the king's ring." We also read elsewhere that the den into which Daniel was thrown was sealed by the king "with his own signet, and with the signets of his lords, that the purpose might not be changed concerning Daniel."
It is supposed that the Greeks did not know the ring at the time of the Trojan war; for Homer does not speak of it, and instead of sealing, they secured their letters by means of a silken cord. Although this people encouraged learning and the fine arts, they do not seem to have possessed that of engraving, which they borrowed from the Egyptians, who excelled in this branch to a remarkable degree.
The rage for signets soon became universal, no patrician was without his ring, and in Rome the engravers were forbidden to make any two seals alike. In such esteem were they held, that it is related, when Lucullus visited Alexandria, Ptolemy could find no more acceptable present to offer him than an emerald, on which was engraved a portrait of himself. Julius Caesar had on his ring the image of Venus, armed with a dart; and the seal of Pompey was a lion holding a sword, while that of Scipio Africanus bore the portrait of Syphax, the Libyan king whom he had vanquished.
The manner of wearing the signet differed greatly, the Hebrews preferring to ornament the right hand, the Romans the left. The Greeks put it on the fourth finger of the left hand, because of the belief that a nerve connected that member with the heart; hence the same custom is observed with the wedding-ring.
After the advent of Christianity, it assumed a spiritual as well as political value, the episcopal ring, as it is called, being used as a pledge of spiritual marriage between the bishop and the church.This custom is of ancient date, since there is mention in the proceedings of the fourth Council of Toledo, A.D. 633, that a bishop condemned for any offence by one council, if found innocent upon a second trial, should have his ring restored. The popes also wore seals, and at the present time the revered Father of the Catholic Church has two—one which he uses to sign apostolical briefs and private letters, called thefisherman's ring,representing St. Peter drawing in his net full of fishes; the other, with which he seals his bulls, is ornamented with the heads of St. Paul and St. Peter, with a cross between the two.
The Hebrew used the wedding-ring, though some writer maintains that it was not a pledge of love, but given in lieu of a piece of money. It is evident that the Christians adopted the practice in their marriage rites at an early period, some of the oldest liturgies containing the vows with regard to it.
Being esteemed in a political and religious sense, it is no matter of wonder that Cupid's minions have also, from time immemorial, made the ring a seal of undying constancy, accepting its circular form as a type of eternity. Thus, Portia, after bestowing her riches upon Bassanio, says:
"I give them with this ring;Which when you part from, lose, or give away,Let it presage the ruin of your love,And be my vantage to exclaim on you."
"I give them with this ring;Which when you part from, lose, or give away,Let it presage the ruin of your love,And be my vantage to exclaim on you."
But lovers, not content with the emblem of shape, also added mottoes, and it became the fashion to engrave verses, names, and dates within the ring. Alluding to the custom, Hamlet asks, "Is this a prologue, or the posy of a ring?" And in the last act ofThe Merchant of Venice, when Portia exclaims:
"A quarrel, ho, already? What's the matter?"
Gratiano answers:
"About a hoop of gold, a paltry ringThat she did give me; whose posy wasFor all the world like cutler's poetryUpon a knife—Love me, and leave me not."
The wedding-ring of Lady Catharine Grey, sister of Lady Jane Grey, consisted of five golden links, and on the four inner ones were these lines of her husband's composition:
"As circles five by art compact, shewe but one ring in sight,So trust uniteth faithfull mindes with knott of secret might;Whose force to breake but greedie Death noe wight possesseth power,As time and sequels well shall prove. My ringe can say no more."
The famous ring given by Queen Elizabeth to the Earl of Essex is said to be still extant, and in the possession of Lord John Thynne, a descendant of Lady Frances Devereux, the earl's daughter. It is of gold, the sides engraved, with a cameo head of Elizabeth in a sardonyx setting.
