that habits of libertinism incapacitate and indispose the mind for all intellectual, moral, and religious pleasures, which is a great loss to any man's happiness. The moral instructor, who is anxious for the welfare of the young, must feel solicitous to induce them to shun the beginning of evils so destructive to their peace and welfare; and he cannot fail to urge them to avoid every kind of indecent language. The advice of the heathen moralist cannot be too forcibly recommended or too cautiously observed. The Scripture precepts are express on this point; they require us to avoid all "corrupt communica tion;" and they point to a future account of our words, as well as of our actions. In innumerable instances, the first step to ruin has been indulging in impure conversation. To give the dictates of reason, religion, and conscience their due influence, the disposition to self-restraint should be early and steadily cherished by those who have the care of the young; and after they arrive at that period in which the passions too often acquire the ascendency, it should be carefully exercised by themselves. Next to the direct culture and exercise of religious principle, nothing can be more effectual than a full and judicious employment of their time in the various engagements of their station, in the occupations to which benevolence prompts, in the acquisition of useful knowledge, and in cheerful and active, but innocent recreation. If habits are formed of indolence, and of unrestrained indulgence in sleep, in diet, and in mere amusement, it is in vain to look for that self-control which was declared to be "wisdom's root," by one who, through the want of it, blighted his fairest prospects and sunk into an untimely grave. If we are asked by any of our young readers how they may pass through the present period of their lives with most of honor and of solid enjoyment, and at the same time make the best preparation for future respectability, usefulness, and happiness, we should unhesitatingly answer-think nothing allowable, in word or action, which you feel your conscience condemn, and of which you could not speak to a respected friend-cherish an habitual and operative sense of the Divine presence and your own accountableness, and remember that "he who despiseth small things shall fall by little and little." Nil dictu foedum visuque hæc limina tangat, Juv. Sat. xiv. 44. "Far from the walls where children dwell, JOHN IRELAND, 1761-1842. JOHN IRELAND, a distinguished dignitary in the English Church, was born at Ashburton, in Devonshire, on the 8th of September, 1761. He matriculated at Oxford, in 1780, and, after receiving various ecclesiastical preferments, he was installed Dean of Westminster in 1816. In conjunction with his friend, Mr. Canning, he was one of the principal writers who assisted Mr. Gifford in the early volumes of the "Quarterly Review." He was the author of a number of valuable theological works; but that by which he is most known is his work entitled "Paganism and Christi. anity Compared, in a course of lectures to the king's scholars at Westminster." It is a most learned and eloquent exposition of the sufferings of the early Christians, and of the comparative claims of Paganism and Christianity upon their followers, both as respects "the life that now is, and that which is to come." He left behind him numerous manuscripts, but (as his friend Gifford had done), he desired that they all should be destroyed. He lived a life of great usefulness and benevolence, was a most munificent patron of learning, a liberal encourager of religious and benevolent undertakings, and, by his will, he left about thirty thousand pounds to various universities and hospitals. He died on the 1st of September, at his Deanery, Westminster, universally lamented and beloved. SUFFERINGS OF THE EARLY CHRISTIANS. St. Paul has affirmed, concerning the godliness of which he was an inspired teacher, that it "is profitable to all things, having the promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come." His immediate intention was to refute an erroneous notion, whether ascribed to certain heretics of the early ages, or more prospectively to the Romish Church, that the profession of the faith of Christ was incompatible with the usual connections and supports of common life. But his declaration extends beyond the controversy itself, and asserts, in universal terms, the happy condition of believers under the Gospel. The "bodily exercises," the unbidden austerities and mortifications, against which he argues, have little influence in promoting the welfare of man-but true Christianity comprehends all good. It unites the blessings of this world and the next. In the present life it allows to us whatever can be desired with innocence, or used with thanksgiving to God; and in 1 I can speak of this book with the affection of an early love, for I read it, in my senior year at college, with great pleasure as well as profit. the life to come, it offers that transcendent happiness which is promised, in a more eminent manner, through Jesus Christ. It is impossible not to be struck with admiration, when we consider this assertion, and compare it with the outward circumstances of the Christian church in the age in which the Apostle wrote. The Saviour had prepared the minds of his disciples for the trials which awaited them in the execution of their sacred commission"Behold I send you forth as lambs among wolves;" and those who conspire to hinder the propagation of your doctrine "will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues. Ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles; and ye shall be hated of all men for my sake." These denunciations were dreadfully verified. Disastrous, indeed, was the condition of the Gospel, not only while it was confined within the borders of Judea and Samaria, but after it was announced to the world at large. The propagators of the faith had to make the melancholy confession, that distresses of every kind were prepared for them by the ready malice of their enemies. They were openly punished, and privately defamed. They suffered both "hunger and thirst, were naked and buffeted, and had no certain dwelling-place." For himself, in particular, St. Paul states his more abundant labors, his frequent imprisonments, his various and unceasing perils by sea and land, from his own countrymen and from the heathen, and the "bonds and afflictions which awaited him in every city." Yet amid circumstances so unusually discouraging arose the steady assertion of the apostle; and the Gospel, thus persecuted and apparently forlorn, was still declared to have the promise of the life that now is, as well as of that which is to come! Let us extend this view beyond the limits of the apostolic age, and follow the Gospel in its afflictions and its joys, its persecutions and its determined triumphs. The continued sufferings of the propagators of the faith are abundantly proved in the descriptions which other writers have given us of the hostile conduct of the Gentiles and Jews. In the early defences of Christianity, nothing is more frequent than the complaint that the mere confession of the faith was deemed sufficient ground of condemnation by the heathen tribunals. Justin Martyr, in his first apology, relates the cases of those who were summarily punished on this account, and the conversations which were held concerning them in the Roman courts of justice. Ptolemæus, a convert, had been seized and thrown into prison, upon information that he was a Christian. When he was brought before Urbicius, the præfect of the city, the only question asked of him was, whether he professed the faith of Christ? This being acknowledged, he was instantly ordered to be led away to death. Among those who stood by, was Lucius, another convert, who, in the boldness of innocence, asked the præfect on what grounds he condemned a man proved guilty of no crime. "Art thou also a Christian?" demanded Urbicius. This was not denied; and the same punishment was adjudged to both. While these advocates of the faith justly demand that their lives and characters be made the subjects of inquiry, before sentence is passed upon them, they boldly declare that they refuse not to die, if wickedness be proved against them; and they complain, with peculiar force of argument to a Roman ear, that they have not the usual lot of subjects, for whose prosperity the empire professed a common and undiscriminating care. "If we are guilty of any wickedness (says Athenagoras in his address to the Emperors M. Aurelius and Commodus), we do not refuse to be punished; nay, we call for the worst of punishment. But if our only guilt be the name of Christians, it is your duty to protect us from the injuries which we suffer." Justin Martyr indulges the same complaint in his second apology. "Other men acknowledge what gods they will, and you hinder them not." Then, alluding to the Egyptian worship, always deemed the opprobrium of Paganism, and reprobating the senseless, trifling, and disgusting objects of it, he points out the differences of opinion concerning the worshippers themselves. "Yet, even to these sects, bigoted to their several deities, and hostile to each other on their account, you, Romans, show an equal clemency, and allow their discordant practices. To Christians alone you object that they worship not the same gods with yourselves; and you devote us to death, because we do not adore dead men, and propitiate them by sacrifices, and garlands placed upon their altars." The apology of Tertullian is a mixture of indignation, strong reasoning, and irony. He is generally serious, though sometimes sportive; and while he repels the calumnies of the enemies of the faith, he can indulge a vein of pleasantry. He declares his belief with much force and dignity. "Mangled by your cruelty, and covered with our own blood, we still proclaim aloud-We worship God through Christ. Persist in your own opinion, and deem him a mere man. Yet through him God makes himself known; in him he will be worshipped. But rather ought ye to inquire, whether the divinity of Christ be not the true divinity, the knowledge of which leads the worshipper to all goodness, and therefore compels him to reject the lying pretensions of your idols." Again, he sportively compares the idols themselves with the mangled bodies of the Christians: "You place us upon a cross, or the stump of some tree; and on a frame of the like shape you fashion your gods of clay. You lacerate our sides with hooks of iron; with similar labor do you employ axes, and saws, and augers on your gods of wood. You throw us into the fire; and in the fire you cast your gods of metal. Or perhaps you send us to the mines; but from thence come your best divinities. We are, therefore, under the like circumstances with them; and if divinity is produced by hewing and mangling, our tortures are our consecration, and we are fit objects of your worship." “THE LIFE THAT NOW IS" PROMISED TO THE CHRISTIAN. Nor is the superiority of the Christian seen only in the better principles through which he bears the unavoidable evils of life. He has a present happiness surpassing that of other men. The Saviour had promised to the meek, that they "should possess the earth." This expression was meant to point out the advantages resulting from a Christian use of this world-the contentedness with which we receive what God sees to be necessary or convenient to our being, the happy freedom from those malignant and destructive passions which poison the enjoyments of other men, the mildness of temper with which we soothe every occurrence of life, and that lofty tranquillity concerning the objects of the world which is the blessed effect of our sincere reliance on the Divine providence. This, then, is the foundation on which St. Paul grounds his assertion that the Christian has the promise of "the life that now is." The laxity of morals which prevailed in an early part of the last century, occasioned a dispute which involved this question, To whom fell the largest share of the common enjoyments of life?-to the man of religious sobriety, or to the man of pleasure, the glutton, the drunkard, and the sensualist? The better cause was defended against the false philosophy of the times by the acute and pious Bishop Berkeley, in a part of his Alciphron. His chief argument is against the strange notion of Mandeville and his followers, who represented private vices as public benefits; and he infers that, before they can be such, they must benefit the individuals who practise them. But this being false, the other cannot be true. Hence he satisfactorily demonstrates the superior advantages possessed by the man of temper |