life and works of the saint are not wanting. In the history whether of nations, of literature and art, or of opinions, the contributions have been equally rich. Nor has the age fallen behind any preceding one in efforts to find meaning and system in ancient mythology. Two schools divide the learned between a mystical and symbolical interpretation of the religious fables akin to that of the Neoplatonists, and another of a more rational kind, which, while it does not deny the use of symbols, ascribes the system of mythology in a good degree to the imagination of a highly poetical age. In philosophy, the zeal excited by the jarring systems of the Germans has led to the study of those of the ancients; and a multitude of treatises, devoted to every school, from the time of Thales, until the driveling Neoplatonists expired by feeding on the shadows of nothings, have left no corner of philosophy, no obscure sect, unexplored. In archæology, if the formidable tomes of Salmasius and Meursius have not been rivaled, a spirit of cautious and critical investigation has avoided the faults of the older antiquaries, who too often presented pictures which were composed of shreds of several ages, and put together on the stand as of equal trustworthiness, the best and the worst writers. It would take long to enumerate the departments of antiquities, in which the present race of scholars have gone beyond their predecessors. Let it suffice to say, that those departments which are concerned with politics and civil institutions, with dramatic exhibitions and the remains of art, have received the largest share of attention.

We have noticed thus far two portions of the "Classical Studies." A third is occupied with translations from the German, on subjects relating to ancient literature and art. The most important of these are three: " on the wealth of the Greeks in works of plastic art," "on the Vol. I.

74

superiority of the Greek language, in the use of its dialects," and "on the education of the moral sentiment among the ancient Greeks," translated from the works of Frederick Jacobs, by Prof. Felton, of Cambridge. These essays, being of a popular character, dwell on topics not confined in their interest to the professed scholar. Any man of liberal education may read them with interest and profit. The leading thought in them all is the free development among the Greeks of a sense of beauty and of fitness, which influenced them when they wrote, in their choice between the dialects of their language, which appears remarkably in the finished productions of their art, and which affected their whole life and manners. While reading these essays, we have been led to wish that Mr. Felton had written original ones, instead of them, on the same subjects. His wellknown elegant taste and just appreciation of what has come down to us from antiquity, would have enabled him to present similar views to those of Jacobs, in a way better suited to the wants of his countrymen; while he would have avoided some of the errors into which Jacobs, when speaking of Greek morals, has fallen, and which are becomingly noticed at the end of the work.

The tendency of the essay on the "education of the moral sentiment among the Greeks," is unduly to exalt that part of the Greek character.

It is rather strange that so learned a man as Jacobs, who knows from Aristophanes what the Athenians must have been in the days of Pericles, can speak so complacently of the nation in this respect. The cause is to be found to a degree in partiality for the authors to whose explanation he has devoted his life. It must be confessed, too, that the simplicity of manners among the Greeks before the Macedonian period, their delicate sense of propriety and exquisite taste to which Jacobs

calls attention, were invaluable national traits, and, if they had been united to a religious system, which supplied true morals and the motives to practice them together, would have produced a more beautiful national character than has been else. where seen. But besides this, a cause of too great leniency in judging of ancient morals may be,-and we hope that we shall not be thought harsh or unjust in making the observation, that the minds of many German students of antiquity are heathenized by their studies. The subject which they pursue has become so vast as to demand all their time, and they have little leisure for other studies which might neutralize some of its dangerous influences. Add to this the want of faith in revelation, and the irreligious spirit of the past age, in which it is natural that many of them should share. Would that they read their Greek testaments more, and compared with the spirit there found, the moral

tone of heathenism. In this important respect the scholars of this age appear to be behind those of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, who, though they too often reviled one another in Latin worthy of the Suburra, yet could use their learning in the cause of Christianity. May we not hope that the next age, while it avoids the coarseness and quarrelsome spirit of the older scholars, will avoid also the want of moral feeling but too prevalent among the more modern.

We had intended, before closing, to make some remarks on ancient art, its relations to morals, and the part it ought to have in the education of a scholar. But this is a subject no less copious than important; and having already exceeded the bounds which we had marked out, we are afraid to enter upon it. We will close, therefore, with expressing our gratification with this work, and our conviction that it will prove a valuable guide to classical scholars.

MR. ARTHUR CAREY has suddenly, and at a very early age, become a historical personage. He is a graduate of Columbia College, New York, and he received there, four years ago, the highest honor among his classmates. Having de

man.

The true issue for the true church

A statement of facts in relation to the recent ordination in St. Stephen's Church, New York, by Drs. Smith and Anthon Harper & Brothers. 8vo. pp 46.

