I am decidedly of the same opinion with Mrs. More, against those who recommend that christianity should not be taught to children. Many argue that the scriptures ought not to be a school book. I think otherwise. The objection, that familiarity with so sacred a book produceth future neglect and contempt, is not well founded. I know the contrary to be true. When children become men and go into the world, they are not likely to make that book a study. By reading it early, the historical part, and the miracles, make an impression never to be obliterated. It is there we have the most ancient theory of the earth, and the most authentic history of the primeval state of the world; there is contained the most perfect system of ethics, the purest legislation, the most rational induction of natural religion, an exemplification of the ways of God with man, and the words of eternal life revealed. But I certainly would not, like her, teach a child any part of what is called the " system." The distinguishing characteristics of establishments and sects, will be learned in manhood; a catholic way of worshipping God, and "serving him only," inculcating charity to all men, constantly dwelling on the "great and first, the new commandment," is most rational, intelligible, scriptural, and superlatively useful. Of system, it will be enough to teach the catechism of the church of England, than which I know no compend more rational and excellent, and so free from system. I totally disagree with her, however, that the "

youth or

66

young lady should be taught to hug prejudices, " rather than acquire that versatile, accommodating citizenship of the world, by which he may be an infidel at Paris, a papist at Rome, "and a mussulman at Cairo." To overcome prejudices is an hard and difficult study; and of whatever application and diligence Mrs. More may have been capable, or have employed to enable her to produce the work, with or without the aid of others, which goes by her name, it will not be uncharitable to say, that she has not yet studied at the feet of Jesus, that there is more system and "nasty heresy," than of the "new command"ment" in her religion, that she is rather influenced by the "pride of human wisdom," than led by affection to be "early at the tomb." Of the versatility she describes, there have been but few instances of individuals in the world; and he who cannot worship God at Paris, Rome, or Cairo, will but coldly worship him in London. The writer of this blesseth God that if he has learned but little, he has, however, learned this, and he dares avow it, that he has long since overcome all prejudice, nay even against non-descript bigotry, that he could and would worship God in Notre Dame, St. Peters, or while the grand Mufti of Cairo was officiating in the house of Rimnon, or even in H. More's non-descript meeting, with the same fervency as in St. Pauls. Is he "the "God of the Jews and not of the Gentiles also." But for all this, I respect order, decency, liberality, true piety, establishment, and good government,

which with might and main I will ever defend. Invective is no argument. At Paris there are many as good christians as at London; and I must repeat it again, that Mrs. More's religion is bigotry, likely to do more mischief than good to the world; and did I absolutely believe her to be the author of the work I am now considering, I should be provoked to say, that she is less pious than knavish. She seems to possess that spirit of bigotry, which in all ages detracted from the amiableness and liberality of the priestly character, which taught man to hate man, and produced so much evil in Europe, & lately so much misery in France. I allow no doctrine that circumscribes the mercies of God; there is no method of gaining eternal life but by "doing justice, loving mercy, and walk

ing humbly with him," and the belief and practice of this rule supersedeth the excellence of every form or scheme sanctioned by ukases, decrees of Popes, councils even œcumenical, or by parliaments themselves, however omnipotent, because it is the word of God himself. "Miss Moon !" I yow, though you have had a pair of good black rolling eyes, and I love black eyes, I would rather, cæteris paribus, supposing Lady Mac Sarcasm buried, marry a brunette, a Mussulwoman from Cairo than you; because we could together adore the same God, the God that made the "heavens "and the earth," "in various style and strains "unmeditated;" who made the people of all nations, the revolutionary Parisians, and the Nondescripts; and we should love one another too, shewing no wish to prevent others from being

happy here and hereafter; believing, as we would, that God is "verily no respecter of persons; but "that in every nation he that feareth him, and

worketh righteousness, is accepted of him."

An infidel at Paris! Hannah! here you was not half cunning, and versatility and craft are the predominant features in your character. Such phrases ought not to have disgraced your pages! Did you not foresee that there would, and must be "friendship and amity" between our King and the Chief Consul of the "Infidels?" Have not our brave soldiers, and several "fine fellows" from off my estate among them, fought in the same cause, and under the same banner, with the Turkish infidels; and did not you know that there are treaties of" friendship and alliance" between the Defender of the Faith and the Defender of the Infidels, and of the false Prophet? Surely you have lost all your prudence and discretion, for which you are remarkable! You are a bad subject I am afraid; I do not mean to his Majesty, or to Mr. Pitt. I should be glad to reclaim you from your non-descript ways; and I am of opinion, were we acquainted, I might do something, though I fear you are too old to mend. Lady Mac Sarcasm shall, however, I am determined, soon wait on you, and we shall become acquainted; and as you are something of a virago, as I perceive from your own and other books, I expect you will reason unlike " other women," without insisting "it is so because it is," but dialetically; and if I shall be happy enough to get you to " recant your

M

"wicked errors," and be "restored and recon

ciled," according to the canon, there will be much joy on the recovery of a " stray sheep."

We are assured (p. 275) that it is reasonable "we should in christianity, as in arts and sciences, "or languages, begin with the beginning, set out "with the simple elements, and thus go on to "perfection." Though, for the reasons I have already given, my opinion is, that children should from infancy be taught religious duties, yet I do not hesitate to say, that the lady and her doctor, whoever he be, are mistaken, when they say

Christianity is a science." A knowledge of natural religion, if it has not descended from Adam, may be attained by investigation and reasoning; but in christianity there is no induction, otherwise there was no necessity for a Messiah. The great teacher of christianity never begins with first principles, runs into no abstraction or metaphysical disquisitions. The sermons of Jesus, in no instance, resemble a gradual progress, advancing step by step till a regular series of conclusions is established. Many of his discourses, in the fragments of them which have been preserved, begin with a redoubled verily, not only importing the consequence and utility of the doctrine he is about to deliver, but principally the infallible knowledge he had of it. His discourses were all occasional, generally consisting of precepts and aphorisms, as rules of conduct, having all a singular aptitude to existing circumstances, and the capacity of those to whom they were