stinguishable as diamonds, in a dunghill. The
result is an octavo of forty-six pages, of pure and unsophisticated
doctrines, such as were professed and acted on by the unlettered
Apostles, the Apostolic Fathers, and the Christians, of the first
century. Their Platonizing successors, indeed, in after times, in order
to legitimate the corruptions which they had incorporated into the
doctrines of Jesus, found it necessary to disavow the primitive
Christians, who had taken their principles from the mouth of Jesus
himself, of his Apostles, and the Fathers cotemporary with them. They
excommunicated their followers as heretics, branding them with the
opprobrious name of Ebionites and Beggars. For a comparison of the
Grecian philosophy with that of Jesus, materials might be largely drawn
from the same source. Enfield gives a history and detailed account of
the opinions and principles of the different sects. These relate to
the Gods, their natures, grades, places, and powers; the demi-Gods and
Demons, and their agency with man; the universe, its structure, extent,
and duration; the origin of things from the elements of fire, water,
air, and earth; the human soul, its essence and derivation; the _summum
bonum_, and _finis bonorum_; with a thousand idle dreams and fancies on
these and other subjects, the knowledge of which is withheld from man;
leaving but a short chapter for his moral duties, and the principal
section of that given to what he owes himself, to precepts for
rendering him impassible, and unassailable by the evils of life, and for
preserving his mind in a state of constant serenity.

Such a canvass is too broad for the age of seventy, and especially of
one whose chief occupations have been in the practical business of life.
We must leave, therefore, to others, younger and more learned than
we are, to prepare this euthanasia for Platonic Christianity, and its
restoration to the primitive simplicity of its founder. I think you give
a just outline of the theism of the three religions, when you say that
the principle of the Hebrew was the fear, of the Gentile the honor, and
of the Christian the love of God.

An expression in your letter of September the 14th, that 'the human
understanding is a revelation from its maker,' gives the best solution
that I believe can be given of the question, 'What did Socrates mean by
his Daemon?' He was too wise to believe, and too honest to pretend, that
he had real and familiar converse