EDUCATION: INTELLECTUAL, MORAL, AND PHYSICAL. By Herbert Spencer. New York: D. Appleton & Co. Mr. Herbert Spencer's book on education has been long before the public. This new and cheap edition shows that it is gaining popularity. When the book first appeared, the theories and views advocated in it were considered too radical. They were a protest against the existing modes of education. But since then the general views of education have become materially changed. The advancement of the physical sciences and the consequent large share of attention they claim, have led men to regard education on a physical science basis as of more importance than education on a literary or classical basis. The useful, so called, is considered of more importance than the ornamental; a smattering in science finds more favor than a smattering in classics. Hence we find that the new efforts to establish universities, such as Cornell and the Johns Hopkins, are all reduced to the planning of a system of special schools for specialist teaching-a system, by the way, that ignores the very idea of a university, ancient or modern. Mr. Spencer's book is calculated to foster these ideas. So far as the book is a protest against the frivolous and the superficial in education, it is good. So far, also, as it lays stress upon proper physical development in boys and girls it is worthy of a reading. The author has the rare faculty of suggestiveness, even where one must differ with him entirely. For example, speaking of classical education, the author says: "If we inquire what is the real motive for giving boys a classical education, we find it to be simply conformity to public opinion. Men dress their children's minds as they do their bodies, in the prevailing fashion" (p. 23). Now, this is partially true. Where a classical education is so superficial that it results only in a conceit for the classics without sufficient knowledge to relish them, it is simply a fashion, and, in a sense, a waste of time. For when the mental discipline has not been strong enough to enable the intellect to grasp the subject thoroughly, it is only nominal, and the same drill on a more useful subject might practically be equally beneficial. But then, there is much truth in the expression of the German poet, that he who only knows one language does not know his own. Studying the structure of the languages gives insight to the force and beauty and genius of the language one speaks. Then again, language is the key to unlock the storehouses of information among all nations. But so utterly valueless are Mr. Spencer's views upon the classics, that they have been expunged in the last French edition of this work, at the instigation of the government commissioners on the books for school-libraries, as being calculated to give a disgust for the ancient languages of Greece and Rome. There is much rambling talk on instructing children in the laws of sociology and biology, and the sciences which are yet in embryo, and have very few laws to teach. Then girls are to be taught the duties of maternity, and what not; all of which is laid down with the dogmatism of one who lacks the educator's experience. We like the author's protest against the pernicious habit of teaching elementary branches by abstract definitions. Whilst it is true that the developed reason sees the abstract in the concrete, it is also true that the child's mind apprehends the concrete before it distinguishes the abstract. According to the old Aristotelian maxim adopted by the Scholastics, "There is nothing in the intellect that is not first in the senses;" therefore, the child should begin with the concrete, and thence ascend to the abstract. "It has been well said," says Mr. Spencer, "concerning the custom of prefacing the art of speaking any tongue by a drilling in the parts of speech and their functions, that it is about as reasonable as prefacing the art of walking by a course of lessons on the bones, muscles, and nerves of the legs; and much the same thing may be said of the proposal to preface the art of representing objects by a nomenclature and definitions of the lines which they yield on analysis. These technicalities are alike repulsive and needless. They render the study distasteful at the very outset ; and all with the view of teaching that which, in the course of practice, will be learned unconsciously" (p. 144). And as a further illustration of this point we may remark that just now educators are growing alive to the fact that English grammar, for instance, as taught to beginners, is a complete waste of time, inasmuch as it misses its real end, which is to teach a practical knowledge of the English language. Drillings in the proper forms of expression will be more beneficial to the young mind than drillings in abstract definitions and obscure rules. It is time that all teachers realize this fact. But Mr. Spencer says truly: "The true education is practicable only to the true philosopher" (p. 116). A HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY IN EPITOME. By Albert Schwegler. Translated from the first edition of the original German, by Julius H. Seelye. Revised from the ninth German edition, with an Appendix, by Benjamin E. Smith. New York: Appleton & Company. 