accounts women an inferior race, although he would give them a manly and liberal education. He permitted slavery in his Ideal of a state, though he moderated its severity. His philanthropy never extended beyond the limits of Greece. He is sometimes accused of Pantheism, but he only finds the divine spirit in man, and proofs of God's wisdom and power wherever he turns. His doctrine of the soul of the world is not Christian, it is quite certain, but it is no more un-Christian than the popular doctrine of Angels. It is sometimes pleaded in extenuation of these objections, that the age is responsible for these errors of doctrine. This is true. Plato looked far beyond the horizon of his own day, and yet was sometimes misled by the false lights of his age. His excuse is obvious. But when his teachings are compared with those of Christianity, it should be remembered there is nothing local, or temporal in the latter. There is one important distinction between the spirit of Plato and that of Christianity, not dwelt upon by this author. The spirit of universal philanthropy breathes in every word of Jesus. All men are brothers to all. He values man, old, poor, vicious, as man, and counts nothing too much to be done for his salvation. A man is not to be healed when sick, educated in youth, and disciplined in manhood, because he is a member of the state, and may be useful to the state, but because he is a man. With Plato, the state is all; the man is little. How different with Christianity! In Platonism there is little of true philanthropy; there is little in all heathen, or Jewish antiquity. In olden times, the Roman, or the Greek went to distant lands to seek wealth, to plunder, to kill, sometimes to gain instruction, sometimes to eat larger mullet, always seeking to benefit himself. Can antiquity furnish a parallel to modern missionary efforts? Be those efforts useful or injurious, there can be no doubt that they are the result of the purest, noblest feelings,—of feelings which Plato did little to encourage; feelings which had no action in his Ideal of a state. Would Plato's spirit suggest a ministry to the poor? Here, we have ever thought, is the peculiarity of the Christian doctrines, in love intense and universal, which continues, though it is repaid with hatred, love which prays for its persecutors and murderers.* * "The greatest productions of human genius have little quickening power in comparison with these simple narratives, (the Gospels.) In reading the Gospels, I feel myself in presence of one who speaks as But let us return to Dr. Ackermann. The essential of Christianity consists in its power of salvation; that of Platonism in its aim at salvation. In Christianity salvation is present in its efficacy and its works; in Platonism, only in thought, and as the object aimed at. The Christian redemption proceeds immediately to life, adheres closely to life, for it proceeeed from it; that of Platonism is a product of speculations and belongs the rather to science, over which, in life, it is not fitted to produce a particular influence. It is not the actual, not concrete, but abstract wisdom, which the spirit of Plato has comprehended. Near as his theology and view of the world may approach the Christian scheme, it is still destitute of the peculiar vigor and animation, the living heart-beat of Christianity, viz. the character and actions, the life and sufferings of the Redeemer. This is, and will ever be, the important point which essentially distinguishes not only heathenism, but every other religion and form of faith from Christianity. No man can contemplate the religious and moral doctrines of the heathens without a deep admiration at the surprising similarity with the Christian. The deeper we penetrate into the writings of antiquity, the less can we avoid the conviction, that, in regard to doctrines, they are but little inferior to Christianity. They contain not only almost all the moral doctrines and sublime sentences which the Gospel presents us, but they often conceive them more clearly and express them more beautifully. They who can boast of nothing better in Christianity than "its incomparable precepts," its sayings and moral sentences, know not what they do and say, Certainly, it is not the doctrine which raises Christianity high above all religions which have been formed and diffused in the course of time. Sages, who were not Christians, have taught the Noble and Divine with nearly the same purity and sublimity, as the Founder of Christianity, whom some think to honor by calling him the "Sage of Nazareth." But in the power of the idea and emotion, in the life and love of the Holy on the earth, in the incarnation of the divine Word, no philosophy and speculation of the world can compete with Christianity; for man never spake; whose voice is not of the earth; who speaks with a tone of reality and authority altogether his own; who speaks of God, as conscious of his immediate presence, as enjoying with him the intimacy of an only son; and who speaks of heaven, as most familiar with higher states of being."— Dr. Channing's Discourse before the Sunday School Society. in general the proper life-creation consists in no man's power and art, and least of all in that of an abstraction. In heathen religions, the idea of God was not conceived as actual and personal, and therefore the human and the finite were predominant; while in Christianity, the infinite and eternal are superior. There pure worship in spirit and in truth is scarcely possible, for the thinker is exalted above his thought, the knower above his idea, and the conceiver above his conception. There pride, here humility, is the foundation of all virtue. But we must bring our lucubrations to a close. shall speak in his own words. The author "We have now seen that there was something really Christian in Plato, and in his philosophy, but not so pure and valuable as in that great historical phenomenon which we call Christianity. Our inquiry conducted us back to the views of the fathers of the church upon Platonism. We