A Letter to a parishioner, relative to the recent ordination of Mr. Arthur Carey, by Benjamin I. Haight, A. M., Rector of All Saints' Church, New York. James A. Sparks. pp. 22.

A full and true statement of the examination and ordination of Mr. Arthur Carey. Taken from the Churchman of July 8, 15, 22, 29, and August 5, and 12: with an appendix. James A. Sparks. Pp. 116.

voted himself to the clerical profession in the Protestant Episcopal church, he pursued his studies in the General Theological Seminary of that church in the city of New York; and in June, 1842, he received the testimonial usually given by the trustees at the completion of the course of study. Not being then of the canonical age for admission to the order of deacons, (which we understand to be twenty one years,) he remained at the seminary another year, devoting himself to the studies connected with his profession. He appears to have been not only diligent and successful in study, but eminently amiable and blameless in his deportmentthe pride of his teachers and the joy of his friends. Even those who

have been constrained to protest against his admission to the ministry, and who knew him well while connected with the seminary, tell us how strong was their "conviction of the purity and excellence of his Christian character, and of his quiet and studious habits, and of his love for truth."

Mr. Carey, as connected with the parish of St. Peter's, was under the pastoral care of the Rev. Dr. Hugh Smith, in whose Sunday school he was also a teacher. In May last, as the time at which he expected to receive ordination drew near, he applied to his pastor for the necessary certificate, which must needs be signed by the rector and vestry, testifying, among other things, that "he had never written, taught, or held, any thing contrary to the doctrine or discipline of the Protestant Episcopal church." On that occasion Dr. Smith referred to the fact, well understood between them, that Mr. Carey had "embraced the doctrines of the Oxford school;" he informed the young man that those opinions of his would have given serious uneasiness to his pastor, but for the high estimate he had formed of the candidate's moral and spiritual character; and he promised to procure for him the required certificate. Before the paper was called for by Mr. Carey, Dr. Smith was informed of some expressions used by Mr. C., which seemed to make it questionable whether the testimonial could honestly be given to him. Accordingly, Dr. S., at the next interview, which was on the 21st of June, stated to Mr. C. the expres sions which had been ascribed to him, and asked for an explanation. This was the commencement of a protracted conversation, in the progress of which Mr. Carey made a frank and full avowal of views which filled his pastor with "astonishment and grief." Dr. Smith declined giving him the certificate at that time, and requested him to call

again the next day. In the mean time, Dr. Smith, for the sake of greater accuracy, wrote down some of the most important views which he had understood Mr. C. to express. The document thus prepared was read to Mr. C. the next day, that if any thing had been misunderstood it might be corrected, and that if, in the freedom and warmth of conversation, any thing had been said inadvertently, it might be withdrawn. The document was accordingly corrected, not by Mr. Carey's hand, but in his presence, and in conformity with his suggestions. As the story depends very much upon this document, we put it upon record, not in the double form in which Dr. Smith has published it, but only as corrected.

"St. Peter's Rectory, June 21, 1843.
Evening.

"In my conversation with Mr. Carey this afternoon, I understood him substantially to admit to me a conversation reputed to have been held, as leading to the general impression that, if union with the ministry of the Protestant Episcopal church of this country were not open to him, he might possibly have recourse to the ministry of Rome-not without pain or difficulty, but still that he did not see any thing to prevent or forbid such an alternative, although he thought it much more likely that he would remain in the communion of our church; and that he could receive all the decrees of Trent, the damnatory clauses only excepted.

"2. That he did not deem the differences between us and Rome to be such as embraced any points of faith.

"3. That he was not prepared to pronounce the doctrine of transubstantiation an absurd or impossible doctrine; and that he regarded it, as taught within the last hundred years, as possibly meaning no more than what we mean by the real presence, which we most assuredly hold.

4. That he does not object to the Romish doctrine of purgatory as defined by the Council of Trent, and that he believed that the state into which the soul passed after death was one in which it grows in grace, and can be benefited by the prayers of the faithful and the sacrifice of the altar.

5. That he was not prepared to con sider the church of Rome as no longer an integral or pure branch of the church of

Christ; and that he was not prepared to say whether she or the Anglican church

were the more pure: that in some respects she had the advantage, in others we. "6. That he regarded the denial of the cup to the laity as a mere matter of discipline, which might occasion grief to him if within her communion, but not as entirely invalidating the administration of the sacrament.

"7. That he admits to have said, or thinks it likely he has said, inasmuch as he so believes, that the Reformation from Rome was an unjustifiable act, and followed by many grievous and lamentable results; he, however, having no question but that a reformation was then necessary, and being far, also, from denying that many good results have followed from it, both to us and Rome.