Before ending this paper, I must relate a curious legend, told of the Emperor Charlemagne, prefacing my story by saying, that in those times certain precious stones were thought to possess peculiar virtues which had an influence on the wearers or those around them. At the court of Charlemagne there lived a woman, neither young nor handsome, but who appeared to have a wondrous fascination for the monarch. So potent were her charms, that he neglected the affairs of his empire, and allowed his sword to rust. At last, to the great joy of all, the woman died; but Charlemagne mourned grievously, and even when her body was prepared for burial, refused to allow it to be carried out of his sight.However, there was in the palace a bishop, learned in the arts, and acquainted with the superstitions of the time; and one day, when the king had gone hunting, he resolved to examine the corpse. His search was successful; for under the woman's tongue he found a ring, which he immediately secured. On his return from the chase, the emperor repaired to the room where the body lay; but instead of lingering near it, he ordered it to be interred, and seemed to have entirely recovered from the spell that bound him. That night a ball was given at court; and many a fair cheek flushed in anticipation of being the choice of Charlemagne in the dance; but lo! when the music struck up, the emperor stepped forward and requested the bishop to be his partner. The good priest, resenting the indignity, escaped from the hall, and feeling assured that the ring in his possession was the cause of such conduct, threw it into a lake beneath the palace walls. Thereupon Charlemagne recovered his senses, but ever after was devoted to the spot, and built there the town of Aix. Some old chronicler also asserts that, when the monarch was on his death-bed, he said that it was impossible for him to depart in peace from this world until a certain ring was restored to him. The secret of its hiding-place being revealed, the lake was dragged and the charm found. Charlemagne received it with many signs of joy, and requested that it might be buried with him.
For the truth of this legend I do not vouch; but it is averred that, years afterward, when the tomb of the mighty Frank was opened, on his breast was found an antique ring.
[Footnote 25]
[Footnote 25:In the School-Room; Chapters in the Philosophy of Education.John S. Hart, LL.D., Principal of the New Jersey State Normal School. Eldredge & Brother: Philadelphia.
The Scientific Basis of Education, demonstrated by an analysis of the temperaments and of phrenological facts, in a series of letters to the Department of Public Instruction in the city of New York. By John Hecker. Published by the Author, 56 Rutgers Street, New York.]
The author of this volume has evidently spent much time in the school-room, and has not spent it in vain. He writes like a practical man, in a clear, vigorous style. As he says in his preface, he takes "a pretty free range over the whole practical field of inquiry among professional teachers, and presents to us thoughts suggested in the school-room itself in short, detached chapters." The work is not aphilosophyof education, but rather a laudable attempt to contribute something toward it.
In the first chapter, on "What is Teaching?" he brings out forcibly the truth that teaching is not simply telling, nor is talking to a class necessarily teaching, as experience shows that a class may be told a thing twenty times over, and talked to in the most fluent manner, and still make little advancement in knowledge.
This truth deserves more attention from those engaged in teaching. The work of universal education which is required in our country is so vast, that necessity has forced many to assume the office of teachers who have very little knowledge of what teaching is. "Teaching," as the author well says, "is causing one to know. Now, no one can be made to know a thing but by the act of his own powers. His own senses, his own memory, his own powers of reason, perception, and judgment must be exercised. The function of the teacher is to bring about this exercise of the pupil's faculties."
The second chapter, on "The Art of Questioning," states that a "most important and difficult part" of the teacher's art is to know how to ask a question, but he gives none of the principles that underlie the art. The earnest reader will say: If so much depends on skilful questioning, why does he not tell us how to do it? The little work of J. G. Filch, M.A., onThe Art of Questioningappears to us much more philosophical and satisfactory. According to him, questions as employed by teachers may be divided into three classes, according to the purposes which they may be intended to serve. There is, first, thepreliminaryorexperimentalquestion, by which an instructor feels his way, sounds the depths of his pupil's knowledge, and prepares him for the reception of what it is designed to teach.
There is, secondly, the question employed inactual instruction, by means of which the thoughts of the learner are exercised, and he is compelled, so to speak, to take a share in giving himself the lesson.
Thirdly, there is the question ofexamination, by which a teacher tests his own work, after he has given a lesson, and ascertains whether it has been soundly and thoroughly learned. By this method, as an eminent teacher has said, one first questions the knowledge into the minds of the children, and then questions it out of them again.
The following chapters on the order of development of the mental faculties are very good. We think, however, he lays too much stress on the necessity of knowledge before memory. The memory, being strongest and most retentive in youth, should then be stored with those germinating formulas which will bear fruit in after life. When the reasoning powers are developed at a later period, they then have something upon which to act.
The chapters on "Loving the Children" and "Gaining their Affections" are excellent.
The high salaries paid in our public schools induce many to engage in teaching, merely because it affords them honorable and lucrative employment. They have no love for the children, and are, therefore, unfit for the work. They have no sympathy for the children of the poor with bright eyes and tattered garments. It is painful to go into the school of such teachers. They seem to regard the children as pawns on a chessboard, or asthingswhich they are paid to manage and keep in order. Such teachers should study well the chapters on loving the children for what they are in themselves.