feel joyfully constrained to unite in the praise they bestow upon his pious and Christian thoughts, but with them, to declare his philosophy can never be compared to the gospel, nor fill its place. We affirm that, out of the church of the Lord, there was never a more Christian philosophy than the Platonic. We affirm that Christianity, which from the beginning lay in the bosom of history,- before its bodily appearance in the person and life of Jesus, had reached a high degree of perfection in the minds of thinking men, who were inquiring after divine truth, - and this ideal Gospel was Platonism. In uttering this, we have said the most and the best of him which we can say with a well grounded conviction. Platonism can never have more than an ideal power and greatness. "But now if Platonism, by its ideal nature, its religious sublimity, the perfect beauty of its dialectic form, is so admirably fitted to astonish and inspire the thinking, and to win all souls that aspire after the Divine, -how great, how infinitely great, must be the hidden inward power of the plain words of the humble Jesus, which, though entirely destitute of all that is so enchanting in Platonism, have not only established a mighty Church, but have triumphantly outlasted Platonism, its most venerable and most powerful antagonist! And if, as it is well known, in the whole philosophical literature of ancient and modern times, no production can be found which equals Platonism in its æsthetic perfection of form, in profoundness, in wealth of ideas, and in lofty soaring of a spirit inspired by God, how incomparably high must Christianity stand, since we see the loftiest work of human art and wisdom far beneath it." T. P. ART. VI. William Tell; a Drama, in five Acts. From the German of SCHILLER. Providence: B. Cranston & Co. 1838. 12mo. pp. 120. THIS version of one of Schiller's most admired dramatic pieces was made, it is understood, by Rev. C. T. Brooks, of Newport, Rhode Island. It must prove an attractive volume, uniting, as it does, to its intrinsic interest as a play, rare excellence as a translation. We think it may be relied upon as a just reproduction, in matter and in style, of the beautiful original; and we trust that a hitherto well-warranted_prejudice against translations shall forget itself entirely here. It is done faithfully, almost literally. It preserves much of the beauty and the strength of the German, not by diligent imitation, but by feeling. It is in a strong, free, simple style of English; chaste, while it has struggled well with the cold embrace of our all-taming refinement. The translator seems to have caught almost unconsciously the characteristic Näive of German writing, in which no words, representing pure thoughts, are ever considered homely. And it is just here, that an infusion of German literature may very much benefit our own. We have come 'to look upon all fresh and childlike utterance as balladlike and antiquated. It is refreshing to have modern thoughts come to us so clad. If this trait of the German writers can be fairly presented to our young authors, and win them to truthfulness, it will be doing more than all criticism. The difficulty, however, lies deeper than in language. The translation before us has, in the main, we think, done this well. There are, perhaps, occasional symptoms of a tendency to amplification, to the filling out of blank measures, or what may be called sound-periods, with words, always proper, but not always necessary, and therefore weak. This shows itself mostly in the accumulation of epithets, as "desperate daring," "cruel tyrant," &c. It is the danger of a great facility in rhythm. This is, however, the fault of Schiller himself, who is often wordy, and often obscure, with all his divine merits. The translator would often like to abridge and condense him; while, with Goethe, and all perfect artists in language, the difficulty is, how to say the same thing with the same strong brevity. These are trifling strictures, when we are able to say that we find the true spirit of the original, its feeling, its atVOL. XXV.· -3D S. VOL. VII. NO. III. 49 mosphere, its coloring, -in this unpretending version; and much, too we will not say all of its music. Particularly beautiful are the little Alpine lyrics in the opening of the piece, which lull to sleep all our other associations in the imaginary sense of Switzerland. The whole of this first scene is too long, or we should quote it, as a specimen of the simple colloquial manner of the play. It introduces us into the heart of Swiss life, and of the history of the times, so that we are at home in all the acts that follow. One of the finest passages is where young Melchthal hears of his father's having his eyes put out by the tyrant. Stauffacher has just arrived at the house of Walter Fuerst with news of fresh cruelties; Melchthal is concealed within hearing. "STAUF. But something yet more horrible I heard From the same source, a deed at Sarnem done,- At Melchthal, hard by Kerns, There lives a man, through all the region famed, Henry of Halden, one whose name and voice Hold in the general council a high place. FUERST. Who does not know him! what of him? say on. STAUF. The Landenberger, for some slight offence Committed by the old man's son, had sent His servant with directions to unyoke A noble pair of oxen, but the young man, Stung with resentment, slew the boy and fled. FUERST. (with increasing earnestness.) But the old father say on- what of him? -- STAUF. The Landenberger straightway summoned him, And bade him on the spot yield up his son; Bnd when the old man swore a solemn oath, He knew not to what place his son had fled, The Vogt made sign his headsmen should approach FUERST (starts up and endeavors to lead him aside.) O hush! no more! STAUF. (with increasing vehemence.) "Your son is gone," he cried, "But you are mine, old man!" then gave a sign Instant the headsmen felled him to the floor, And with well sharpened steel bored out his eyes. MELCH. (rushes forth.) His eyes! bored out his eyes! |