- ideals, for approximate imitation in all the individual acts relating to them in life. The ideal element in education is therefore the direction of the mind to something higher, nobler, and better than is to be seen on earth; namely, to ideas of perfect beauty, goodness, and truth. But the ideal should not merely furnish matter for philosophical contemplation; it should be, as far as possible, realized in life. To realize ideas and to idealize life, are substantially the same thing. It is so when the sculptor resorts to marble, the painter to colors, the poet to words, or the musician to tones. It is no less so when the domestic circle strive to manifest nothing but pure and unselfish affections; when a statesman nobly endeavors to lift society into a higher and purer atmosphere; when the philosopher lives to pour the light of truth upon the minds of all; when the patriot finds in the safety and welfare of his country something better and dearer than life; when the martyr testifies to truth in the midst of devouring flames. Thus it is apparent that an ideal tendency is the noblest direction which a teacher can give to the minds of his pupils.

We pass over the address on education in general and the principles on which it is to be conducted, and that on the difference between domestic and school education, and come to the sixth, on the instruction peculiar to the gymnasium. Its object cannot, of course, be at variance with that of education in general. Nor can its aim be to give any special education with reference to a particular occupation. It is concerned with literature, science, and art. To the last belong poetry and oratory. Some maintain that its proper aim is the study of the humanities. This view, though true as far as it goes, is too restricted. If it included science, and religion, and the like, there would be no objection to it. Others say its office is to give a general culture; this is true, only we are left in uncertainty as to how much is to be included under the term general. The lines need to be more sharply drawn. Others still affirm that the culture which it gives is purely subjective; that is, its object is discipline rather than knowledge. It would be more correct to say, discipline and a thorough elementary knowledge of a given class of subjects. It is convenient to call a gymnasium a learned school, though no single epithet adequately describes such a school. Leaving definitions, we may remark that the leading object of a gymnasium is to give depth of knowledge in a limited number of well-chosen subjects. Knowledge is disciplinary only when it has thoroughness and accuracy. Other kinds of knowledge, though unavoidable, are incidental and subordinate rather than essential. The power to investigate subjects is to be created or developed; and habits of investigation formed. The student must learn to trace knowledge to its sources. The mind of the pupil has indeed to perform much mechanical work, like that of the memory, and must take many things on trust; but these are the instruments of education rather than education itself. If a few select subjects are well understood and comprehended, the benefit of this mastery will not be lost because other subjects are less perfectly known. He who has learned two or three

things properly, knows how to learn other things in the same way. One of these subjects, and the most important, no doubt, is classical antiquity. It is not necessary here to argue this point, though the author does so to a considerable extent, nor to enumerate the other studies which should be associated with that above named, in order to furnish a liberal education. Experience has settled this question with tolerable accuracy. The practice of the majority of the best schools of learning in different countries cannot be a very unsafe guide, if due regard be had to the circumstances of each

case.

The last two discourses will be specially interesting to the teacher of Latin, the former on the Latin as the centre of instruction in the gymnasium, and the latter giving a history of instruction in that language from the sixteenth century to the present. The details of these subjects are so numerous that we must forego the pleasure of presenting them.

L. Döderlein's Public Addresses; with an Appendix. The volume before us, though published separately, may be considered as a continuation of the Addresses and Essays (Reden und Aussätze) of which the first volume appeared in 1843, and the second in 1847. The three volumes together contain the results of the experience of a great scholar and first-rate teacher and director of a gymnasium, extending over a period of more than forty years. In this country he is known more as a critic, and as the author of a large work on Latin Synonyms, than as a practical teacher. His Addresses, which are in Germany classed among the best, present him to us in a new light, and most favorably. The subjects discussed all relate to education, and yet vary widely from each other. The contents of these three volumes are so various that we cannot attempt to represent them, much less make any selections from them. The last volume, not materially different in its plan from the others, has thirteen addresses on topics similar to those discussed by Hoffman; six on the life and character of eminent deceased teachers, and ten articles relating to classical studies, which are mostly critical, grammatical, or rhetorical (specimens of translations). In the first volume, which was also published separately, the addresses predominate; in the second, critical essays. We regard the first volume as the best; the third, as the next best for teachers generally; the mere philologist would prefer the second.