He then introduces a chapter on "Phrenology," in which he details several instances where a professor of phrenology, as he says, was misled, and gave an incorrect delineation of character. We suppose he wishes us to conclude, phrenology is therefore a humbug. But such an inference is evidently unwarranted from anydatahe has given.One might as well say that several instances of malpractice on the part of physicians prove the science of medicine to be a humbug. There is no doubt that, by phrenology, physiognomy, and various temperamental peculiarities, a person's general character and disposition may be discerned. The wise teacher will study these, that he may intelligently vary his government and teaching to suit the various characters of the pupils under his charge.
The work of Mr. John Hecker onThe Scientific Basis of Educationshows to how great an extent a knowledge of phrenology and of the different temperaments may assist the teacher in the instruction and government of children. His work is worthy the attention of every teacher.
The chapters on "Normal Schools" and "Practice Teaching" are important. It by no means follows that, because a person knows a thing, he is therefore prepared to teach.
The art of communicating one's knowledge to others is quite a distinct acquirement.
No one who has compared the results obtained by teachers who have been trained for the work with those who have not can fail to appreciate this. We hope the time will come when all who occupy the position of teachers will be required to attend to this matter, and keep pace with the progress made in the art of teaching.
The chapter on cultivating a habit of attention should be studied by every teacher.
The freaks into which an uncultivated ear may be led for the want of attention will be best illustrated by one of the author's examples. A class at the high-school was required to copy a passage from dictation. The clause,
"Every breach of veracity indicates some latent vice,"
appeared with the following variations:
Every breach of veracity indicates some latent vice.Every bridge of rasality indicates some latest vice.Every breech of ferocity indicates some latinet vice.Every preach of erracity indicates some late device.Every branch of vivacity indicates some great advice.Every branch of veracity indicates some late advice.Every branch of veracity indicates some ladovice.Every branch of veracity indicates some ladened vice.Every branch of veracity in the next some latent vice.Every reach of their ascidity indicates some advice.
Every one who is called upon to give out "notices" or to speak in public knows full well how great a portion of what is said in the plainest manner is misapprehended for the want of this habit of attention.
The volume closes with a lengthy "Argument for Common Schools." It would be more properly called an "apology." His first point is, "that without common schools we cannot maintain permanently our popular institutions." The necessity of universal education to secure the permanence of our popular institutions is conceded by all. But education, according to the author's own definition, is the "developing in due order and proportion whatever is good and desirable in human nature." Therefore, not only the intellect, but also the moral and religious nature must be developed. This the common schools fail to do.
A man is not necessarily a good citizen because he is intelligent, without he also possesses moral integrity. According to the author's own admission, his education is incomplete. As the public schools fail to give any moral training, they fail to make reliable citizens, and are therefore insufficient to secure the permanence of our democratic form of government.
To this objection he replies "that many of the teachers are professing Christians, and exert a continual Christian influence." But many more are non-professors, and exert an anti-christian influence.
In visiting schools, we have been able to tell the religiousstatusof the teachers in charge by the general tone of the exercises. One presided over by a zealous Methodist resembled a Methodist Sunday-school or conference meeting. Another, under the care of a "smart young man," delighted in love songs, boating songs, etc., and had the general tone of a young folks' glee-club. In another of our most celebrated public schools, one of the professors was an atheist, and it was a matter of common remark among the boys that Prof. —— said there was no God.
In another, one of the teachers was overheard sneering at a child because she believed in our Lord Jesus Christ, and had a reverence for religious things. We admit that the familiar intercourse and intimate relations of the teachers with the children give them a great influence over their plastic minds, but, to our sorrow, we know that it is not always for good. We do not, therefore, consider it a recommendation of a system to say that the moral tone of its teaching depends altogether on the caprice and character of the different teachers it happens to employ.
Again, he says the law of trial by jury requires that every citizen should be intelligent, as they are thus called to take part in the administration of justice. True; but it requires much more that jurymen should possess moral principle. What makes courts of justice so often a mockery, but the want of principle and of conscience in those who administer the law? If his estate, life, or reputation depended on the decision of twelve men, would he feel easy if he knew them to be unprincipled, immoral men, open to bribery and corruption, however intelligent they might be? No; the constitution of our government, the popular institutions of our country, require that here, more than in any country of the world, the young should receive a sound moral and religious training, which cannot be done where, as here, religion is excluded from our common schools.