1880. We certainly cannot recommend this volume as a "suitable textbook on this branch of study;" for it is written from the standpoint of Germans Transcendentalism. But we feel very deeply the want of a similar work by a Catholic author, which, with equal vigor, clearness, and conciseness, shall exhibit the content, the succession, and the inner connection of the different philosophical systems." So far as form and method are concerned, Schwegler's manual is a gem. His aim is to present each philosopher, not as an isolated individual, but as the representative of the civilization of the age and nation which produced him. "The historical and collective life of the race," he says, "is bound together by the idea of a spiritual and intellectual progress, and manifests a regular order of advancing, though not always continuous, stages of development." The idea of one rational and internally articulated system, one order of development, grounded in the constant endeavor of the human mind to raise itself to a higher point of consciousness and knowledge,' is his unity in variety. The Christian philosophical historian, admitting this law of progress, goes one step forward, and recognizes its infinite, intelligent cause. We are glad to note that the author, whilst extolling the "great law of progress" and development," still contends for human freedom. It is certainly an inconsistency in a Pantheist; but one which we willingly condone. 66 His review of the ancient Greek and Roman systems is clear and concise. The only criticism we have to offer, is that he is too prone to make the Greeks speak and think like modern Germans. It is doubtful whether the ancients puzzled themselves so much over the Ego and the non-Ego as the author intimates. The great defect of this history is its exclusion of that philosophy, which we, as Catholics, have most in esteem, the philosophy of the fathers and the schoolmen. "This is not so much a philosophy" says Schwegler, "as a philosophizing or reflecting within the already prescribed limits of positive religion. It is, therefore, essentially theology, and belongs to the science of the history of Christian doctrine." Thus, on what may be called technical grounds, some of the most interesting chapters in the history of human thought are eliminated. That so able a thinker as Schwegler proves himself to be, should have fallen into this grave error, can only be ascribed to an utter unacquaintance with the masters of scholacticism. He was doubtless prejudiced against them from his youth. He was taught to regard them as upholders of "irrational dogmas," and he never expended time upon them. As a proof of this, take his comparison of St. Thomas and Duns Scotus. He informs us that they were "the founders of two schools, into which, after them, the whole scholastic theology divides itself,—the former exalting the understanding (intellectus), and the latter the will (volentas), as the highest principle, both being driven into essentially different directions by the opposition of the theoretical and practical. Even with this be gan the downfall of scholasticism; its highest point was also the turning point to its self destruction. The rationality of the dogma, the oneness of faith and knowledge, had been constantly their fundamental premise; but this premise fell away, and the whole basis of their metaphysics was given up in principle, the moment Duns Scotus placed the problem of theology in the practical." Meaning no disrespect to our distinguished author, we must pronounce this to be arrant nonsense. Whilst, Is it true that the schoolmen confined their philosophizing "within the limits of positive religion?" Nothing can be more false. as theologians, they demonstrated the "rationality of dogma," as philoso phers they ranged far and wide beyond the "limits of positive religion.” No one ever insisted more earnestly than St. Thomas upon the neces sity of distinguishing carefully between faith and reason, between science and revelation. The schoolmen never adduced the authority of Scripture or the fathers to prove a philosophical thesis; hence their doctrine regarding the attributes of God, the spirituality of the soul and the freedom of the will could stand on its own merits, even though the Bible were rejected. The celebrated watchword, Credo ut intelligam was not construed as signifying that in philosophy faith is the basis or premise of knowledge. This is literally true in such matters as the Trinity or the Incarnation. Our only reason for believing these high truths is the fact of their being revealed. But in matters previous to the reason St. Anselm's maxim means that were it not for faith we should, probably, not have attained to perfect knowledge. The existence of God, for example, is a truth within reach of the unassisted reason; but, nevertheless, faith points out a surer and simpler path to knowledge of it. Hence the Christian is not debarred from philosophy because he clings to his "positive religion." What he believes as a Christian he can prove by theological and oftentimes by philosophical arguments. Thus the mathematician can solve the same problem by different methods; and he does not forfeit his claim to the appellation of arithmatician because he has previously ascertained the solution by a process in algebra. One fact cannot be denied, viz., that