For the sake of unity we add here the following work published some years ago.

C. L. Roth's Minor Ptoductions relating to Education? Roth, director in Nuremberg, and Döderlein in Erlangen, have been for

1 Oeffentliche Reden mit einem Anhange pädagogischer und philologischer Beiträge von Ludwig Döderlein. pp. 446. Frankfurt: 1860.

Kleine Schriften pädagogischen und biographischen Inhalts von Carl Lud wig Roth, Th. Dr. Zwei Bde. Stuttgart: 1857.

nearly half a century the two leaders among classical teachers in the gymnasia of the south of Germany. These two volumes relate more exclusively to education than Döderlein's, and less so than those of Heiland and Hoffmann. We regret that Hoffmann is so brief; we almost regret that Döderlein is so voluminous. With the two small volumes of Roth we are satisfied in all respects. More varied and less compact than Hoffmann; as religious as Heiland, though less fiery; as classical as Döderlein, though less powerful; he alone would represent tolerably well the whole class of writers referred to in this and the preceding notices. Besides a clear discussion and sound views of the principles involved in education, we find in these volumes, incidentally, much historical information pertaining to the German gymnasia, especially those in the south, reaching back as far as the Reformation. To the majority of classical teachers, these minor works of Roth would, on the whole, be more useful than the more stately addresses and the more elaborate and critical essays of Döderlein.

ARTICLE VIII.

MISCELLANEOUS GERMAN WORKS.

THOLUCK'S PRELIMINARY HISTORY OF RATIONALISM, Second and last Part: the Religious Life of the Chnrch in the Seventeenth Century to the beginning of the Period of Illumination, First Division. The first half of the Seventeenth Century, extending to the Peace of Westphalia. Berlin: 1861.'

THE second half of this last part of the Preliminary History of Rationalism will soon be put to press, and this will complete the author's elaborate introduction to the subject. This history must be considered as the chief work of his life. It was begun early in life, and has been continued to old age. As a compendious account of rationalism was his first publication on the general subject, we may fairly suppose that a new and enlarged edition of it will not cost much additional labor, or require any great length of time Taken together, the whole work will constitute a complete view of one of the most wonderful moral revolutions in the history of the church. As the causes of the French revolution lay far back in the moral history of the

Vorgeschichte des Rationalismus, von Dr. A. Tholuck, Zweiter und letzer Theil. Das kirchliche Leben des siebenzehten Jahrhunderts bis in die Anfänge dem Aufklärung. Erste Abtheilung. Die erste Hälfte des siebenzehten Jahrhunderts bis zum Westphälischen Frieden:

French people, and as the rise of Unitarianism in our own country is to be traced back to the period of Orthodoxy that preceded it, so Rationalism was but the harvest which sprang from seeds sown long before.

The history before us, though interesting and instructive, is a sad one. It is the history of evil in the church, working out its legitimate results.