"8. That while generally subscribing to the sixth article, so that he would not rely for proofs to himself or others, upon passages from books other than canonical, yet he is not disposed to fault the church of Rome in annexing others to these, and in pronouncing them all, in a loose sense, sacred Scripture; nor was he prepared to say that the Holy Spirit did not speak by the books apocryphal. Mr. Carey alledged himself here to have added that this was the doctrine of the homily.

"9. Mr. Carey considered the promise of conformity to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Protestant Episcopal church as not embracing the thirty nine articles in any close and rigid construction of them, but regards them only as affording a sort of general basis of concord-as those which none subscribed except with certain mental reservations and private exceptions, and that this was what he regarded as Bishop White's view."-True Issue, pp. 9-11.

After the most deliberate consid

But

doctrine and discipline of the Protestant Episcopal church."" to Dr. Smith's surprise, the Bishop was already informed of the fact, and informed of the document which embodied the grounds of the refusal. Mr. C. or his advisers, had been beforehand with the Dr., and had been in conference with the Bishop. It appeared too, that Mr. Carey was taking effectual measures to obtain from the rector and

vestry of Trinity church, the testimonial which he could not obtain from the rector and vestry of his own parish.

On the same day, a few hours afterwards, the trustees of the seminary were in session-a board, of which Drs. Smith and Anthon are members. At that session these gentlemen offered a resolution, that the attention of the examining committee, in the examinations then about to commence, be directed especially "to the points at issue between us and the church of Rome." This was objected to on the ground, that the business of the committee was not to examine, but to attend upon the examination as conducted by the professors, and to report the result. The motion was, by a vote, laid upon the table. Another, to nearly the same effect, met with the same reception. The discussion of these resolutions appears to have been not without

some excitement. Dr. Smith is re

table, that they might have the opportunity of obtaining satisfaction; and it was suggested to them, that a request to the professors to examine any particular student or

students, with special distinctness on any particular topics, would undoubtedly accomplish their object. This course we are informed was taken; but nothing appears to have been elicited either to prove or to disprove the suspicions which had been excited. Drs. S. and A. were not satisfied with the manner in which the resolutions moved by them had been disposed of. Still less were they satisfied the next day, when a third resolution, requesting that the sermons which the members of the senior class had handed to the professor for inspection, might be laid before the committee-shared the fate of its predecessors, and was laid to sleep with them, like anti-slavery memorials on the tables of Congress.

By this time, all parties, and particularly Drs. S. and A., seem to have felt that matters were verging towards a crisis. "The two Doctors," as the Churchman calls them, were plainly in a minority; the ruling influences were against them. Mr. Carey, having passed through all the canonical formalities, had presented his regular testimonials to the bishop, notwithstanding the refusal which he had met from his own immediate pastor. The Bishop, either because he desired a farther investigation for the satisfaction of his own conscience, or because he felt that some deference was due to the gentlemen in opposition, determined to hold a special examination of Mr. Carey, with the aid of a council of his presbyters. Friday evening, June 30th, the council was assembled. There were in attendance on the Bishop, as his counselors, Drs. Smith, Anthon, Berrian, M'Vickar, and Seabury, and the Rev. Messrs. Haight, Higbee, and Price. Into the details of that examination, we do not propose to enter. "The two Doctors" began with stating, in words which they had written down beforehand, that they had resolved to propose

to the examined, certain written questions, and to request that the answers to the same might also be in writing. Instantly, the suspicion seems to have filled the minds of the council, that written questions and written answers were designed to be the materials of an appeal to the public; and this mode of examination was strenuously opposed. The decision of the Bishop was, that the written questions might be proposed; and that though the candidate should not be required to answer in writing, the questioners might write down his answers, and read their record to the candidate in order to ensure its correctness. Thus conducted, the examination seems to have been attended with considerable excitement among the the presbyters, on both sides, with frequent interruptions, especially by Dr. Seabury, and with some confusion. It seems to have been the object of Drs. Smith and Anthon, to draw from the candidate either an explicit avowal, or a recantation, of the opinions which he had expressed in conversation, and which had been recorded in the "document" which we have transferred to our columns. In this they were not unsuccessful. The difference between the record of the young man's answers as written down by Drs. Smith and Anthon, and the representation of his answers and explanations as given by Drs. Seabury and M'Vickar, and Messrs. Haight and Higbee, does not seem to us to be very material.

The examination having been completed in such fashion as was practicable under the conditions which have been described, the presbyters of the council were severally called on for their opinions as to the fitness of the candidate. Drs. Smith and Anthon objected to his ordination, and intimated the probability of their making written communications on the subject to the Bishop; the others unanimously,