whereas our modern "philosophy" has destroyed everything and built nothing, scholasticism on the contrary-as Schwegler justly exclaims-" brought out systems of doctrine like the Gothic cathedrals in their architecture." And we may add that philosophy, as well as architecture, will make no solid progress until it shall first sit at the feet of the medieval masters. Scholasticism obeyed the law of progress because it accepied and perfected the achievements of its predecessors. "Modern philosophy," on the contrary, began and has ended in universal doubt. Ex nihilo nihil fit. THE TRUE FAITH OF OUR FOREFATHERS. By a Professor of Theology in Woodstock College, S. J., Maryland. New York American News Company, 1880, 12m0., pp. 575. Little did Rev. Dr. Stearns dream of the rod that was in pickle for him, when he came out with his boasted reply to the "Faith of our VOL. V.-49 Fathers" by Archbishop Gibbons. The author of the present treatise, one of the Jesuit professors at Woodstock, has done his work thoroughly and admirably, not only refuting everything advanced by Dr. Stearns in the shape of argument, but laying bare his many misrepresentations of Catholic doctrine and history, his garbling of quotations, his vending of spurious for genuine passages of the Fathers-in a word, the very faults of which this unscrupulous controversialist had accused the Archbishop. Without saying what is unnecessary, considering its distinguished source, that the book is splendidly faultless and excellent in its statements of Catholic doctrine, we may add that its learning, profound as the scholar will find, has been so happily adapted as to delight and instruct, without burthening, the ordinary intelligent reader. But what constitutes the chief charm of the book, to say nothing of its pleasing style, is the spirit of meekness and charity that pervades its every page from beginning to end. What makes this the more remarkable, is the provocation given by Dr. Stearns with his inuendoes, silly and offensive jokes, outrageous insulting language, etc. We called it a rod, but never before was chastising rod laid on more mildly and more effectually at the same time. The book is a valuable complemen to the Archbishop's "Faith of Our Fathers ;" and inquiring Protestants will derive much benefit from reading both. To be impartial let them read Dr. Stearns's book between the two. They will soon discover that it is between them in another sense, viz., as bruised, flattened metal is between the hammer and the anvil. THE CHURCH AND THE MORAL WORLD: Considerations on the Holiness of the Church. By Rev. Augustine J. Thebaud, S. 7. New York, 1880. We have been favored with a sight of the proof-sheets of this new and important work by the distingutshed Jesuit whose previous writings have earned for him a high reputation in the Old World as well as in the New. It is astonishing to see how the indefatigable author, pressed by so many other occupations and duties, can find time to write so much and so well. All of his books reveal profound thought, vast erudition, and laborious study; not one of them betrays haste or hurry, though these are sometimes forced on authors by their publishers. Two of the brightest marks of the True Church, that distinguish her pre-eminently from all sects pretending to the Christian name, are her Catholicity (or universality of time and place), and her Holiness. The former forces admiration and reverence even upon her enemies; the latter draws them submissive, loving, eager children to her mother's bosom. Thus does she, at due distance, resemble her heavenly prototype, God himself, who, as the author remarks is not only Maximus, but chiefly Optimus. His majesty inspires awe; His goodness wins irresistibly the hearts of His creatures. Having treated of the Catholicity of the Church fully in another book, F. Thebaud devotes the present volume to her Holiness. He divides it into two parts, the first of which explains the intrinsic sources whence necessarily flow the gifts of sanctity inherent in the Church. The second part shows in detail how the Church diffused her holiness amongst men, sanctifying Greek, Roman, Barbarian, and the new peoples of Europe, from her origin down to our own day. God grant that the author may realize the object of his writing, which is to confound the false philosophy of the age, to instruct and guide honest inquirers, and to teach Catholics a proper appreciation of what they daily utter at their prayers: "Credo unam SANCTAM ecclesiam Catholicam." "I believe one HOLY Catholic Church." VOL. V. SUBSCRIPTION, $5.00 PER ANNUM, PAYABLE IN ADVANCE. OCTOBER, 1880. THE No. 20. AMERICAN CATHOLIC QUARTERLY REVIEW. Bonum est homini ut eum veritas vincat volentem, quia malum est homini ut eum veritas vincat invitum Nam ipsa vincat necesse est, sive negantem sive confitentem. HARDY AND MAHONY, PUBLISHERS AND PROPRIETORS, 505 CHESTNUT ST.,-P. O. Box 2465, New York: D. & J. SADLIER & Co., F. PUSTET-Boston: THOS, B. NOONAN & Co., NICH. M. WILLIAMS- NEWSDEALERS SUPPLIED BY THE AMERICAN NEWS COMPANY, NEW YORKCENTRAL NEWS CO., PHILADELPHIA-NEW ENGLAND NEWS CO., BOSTON-CINCINNATI NEWS CO., CINCINNATI, OHIO-WESTERN NEWS CO., CHICAGO, ILL. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1879, by HARDY & MAHONY, in the Office of the |