페이지 이미지

But let us inquire how this Roman method is being received in this country. My distinguished friend and former collegemate, Dr. John W. White, (a professor in Harvard University,) says,

in a recent letter: The Roman method is used here, and has been for several years. It is just going in at Yale with their new professor, Peck, who comes from Cornell, (New York,) and is an enthusiast on the subject. It is used at Cornell by his successor, one of our graduates.

We have investigated pretty thoroughly, and find that this system has been already introduced into about seventy universities and colleges of this country, among which, in addition to the three mentioned above by Dr. White, are the following institutions : University of California, Columbian University, (Washington, D. C.,) Illinois Wesleyan University, Indiana State University, Indiana Asbury University, Upper Iowa University, Cornell College, (Iowa,) University of Kansas, Kentucky State University, Kentucky Wesleyan University, Louisiana State University, Boston University, University of Michigan, University of Mississippi, University of Missouri, Rutger's College, Columbia College, (New York City,) University of City of New York, University of Rochester, (New York,) Union College, (New York,) Ohio University, Ohio Wesleyan University, Hiram College, University of Lewisburg, (Pennsylvania,) University of Virginia, Bethany College, (Virginia,) State University of Wisconsin.

But what of the success of the new pronunciation ?

So far as I have been able to learn, it has been received with favor in every place where it has been used more than a year. I have known of but two teachers who were not satisfied with it. And they, I think, did not give it a fair trial. The eminent Professor Richardson, to whom I have already referred, expresses his experience in language that can substantially be adopted by those teachers of Latin who have used the English and Roman systems:

I am persuaded, from the experience of twenty-four years in teaching Latin, seventeen on the English and seven on the Roman system, that I can teach the important principles of the language far more successfully with the true than with the false system of pronunciation. I have given the two systems a fair trial, with

no interest but to ascertain the truth; and I not merely think but know that, by the daily use of the true pronunciation, I can secure, on the part of the student, a much more intelligent and lively interest in questions pertaining to the etymology of the language, to its various inflectional forms and laws, to its quantities, and, above all, to its metrical system and to its relations to kindred languages.

And we think, if this system is fairly tried, it will meet with universal favor; and within another generation the original method may be used by all the Latinists of the world.



American Reviews.


1. A Part of the Navajo Mythology; by W. Matthews. 2. Village Defenses; or, Defensive Architecture in America; by Stephen D. Peet. 3. Ancient Mexican Civilization; by L. P. Gratacap, 4. The Religion of the Omahas and

Ponkas; by J. O. Dorsey. AMERICAN CATHOLIC QUARTERLY REVIEW, July, 1883. (Philadelphia.)-1. The

Catholic Doctrine on Marriage; by Rev. Henry A. Brann, D.D. 2. The Church of France and the Revolution; by Kathleen O'Meara. 3. An Old Biblical Problem Solved at Last; by Rev. Simon Lebl, D.D. 4. Father Felix Varela, Vicar-General of New York from 1837 to 1853; by J. I. Rodriguez. 5. Cap. ital and Labor ; by Rt. Rev. James O'Connor, D.D. 6. English Administration in Ireland To-day; by Bryan J. Clinche. 7. Converts: Their Influence and Work in this Country; by John Gilmary Shea, LL.D. 8. The Alleged Fall of Pope Liberius; by Rev. P. J. Harrold. 9. The New Sovereignty; by A. F.

Marshall, B.A. BAPTIST QUARTERLY REVIEW, July, August, September, 1883, (Cincinnati.)

1. Comparative Religion; by Rev. 0. P. Eaches. 2. Herbert Spencer in the Light of History; Prof. William C. Morey, Ph.D. 3. Wilkinson's Webster Ode; by William C. Conant. 4. Some Christian Testimony from Herbert Spencer; by Rev. Alvab S. Hobart. 5. Mr. Howells and the Scholastic Ele

ment in Novel Writing. BIBLIOTHECA SACRA, July, 1883. (Andover.)-1. The Brahma Samaj; by Rev.

C. W. Park. 2. On the Origin of the Primitive Historical Traditions of the Hebrews; translated from the German of August Dillman, D.D. 3. The Theology of Calvin-Is it Worth Saving? by Rev. E. A. Lawrence. 4. The Doc. trines of Universalism ; by Rev. A. A. Miner, S.T.D., LL.D. 5. A Symposium on the Antediluvian Narratives-Lenormant, Delitzsch, Haupt, Dillmann; by Prof. Samuel Ives Curtiss, D.D. 6. Schleiermacher's "Absolute Feeling of Dependence," and its Effects on his Doctrine of God; by Rev. P. H. Foster, Ph.D. 7. Religious Instruction in Prussian High-Schools; by Prof. Hugh M.