But, he says, the children attend the Sunday-school, which supplements the instructions of the weekday-school. True; but every earnest pastor who has any positive creed or doctrine to teach his children will tell you that one or two brief meetings on Sunday are not enough for this purpose. We ourselves are forced to the painful conclusion that the Sunday-school system does not give sufficient control over the children to form in them any earnest Christian character. It is like reserving the salt which should season our food during the week, and taking it all in a dose on Sunday.
The Sunday-school should be diligently used to supply, as far as may be, the lack of religious instruction in the common schools, but that it alone is inadequate to this purpose is shown by the constantly increasing number of our young who follow not the footsteps of their parents in the ways of a Christian life.
The author then, changing his base, argues that intellectual education alone tends to prevent sensuality and crime, and adduces statistics to show that the majority of convicts in our prisons are from the uneducated class. But if he attended to other statistics recently brought to light by Rev. Dr. Todd, Dr. Storer, of Boston, and others, he would discover that sensuality,only more refined, is permeating American society, and that hidden crime is depopulating some of the fairest portions of our land. It is true, perhaps, that those crimes which are taken cognizance of by the police courts may be more numerous among the uneducated, but it is those secret crimes against God and the moral law that corrupt society and endanger a nation's life.
In New England, which the author holds up as the ideal of what the common-school system can produce, physicians testify that immorality and hidden crime prevail to such an extent that the native American stock is literally dying out, the number of deaths far exceeding the number of births. Intellectual culturealonewill not preserve American society from corruption, any more than it did pagan Greece and Rome.
The author seems to feel the force of this objection, which, as he says, "is urged with seriousness by men whose purity of motive is above question, and whose personal character gives great weight to their opinions," and admits that "religious teaching does not hold that prominent position in the course of study that it should hold; but he seems forced, like many of his fellow-educators whom we have known, to argue and apologize for the common-school system, because they see no way of securing universal education and at the same time providing for proper religious training. If they turn, however, to the educational systems of France, Austria, or Prussia, they would find the problem solved. Even in Canada, the British Parliament has avoided by its provisions those serious errors under which we labor, and which are making our system daily more and more unpopular.
By "An Act to restore to Roman Catholics in Upper Canada certain rights in respect to Separate Schools," passed May 5th, 1863, they provided that "the Roman Catholic separate schools shall be entitled to a share in the fund annually granted by the legislature of the province for the support of common-schools, and shall be entitled also to a share in all other public grants, investments, and allotments for common-school purposes now made or hereafter to be made by the municipal authorities, according to the average number of pupils attending such school as compared with the whole average number of pupils attending schools in the same city, town, village, or township." (Cap. 5, sec. 20.)
And also that "the Roman Catholic separate schools (with their registers) shall be subject to such inspection as may be directed from time to time by the chief superintendent of public instruction." (Cap. 5, sec. 26.)
Let our separate schools that have been and may be established, in which the children receive a proper religious training, receive their due proportion of the public fund, and by the inspection of a board of education be kept up to the highest standard of secular learning, and the grievances under which we now suffer will be removed.
From the German
"'Here on the rushes will I sleep,And perchance there may come a vision true,Ere day create the world anew.'Slowly Sir Launfal's eyes grew dim,Slumber fell like a cloud on him,And into his soul the vision flew."Lowell.
"'Here on the rushes will I sleep,And perchance there may come a vision true,Ere day create the world anew.'Slowly Sir Launfal's eyes grew dim,Slumber fell like a cloud on him,And into his soul the vision flew."Lowell.