The first point presented is that of the ecclesiastical organization, which the author thinks is good in itself, but was, in the present instance, sadly perverted. The theory is that of bringing both the state and the church under the supervision of the reigning prince. It is asserted that this is well when, as the theory requires, the sovereign rules the church according to the advice of an ecclesiastical council. But what is to be done when the king and council do not agree? And who is to appoint the council? If the secular prince does not domineer over the church, it is in consequence of the moderation of his personal character. The security is not in the system, but in the individual. This is just the difficulty with a monarchial government. A good king will, no doubt, rule well. But how is it with a bad king? Can such a one be kept from the throne? Luther said, in 1527: "We would gladly have restored the episcopal visitation, but because we had no authority to do so, we have limited ourselves to our office, and prayed the Lord that our Elector might, out of love to God, appoint some suitable persons to such an office." A civil, instead of an ecclesiastical pope! And it came to this. If it is said that consistories govern the church, and that the king is only the nominal head, the question still returns how are these consistories constituted? A part of them are generally laymen, nobles, creatures of the prince. In some instances the king's chancellors take the place of consistories. In the free cities a ministry is appointed by the senate. Who does not know how arbitrarily the minister of religion in Prussia has often ruled over pastors and churches! It is said that two distinct things are represented in the person of the king: the political and the episcopal rule,—jus politicum and jus episcopale. Distinct enough these may be in theory, but who shall keep them apart in practice? Luther, in the end, had good cause to say, "sub papa miscuit (Satan) ecclesiam politiae, nostro tempore vult miscere politiam ecclesiae." We recollect to have heard even Hengstenberg utter the same sentiment. In how many instances have clergymen been dismissed, and even banished, by the civil ruler for not subscribing to doctrinal articles, drawn up, not by the church, but by men appointed by him! How many ministers have been forced upon churches by rulers against the will of the people! How many good Lutherans in the seventeenth century complained of the heavy yoke laid upon the neck of the church by arbitrary princes! A church that trusts in princes is truly to be pitied. Still Tholuck sees a divine order and beauty in the union of church and state.

The very same principle that led to the domination of the princes over the church, led to every form of intolerance. When the Elector Maurice espoused the cause of the Protestants, and protected them against Charles

V., the Catholic party in the treaty of Passau bound themselves to tolerate the Lutherans, not at all on the ground of religious liberty, but from necessity, and only temporarily, till a general council should be held. When the Lutheran party accepted this concession to themselves, they would not allow it to include the Calvinists, unless they would adopt the Lutheran creed. The sovereign of each state, large or small, was to choose between the Catholic and Lutheran faith, and then his subjects were bound to adopt the same, or leave the country. The Catholic and the Lutheran rulers alike acted on this principle. Neither of the two parties would allow a third party to exist at all. Neither the Passau treaty, nor the Augsburg peace founded upon it in 1555, made any provisions for the Calvinists or any other sect. The Catholics thereby weakened the party of Protestants recognized by law, and, of course, divided the Lutherans and Calvinists effectually; the Lutherans could not recognize the Calvinists at all, though the latter did not object to the Augsburg Confession. The Calvinists never had a proper legal existence in the German Empire until the Peace of Westphalia, at the close of the thirty years war. A kind of toleration was informally granted the Calvinists in some states; but the Anabaptists and Socinians did not fare so well. In Saxony neither Catholics nor Calvinists were tolerated. The language of the elector in 1528, in his instructions to the visitors of Saxony, was: "We will have no sect nor separation in our territory."

The aversion of the Lutherans to the Calvinists was so strong that Leyser wrote a treatise under the title: " Why we should prefer to have fellowship and friendly intercourse with the Catholics rather than with the Calvinists." Even when the latter endeavored to effect a reconciliation with their Lutheran brethren, these repelled them with words of ignominy and reproach. They force themselves upon us," it was said, "on the ground that the differences between us are but trifling. Let them consider whether they do not thereby render their cause suspicious; for in church history we do not find that the orthodox approached heretics, but that Arians and Nestorians made advances to the orthodox." A certain Philip Nicolai went so far, in 1597, as to affirm that the Calvinists worshipped, not God, but the Devil. "Their hearts are inwardly and through and through and all over bedeviled" (eingeteufelte, durchgeteufelte und überteufelte). When the Huguenots perished by thousands on the scaffold, a Hutter could say: “What the Sacramentarians suffer, they suffer on account of a false and unauthorized religion. The laws against these men proceed from duty, not from persecution; from just government, not from tyranny." A Lutheran bishop in Denmark was sentenced to death for recommending to his clergy to make themselves acquainted with the writings of Calvin and Peter Martyr. He was graciously pardoned, and only dismissed from office.