Scott. New ENGLANDER, July, 1883. (New Haven.) — 1. The Salvation Army; by

Rev. C. P. Osborne. 2. The Study of Elementary Geometry; by Prof. Eugene L. Richards. 3. Some Neglected Factors in Congregational Fellowship ; by Rev. A. Hastings Ross. 4. Bancroft and Doyle on Colonial Maryland ; by

Rev. President G. F. Magoun. 5. The Decline of the Congregational Church ; by Rev. Charles F. Thwing. 6. The Present Claims of the Clerical Profession on Christian Young Men ; by Rev. J. W. Backus. 7. The Revised Version and the Future State; by Rev. 0. A. Kingsbury. 8. Herbert Spencer's Ulti

matum; by Rev. I. E. Graeff. September, 1883.-1. The Relation between Christianity and Heathen Systems

of Religion ; by Rev. D. Z. Sheffield. 2. Evolutiou as Bearing on Meihod in Teleology; by Rev. H. S. Stanley. 3. The Metaphysical Basis of Belief in God; by Rev. W. D. Hyde. 4. Apriorisms as Ultimate Grounds of Knowl. edge; by Prof. Henry N. Day. 5. The Modern Novel; by F. H. Stoddard. 6. Pantheism ; by Rev. E. Janes. 7. The Present Outlook for Old Testament Study; by Prof. F. B. Denio. 8. The Revision and its Cambridge Critic; by Prof. C. J. H. Ropes. 9. A Lesson in Figures, or a Chapter from Numbers;

by Rev. John Winthrop Ballantine. New ENGLAND HISTORICAL AND GENEALOGICAL REGISTER, July, 1883. (Boston.)

-1. Memoir of Stephen Whitney Phævix, Esq.; by Jacob B. Moore, Esq. 2. Genealogical Gleanings in England; by Henry F. Waters, A.B. 3. Huguenot: Origin and Meaning of the Name; by Hon. George Lunt. 4. Widow Aun Messant, alias Godfrey; by Charles E. Banks, M.D. 5. Portraits of New Hampshire Public Men; by Hon. Benjamin F. Prescott. 6. The Garfield Family of England; by William P. W. Phillimore, A.M., B.C.L. 7. Marriages in West Springfield; by Lyman H. Bagg, A.M. 8. Edward Randolph; by G. D. Scull, Esq. 9. Marriages in Warwick, R. I. ; by Benjamin W. Smith, Esq. 10. Peter and John Brown; by Frank B. Sanborn, Esq. 11. Soldiers in King Philip's War; by Rev. George M. Bodge. 12. Braintree Records ; by Samuel A. Bates, Esq. 13. Descendants of Thomas Deane; by John Ward Dean, Esq. 14. Register Plan for Genealogical Records. 15. Records of Win. chester, N. H.; by John L. Alexander, M.D. 16. Name and Family of Brough

ton; by Henry E. Waite, Esq. PRINCETON REVIEW, July, 1883. (New York.)). The most recent Phases of

the Tarif Question; by David A. Wells, LL.D., D.C.L. 2. Anthony Trollope; by Bayard Tuckerman. 3. The Alleged Conflict of Natural Science and Religion ; by George P. Fisher, D.D., LL.D. 4. On the Education of Ministers: A Reply to Pres. Eliot; by Prof. Francis L. Patton. 5. Recent Researches in Cerebral Physiology; by William B. Scott, Ph.D. 6. The Political Situation in

France; by Edmond de Pressensé. September.-1. “A College Fetich ; " by President Porter. 2. Our Iron, Woolen,

and Silk Industries before the Tariff Commission; by Herbert Putnam. 3. Incineration; by Rev. John D. Beugless. 4. The Artist as Painter; by John F. Weir, N.A. 5. The Antecedent Probabilities of a Revelation; by David J.

Hill, Ph.D. 6. Recent French Fiction; by J. Brander Matthews. UNIVERSALIST QUARTERLY, July, 1883. (Boston.)-1. Episcopacy; by I. M. At

wood, D.D. 2. Scripture Exposition Reviewed; by the Rev. W. R. French. 3. Robert G. Ingersoll vs. Christianity; by Thomas J. Vater. 4. Questions in Relation to Sin and its Consequences, Salvation and Destiny; by Hon. L. W. Ballou. 5. The Romance and Religion of Geology; by S. H. M Collester, D.D. 6. The Restoration of Humanity; by Rev. G. M. Harmon. 7. New Testament Mysteries; by Rev. H. R. Nye. 8. Usage vs. Rights; by A. A. Miner, D.D.