Sir Launcelot Du Lac—without his peer of earthly, sinful man—had taken the Quest of the Holy Grayle. One deadly sin gnawed at the heart of the flower of chivalry; but a mighty sorrow struggled with and subdued his remorse, and a holy hermit assoiled him of his sin. With purified and strengthened heart, he won his way to a sight of that wondrous vessel, the object of so many knightly vows. It stood on a table of silver veiled with red samite. A throng of angels stood about it. One held a wax light and another the holy cross. A light like that of a thousand torches filled the house. Sir Launcelot heard a voice cry, "Approach not!" but for very wonder and thankfulness he forgot the command. He pressed toward the Holy Grayle with outstretched hands, and cried, "O most fair and sweet Lord! which art here within this holy vessel, for thy pity, show me something of that I seek." A breath, as from a fiery furnace, smote him sorely in the face. He fell to the ground, and lay for the space of four and twenty days seemingly dead to the eyes of all the people. But in that swoon marvels that no tongue can tell and no heart conceive passed before his face. …
The history of the wondrous vessel was in a measure made known to him. His purified eyes saw in the dim past a long line of patriarchs and prophets, who had been entrusted with this sacred charge almost from the beginning of time. The San Greal was revealed to his ardent gaze:
First: in the hands of white-robed men, who met Noah as he went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives, with him into the ark, bearing with him the bones of Adam—great Progenitor. Its origin and history were revealed to Noah, and that it was destined to be used in the most mysterious of rites.
Next: Abraham was standing before an altar on a hillock in the valley of Jehoshaphat. His flocks were grazing around or drinking from the brook Cedron: his camels and beasts of burden and armed servants in the distance. The patriarch, flushed with victory, stood as if in awe and expectation. Majestic, white-winged Melchizedek came from Salem. His tall, slender frame was full of tempered majesty. He wore a garment of dazzling whiteness, confined by a girdle on which were embroidered characters of mystic import. His long hair was fair and glossy as silk; his beard white, short, and pointed. His face shone with divine splendor. A holy calm seemed diffused in the air around him. He bore in his hands the holy vessel handed down from Noah. He placed it upon the altar, behind which rose three clouds of smoke; the one in the midst rose higher than the other two. On the altar lay the bones of Adam—long after buried beneath the great altar of Calvary—and both prayed God to fulfil the promise he had made to Adam of one day sending the great Deliverer who would bruise the serpent's head.The priest of the most high God then took bread and wine— emblems of the great Eucharistic Sacrifice—raised them toward heaven, and blessed them, and gave thereof to Abraham and his servants, but tasted not thereof himself. They who ate of this bread and drank of this wine seemed strengthened and devoutly inspired thereby. And Melchizedek blessed Abraham, and said: "Blessed be Abram by the most high God, who created heaven and earth." And he renewed to him the promise that in him should all the families of the earth be blessed.
The San Greal seemed, in the vision, left with Abraham as a pledge of that promise, and afterward, was carried down into Egypt by the children of Israel. Moses took it with him when he fled to the land of Midian, and was using it for some mysterious oblation on Mount Horeb, when the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the burning bush.
Sir Launcelot saw the vessel long after in the temple of Jerusalem among other precious objects of antiquity; its use and origin nearly forgotten. Only a few remembered its strange history, andfelt, rather than knew, that it yet awaited its most glorious use. Its holy guardians had always watched over its safety with jealous care, until the abomination of desolation entered the holy place. But a divine Eye seemed to watch over it. At the institution of the Mass, it was in the possession of a holy woman, since known as Veronica—her who took off her veil to wipe the dust and sweat and blood from the divine face of suffering Jesus, which was left thereon so miraculously imprinted. Veronica brought the vessel to the disciples of Jesus to be used at the Last Supper.
The Holy Grayle revealed to the astonished eyes of Sir Launcelot was composed of two parts, the cup and the foot. The cup alone had been handed down from the time of the holy patriarchs. Its very form was wonderful and significant, and its composition mysterious. Jesus alone knew what it was. It was dark, compact, and perhaps of vegetable origin. It was covered and lined with gold, and on it were two handles.
The foot of the chalice, added at a later period, was of virgin gold, wrought with the skill of a cunning workman. It was ornamented with a serpent and a bunch of grapes, and gleamed with precious stones.
The whole chalice rested on a silver tablet, surrounded by six smaller ones. These six cups had belonged to different patriarchs, who drank therefrom a strange liquor on certain solemn occasions. They were used by the holy apostles at the Last Supper, each cup serving for two persons. (These cups Sir Launcelot saw belonging afterward to different Christian churches, where they were held in great reverence.) The Holy Grayle stood before our blessed Lord. … Let not sinful hand depict the vision of that unbloody sacrifice, so clearly revealed to the adoring eyes of Sir Launcelot, and so affectingly told in Holy Writ. …
The San Greal, fashioned with mysterious care for the most mysterious of oblations, and handed down from remote antiquity by righteous men, to whom it was the pledge of a solemn covenant, was henceforth to be the object of the veneration of the Christian world. Only the pure in heart could guard it. Angels with loving reverence folded their wings around what contained most precious Blood. Its presence conferred a benediction on the land in which it was preserved.
