But what of the Christian classics? _Obstupescite, cœli!_ Harper & Brothers have come to the rescue. To them, then, we must suppliantly look for help to open this avenue of Christian civilization――the blended instruction, in our schools, of pagan and Christian training in belles-lettres! “_Latin Hymns, with English Notes._ For use in schools and colleges. New York: Harper & Bros., Publishers, Franklin Square. 1875. Pp. 333. 12mo, tinted paper, $1 75.” The book is to be the first of a series of what may be called sacred classics. The second of the series, already printed, is _The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius_; it will be followed by Tertullian and Athanagoras (surely a worse choice as regards style could not be made), both in press. Then, “_should the series be welcomed_, it will be continued with volumes of Augustine, and Cyprian, and Lactantius, and Justin Martyr, and Chrysostom, and others; in number sufficient for a complete college course.” From a notice intended to usher the whole series before the public we learn that “for many centuries, down to what is called the pagan Renaissance, they [the writings of early Christians] were the common linguistic study of educated Christians.” A startling disclosure to us. For the future, pagan classics are to be eliminated. Is it not evident that the industrious editors have taken the clue from us?――at least for a part of their programme; for they push matters too far. But here is the mishap. If we have to judge by the first book, their works will be unavailable, their labor bootless. Dr. Parsons closes his admirable translation of Dante’s _Inferno_ (albeit with a little profanity, which we are willing to forgive, considering the subject and its worth) with those imploring words, _Tantus labor non sit cassus!_ Mr. March will find them at page 155 of his book. He may as well appropriate them to himself, with a little suppression, however; nor should he scruple to alter the text, seeing that he has taken other unwarrantable liberties with the ancient fathers. What right has he to mutilate Prudentius’ beautiful hymn _De Miraculis Christi_, and of thirty-eight stanzas give us only eight, therewith composing, as it were, a hymn of his own, and entitling it _De Nativitate Christi_? Without entering into other damaging details, we assure the projectors of this new enterprise that they have undertaken a faithless job. Catholic teachers cannot adopt their books. For, surely, we are not going to make our youth buy publications which tell us, _e.g._, that the hymn _Stabat Mater_ is “simple Mariolatry,” to say nothing of other notes equally insulting, especially when we come to the historical department. Nor can it be said that they give proof either of knowledge or of taste when they choose Eusebius for the very first sample of patristic classicism. Ah! _sutor, sutor!_