9. The Critic Criticised; by 0. D. Miller, D.D. PRESBYTERIAN Review, July, 1883. (New York.)—1. Modern Miracles: by Rev.

Marvin R. Vincent, D.D. 2. The Doctrines of the Buddha and the Doctrines of the Christ; by Professor S. H. Kellogg, D.D. 3. Infant Salvation and its Theological Bearings; by Professor George L. Prentiss, D.D. 4. Spencer's

Philosophy and Theism; by Oscar Craig. The article on INFANT SALVATION is well worth the perusal of our most thoughtful Methodists for its candid survey of the historical ground and its irenical spirit. It fully recognizes the

supreme predominance of the dogma of infant doom among the Calvinists of past centuries, the revolution of Calvinistic sentiment at a very late date in this century, and gives honorable credit to those whose agency brought into his theology the milder view. Though it gently apologizes for his traditional fathers in a most natural and excusable, though sometimes in what would appear to us Arminians unique, way, he disguises no truth of history. He gives in foot-note a letter from the eminent Dr. Henry B. Smith to an eminent Methodist minister, presenting the desirableness of increased accordance between Presbyterianism and Methodism, and the real accordance that now underlies the two. So cordially are these presentations made that they revived in our mind the query raised years ago in our Quarterly, (in our foot-notes to Dr. Aikman's article,) whether the questions debated between Presbyterianism and Methodism could not be relegated to the region of metaphysics, and banished from our theology. This hope very much faded away as we perused the latter part of Dr. Prentiss' article, in which he states the “theological consequences" of the acceptance of the belief of universal infant salvation. In the most unconscious way Dr. Prentiss quietly assumes dogmas that to the Methodist mind are essentially one in appalling nature and substance with infant damnation. He does not sufficiently recognize that the change in the Calvinistic mind is not a logical, but a sentimental, one. That change or yield springs from a back-lying propulsion of popular feeling compelling the theological submission. The stern old predestinarian theologians unflinchingly refused to allow popular "gush” to interfere with their structural system of theologic truth. But so powerful is now that tide of “gush” that it sweeps away the barrier and compels the adoption of a new logic and a new exegesis borrowed from Arminianism. It is “the beginning of the end." Infant damnation and adult irrespective reprobation are of a piece, and both “must go." What is the humane difference between consigning to a predestined perdition a child eighteen inches in length and six months old, or an adult five feet ten and , sixty years old? The former may be painted, especially to the maternal heart, in more melting strains—the ghastly fatality may be more felt—but the true logical injustice is not more positive and clear. Yet how unconscious of this identity a mind

so amiable as Dr. Prentiss' is may be seen from the fact that he imagines that it was a great mitigation by Calvin when he maintained that infant damnation arises, not from absence of baptism, but from direct reprobation by God! From this want of appreciation how in this revolution the maternal heart has conquered the theological head, how sensibility (and, we may add, human right feeling) has prostrated dogma, Dr. Prentiss' appreciation of “theological consequences” in the last half of his article is a signal failure. It penetrates but the surface of a very deep sea.

It was a good many years ago when grand old Lyman Beecher published in a Congregational periodical, called “ The Spirit of the Pilgrims,” an extended denial that the Calvinistic fathers held to the doctrine of infant damnation. This called forth from the Unitarian side a learned response, going over the historic ground and giving plentiful quotations from those venerable fathers, which showed very sweepingly Dr. Beecher's unacquaintance with their literature, and administered to him a Waterloo defeat. Within a decade or two Dr. Hodge made some similar adventures, which called out Dr. Krauth, of the Lutheran Church, who, with a still richer erudition, marshaled a body of old literature and spread it so broadcast before the public that never will there be a third respectable denial. Dr. Prentiss' article is a brief, candid, conceding survey of this state of the battle-field. It is graceful surrender on that point.

From even this brief survey we may draw some facts not sufficiently known, perhaps, by even Methodist thinkers. The doctrine of infant damnation was a part of the irrespective reprobation scheme introduced by Augustine into the Western Church. At the Reformation it came in with the still severer irrespectivism of Calvin and other reformers, either as subjecting salvation to the accident of baptism or to the absolute decree, irrespective of free agency or “any thing in ” the finite being. And here we may note two things :

First, the dogma of infant damnation spread through the Reformation Churches, including the Augsburg and the Anglican. It appears in the desert of “God's wrath and damnation ” upon every one“ born of Adam” of the ninth of the English Thirtynine Articles. How parrowly our own Wesleyan Methodism

« 이전계속 »