Sir Launcelot saw afterward the hand that came from heaven right to the holy grayle and bare it away. But a comforting voice told him that it should reappear on the earth, though for him the quest was ended.
At the end of four and twenty days, Sir Launcelot awoke. The vision had passed away, but the place was filled with the sweetest odors, as if of Paradise. Wondering thereat, he cried: "I thank God of his infinite mercy for that I have seen, for it comforteth me." And he rose up and went to Camelot, where he found King Arthur and many of the Knights of the Round Table, to whom he related all that had befallen him.
Lives Of The English Cardinals;Including Historical Notices Of The Papal Court, From Nicholas Breakspear (Pope Adrian Iv.) To Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal Legate.By Folkestone Williams, author of, etc., etc.Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co. 1868. 2 vols. 8vo, pp. 484, 543.
Wonders will never cease. A few years since, the present pope, willing to do honor to a great nation, conferred on one of its subjects the highest dignity in his gift. The new cardinal was a man honored alike in England and America for his learning and ability, as well as for his never departing from the strict line of his priestly and episcopal functions. One would have supposed that the English government and people would have felt flattered, and that the English sovereign, who is queen not only of certain Protestant Englishmen, but of a mass of Catholic subjects who cannot number much less than twenty millions, would, while thanking his holiness, have hinted that her twenty millions should have more than one representative in the Sacred College. Instead of this sensible course, a period of insanity ensued—England frothed, England foamed, England grew rabid.
To judge by this book, England is actually becoming sane. The author seems to feel that England is slighted because she has no cardinal. "There has recently been a creation of cardinals, and, though some disappointment may have been caused by the omission of an eminent English name from those so honored, the extraordinary claims of one of the most active of Roman Catholic prelates are not likely to be overlooked by so discriminating a pontiff as Pio Nono."
Mr. Williams here, in two goodly octavos, gives the lives of the English cardinals, from Robert le Poule to Wolsey, as he conceives it; and a rapid examination of the whole, and careful scrutiny of portions, leads us to the judgment that seldom has a work been attempted by a man so utterly unfitted for the task. As though his proper task did not afford him a field sufficiently large, he gives an introduction of eighty pages on the Papacy, the Anglo-Saxon Church, and the Anglo-Norman Church. The whole history of the church down to the Reformation is thus treated of, and to the mighty undertaking he brings only the usual superficial reading of our time, with a more than ordinary amount of religious flippancy, and false and prejudiced views of Catholic dogma, practice, polity, and life. There is not a silly slander against the church that he does not adopt and give, with all the gravity imaginable, as undisputed fact, not even deigning to quote vaguely any of his second-hand authorities or modern treatises, while, to make a parade of his learning, he gives us a four-line note in Greek to support his opinion as to a topographical question as immaterial to the history of the English cardinals as a discussion on the Zulu language would be. As instances of his utter unfitness, we might refer to his treatment of such points as St. Gregory VII., Pope Joan, and the institution of the Feast of the Immaculate Conception.
What his own religious stand-point may be is not easily decided. He lays down (p. 146) that Christ's divinity is his humanity; that the idea of the Good Shepherd, put forward by our Lord and ever deemed so typical of him, was of pagan origin, (p. 8,) and, from the note on the same page, that the church, as founded by Christ, was a grand failure. He maintains, too, that the Christianity, as introduced into England, was and is only the old paganism, the names of the days of the week settling the question, (p. 24.) On one point only he seems clear and positive, and this is, that on general principles popes must always be wrong, and that to deny anything they lay down must be pre-eminently right.
As a specimen of his style, take the following: "The Good Shepherd was the recognized emblem of the divine Founder of their religion, but as the community enlarged it required a human director." We are left in doubt whether this community of primitive Christians required this human director as a new emblem, or a new founder, or a new religion. He proceeds: "He who by his superior sanctity gained authority as well as admiration was invested with that character. His flock became a church, and he undertook its spiritual management in the capacity of presbyter." This is a very pretty fable, but he fails to give us any authority. An expression of our Lord shows that church authority began at the other end: "Non vos me elegistis; sed ego elegi vos, et posui vos ut eatis," "You did not elect me, (your God and Redeemer,) but I picked you out and set you up to go and teach." And they did go and did teach, and such as listened to their teaching and became their disciples became Christians with human directors from the outset.
During the period covered properly by these volumes, from the beginning of the twelfth to that of the fifteenth centuries, England had comparatively few cardinals; English kings seemed to have cared little to exercise any influence on papal councils, and never sought to obtain for an English prince an honor given to members of many reigning families. The English cardinals whose names at once suggest themselves are Cardinal Nicholas Breakspear, (subsequently Pope Adrian IV.,) Cardinal Stephen Langton, Cardinal Beaufort, and Cardinal Wolsey. Of all except the first, the general idea in men's minds is drawn less from history than from Shakespeare. Of these especially, really well-written lives, with sketches of the less known and less important English cardinals, would indeed be a valuable addition; but such Mr. Williams's book certainly is not.
In beginning his life of Adrian IV., he quotes Matthew of Paris, who makes him son of Robert de Camera, said by William of Newburgh to have been a poor scholar; then cites Camden's statement that he was born at Langley, near St. Alban's; but he slips in a charge, hunted up in the filth of the wretched Bale, that he was illegitimate; as though the assertion of such a man, in the most virulent stage of the Reformation abuse, could be authority as to a fact of a period so long past. Even Fuller, as he admits, with all his readiness to belittle the papacy, only "insinuates that he was an illegitimate son." Yet Mr. Williams, on the assertion of a Bale and the insinuation of a Fuller, says, "There is reason to believe that he was the natural son of apriest," and on this supposition he proceeds to erect his whole superstructure.
From such a writer no book can emanate that any man can read who does not wilfully wish to be misled.
Goethe And Schiller.An Historical Romance.By L. Mühlbach, author of "Joseph II. and his Court," "Frederick the Great and his Court," "The Empress Josephine," "Andreas Hofer," etc., etc.Translated from the German by Chapman Coleman.Illustrated by Gaston Fay.New York: D. Appleton & Co. Pp. 283. 1868.
A careful perusal of this, the author's latest production, has not caused us to modify, in the slightest degree, the opinion heretofore expressed in these pages concerning the volumes comprising what is now known as the Mühlbach series of historical romances. That they are ably written we admitted then, and we are not now disposed to deny. But this, their only merit, in our judgment, can be claimed equally as well for many literary works which no prudent father, no careful mother, would dream of keeping within reach of, much less of placing in the hands of, their guileless offspring. Illicit love, in some instances covered by a thin veil of Platonism, the intrigues of courtiers, duplicity and meanness, are the pivotal points on which the incidents principally turn. For these and similar offences against morality, the author has no word of censure, while as for thedramatis personae, theirvirtuousindignation, when given utterance to, is always directed against the criminal and not the crime. In fine, we look upon these as books by which not a single person can become better or more enlightened, while very many will rise from their perusal worse than before.
Father Cleveland; Or, The Jesuit.By the authoress of "Life in the Cloister," "Grace O'Halloran," "The Two Marys," etc., etc.Boston: P. Donahoe. Pp. 178. 1868.
An affecting tale, founded on fact. The main incident, the heroine withering beneath the breath of calumny and finally dying of a broken heart, truly depicts the fatal consequences too often resulting from the sin of slander. The scene is laid in England, Ireland, and the New World. The incidents being principally descriptive of the fallen fortunes of the Desmonds, the sad reverses of Squire Cleveland, and the untimely fate of the amiable heroine, give a rather sombre tone to the narrative, which is somewhat relieved, however, by the filial affection of Aileen Desmond, the quaint humor of Pat Magrath, and the unaffected piety and zealous ministrations of Father Cleveland, the good Jesuit.
Outlines Of Ancient And Modern History.Illustrated by numerous Geographical and Historical Notes and Maps.Embracing: Part I. Ancient History.Part II. Modern History.By Marcius Willson.School Edition.Published by Ivison, Phinney & Co., New-York.
Messrs. Ivison, Phinney & Co. are among the most extensive publishers of school books in the United States. They are the publishers of Sanders's series of Union Readers, Robinson's Arithmetics and Mathematical Works, Kerl's Grammars, and many other school publications. All of these are largely used in our Catholic institutions, and extensively used in the public schools all over the country. At present we will confine our remarks to theOutlines of Ancient and Modern Historyat the head of this notice. We are fully satisfied that any candid, intelligent, fair-minded reader of this misnamed history, after the most cursory examination, would pronounce its introduction into the schools of the country as highly calculated to mislead such as should rely on its statements, and corrupt such as should adopt its principles. In note I, p. 332, he tells us that the "Albigenses is a name given to several heretical sects in the South of France, who agreed in opposing the dominion of the Roman hierarchy, and in endeavoring to restore the simplicity of ancient Christianity," and that "the creed of the unfortunates had been extinguished in blood." The Protestant historian, Mosheim, speaking of these "unfortunates," says that "their shocking violation of decency was a consequence of their pernicious system.They looked upon decency and modesty as marks of inward corruption. Certain enthusiasts among them maintained that the believer could not sin, let his conduct be ever so horrible and atrocious." (Murdock's Mosheim, note, vol. ii. b. iii. p. 256. [Footnote 26])
[Footnote 26: This note was omitted in the English translation.]
But our object is not to refute or expose its inconsistencies, contradictions, misrepresentations, falsehoods, and calumnies, as the book, left to itself, is far below our notice. But the case is different when Messrs. Ivison, Phinney & Co. set their machinery in motion for introducing this SCHOOL-BOOK into all the schools in the country, send their agents from school to school soliciting their introduction, and advertise in school publications throughout the country that "thisHistoryhas an extensive circulation, has received the highest recommendations from hundreds of presidents and professors of colleges, principals of academies, seminaries, and high-schools." It is these powerful and, we are sorry to say, successful efforts that have caused us to take any notice whatever of this demoralizing book; for left to itself it would be of very little consequence. In the same page from which we have already quoted, p. 332, the author assents that "the avarice of Pope Leo X. was equal to the credulity of the Germans; and billets of salvation, or indulgences professing to remit the punishments due to sins, even before the commission of the contemplated crime, were sold by thousands among the German peasantry." And then he goes on to tell us that Luther bitterly inveighed against the traffic in indulgences, and that he was a man of high reputation for sanctity and learning. Here the author is so anxious to falsify the Catholic doctrine of indulgence, and to blacken the character of Leo X., that he goes so far as to slander and misrepresent even his idol, Martin Luther. For Luther did not inveigh against the pope for the sale of indulgences, or ever say that an indulgence was a pardon for sin past, present, or to come. It was left for his followers to coin this falsehood, and it is a slander on Luther to accuse him of the fabrication. He has enough to account for without charging him with what he is not guilty of; and he knew and taught while a Catholic priest that an indulgence does not pardon sin, and that a person in mortal sin cannot gain an indulgence. We may return to Willson'sHistoriesagain, for he has written others besides the one referred to, and all in the same strain; but we trust we have said enough to draw the attention of our readers to the character of the work, and we hope that neither the solicitations of agents, nor the high-sounding recommendations of interested parties in its favor, will prevent them from opposing its introduction into our schools, public and private, and preventing its introduction whenever they can. Count de Maistre has testified that history, for the last three hundred years, is a grand conspiracy against truth; and although the Willsons and their tribe are still numerous, active, and powerful, the progress of the age warns them that they cannot delude the public.
1. The Complete Poetical Works Of Robert Burns, with Explanatory Notes, and a life of the author. By James Currie, M.D.2. The Poetical Works Of John Milton. To which is prefixed a Biography of the author, by his nephew, Edward Phillips.3. The Monastery And Heart Of Mid-Lothian. By Sir Walter Scott, Bart. Paper.4. Mr. Midshipman Easy. By Captain Marryatt. Paper.5. The Life And Adventures Of Nicholas Nickleby, Martin Chuzzlewit And American Notes. By Charles Dickens. New York: D. Appleton & Co. 1868.
We give above the titles of six different works, by well-known authors, new editions of whose writings are now being reprinted, in a cheap and popular form, by the Messrs. Appleton. As long as the majority of people will read little else than fiction, we are glad to see the Messrs. Appleton give them such works as Walter Scott's and Charles Dickens's, for the trifle of twenty-five cents a volume. They are certainly remarkably cheap, and if this will have the effect, even in a slight degree, to make the youth of the country turn from the sickly trash of newspaper stories, and read these instead, the Messrs. Appleton will have done good for the rising generation. If we are to have cheap literature spread broadcast over the land, it is better to have such works as those of Scott, Dickens, etc., than the dime novel and the weekly-paper stuff now so widely prevalent.