tion which pleases us, how soon is our pleasure alloyed by discovering some defective morality, some hidden licentiousness, or at least some artificial sentiment, which proves that they have drawn their ideas from that source which is tainted by the foul admixtures of superstition, instead of from that well-spring of life which, under the influence of a pure religion, springs up in every bosom! Compare the elevated and noble works of Mrs. Hannah More with the qualified morality, the affected feeling, the longdrawn-out sentiments of Madame Genlis; though I believe both to be women of great talents and sincere piety. It is the difference of the religions that has raised one to such an eminence above the other. Compare the brilliant imagination, the warm feelings, the conversational accomplishments of Madame de Staël, with the similar qualities of our first female poet, Mrs. Barbauld. What has given to the productions of the latter their irresistible force, their universal interest? Surely, the spirit of pure and simple devotion which breathes through every line. For genius, Madame de Staël stands pre-eminent, for goodness of heart scarcely less so; but our countrywoman has been taught to fix her standard higher, and has consequently made the greatest advances. Many have feared that we are losing the simplicity and purity of our manners, by intercourse with the continent; but I do not fear. As long as our women, and such women, live and write under the influence of a pure religion, we are safe; and I would rather hope that truth is making sure, though slow advances, and that a simple belief and pure morality will in time take place of the superstitions and corruptions now prevalent in the countries of which I have been speaking. The first work which claims our attention on the subject of which I am treating is Mrs. More's Practical Piety, a production which, though I believe it has been much read, is not in general sufficiently studied. I do not entirely approve the whole work, or perhaps even the whole of any one chapter; some doctrines are inculcated which are repugnant to my reason, some subjects are refined upon more than is necessary; but the way in which holy truths are made evident, and carried home to every one's bosom, renders the work truly valuable. In the chapter on "Periodical Religion" some forcible remarks occur on a subject highly important, but on which it is most convenient for the world in general to entertain ideas totally opposite to those of Mrs. More, viz. religious conversation. How strange does it appear that the object for which we were brought into the world, the object which ought to engage our principal, not to say our whole attention, should be kept entirely out of sight in our intercourse with one another! How strange it is that countless millions of beings, created for the same ends, endowed with the same powers, enjoying in a great degree the same facilities and privileges, with a reward great beyond conception placed within the reach of each and all, with a punishment too dreadful for the imagination to comprehend, set before them, which they are all in danger of incurring without the strictest vigilance, should pass through life in constant communication with each other, should experience its vicissi tudes and uncertainties, should ap proach its boundary, should be summoned to the last tribunal, without having held communion together concerning their best interests! While they experience the instability of every thing earthly, while they sicken at and become weary of the best enjoyments the world can give, they leave the glorious hopes, the awful threatenings, the thousand interesting objects of the gospel, to be unheard of, disregarded, and I fear I must say too often unfelt; for surely those who feel the hourly influence of religion in their conduct, who make it the delight of their thoughts, cannot for ever banish it from their conversation, cannot prevent "the mouth" from giving utterance to the "abundance of the heart." I am aware of and can make allowance for the sacredness of the feelings on this holy subject, but I must believe that those feelings are indulged too far, which would lead us to forget religion, or to encourage the forgetfulness of it in others. I by no means advocate the practice of lightly bringing forward subjects of religious discussion in mixed company; but there is a seriousness of deportment, a tone of mind, of manners and of conversation, which at once distinguish the religious man, and which I should wish to see generally esteemed and practised. I cannot render a more acceptable service to my readers than by extracting a passage on this subject from the chapter before us, and by directing their attention to a chapter on the "Introduction of Religious Conversation in mixed Company." If we really believe that it is the design of Christianity to raise us to a participation of the Divine Nature, the slightest reflection on this elevation of our character would lead us to maintain its dignity in the ordinary intercourse of life. We should not so much inquire whether we are transgressing any actual prohibition, whether any standing law is pointed against us, as whether we are supporting the dignity of the Christian character; whether we are acting suitably to our profession; whether more exactness in the common occur. rences of the day, more correctness in our conversation, would not be such evidences of our religion as, by being obvious and intelligible, might not almost insensibly produce important effects. "The most insignificant people must not undervalue, through indolence or selfishness, their own influence. Most persons have a little circle of which they are a sort of centre. Its smallness may lessen their quantity of good, but does not diminish the duty of using that little influence wisely. Where is the human being so inconsiderable but that he may in some shape benefit others, either by calling their virtues into exercise, or by setting them an example of virtue himself? "But we are humble just in the wrong place. When the exhibition of our talents or splendid qualities is in question, we are not backward in the display. When a little self-denial is to be exercised, when a little good might be effected by our example, by our discreet management in company, by giving a better turn to conversation, then at once we grow wickedly modest-Such an insignificant creature as I am can do no good. Had I a higher rank or brighter talents, then, indeed, my influence might be exerted to some purpose.' Thus under the mask of diffidence we justify our indolence, and let slip those lesser occasions of promoting religion which if we all improved, how much might the condition of society be raised!"-"The hackneyed interrogation, 'What! must we be always talking about religion?' must have the hackneyed answer, Far from it. Talking about religion is not being religious. But we may bring the spirit of religion into company, and keep it in perpetual operation, when we do not professedly make it our subject. We may be constantly advancing its interests, we may be giving an example of candour, of moderation, of humility, of forbearance. We may employ our influence by correcting falsehood, by checking levity, by discouraging calumny,by vindicating misrepresented merit, by countenancing every thing which has a good tendency,-in short, by throwing our whole weight, be it great or small, into the right scale."-Practical Piety, Vol. I. Chap. iv. The chapter on Prayer is a highly valuable summary of the reasons for the practice of this important duty, and of the answers to the most common objections against it. I will not injure this dissertation by extracting any part where the whole is so connected together, but will content myself with recommending this and the following chapter to the serious consideration of my readers. Greatly, indeed, are we indebted to the author of the work before us. It contains rules for the government of the Christian in his conduct towards God, his fellow-creatures and himself. Many may deem the duties inculcated too severe, the observances too strict, the threatenings too urgent, the promises too difficult of attainment; but let such consider the paramount importance of the object in view; let them admire and be grateful for the benevolent earnestness of one who, having so far pressed forward toward that standard which she has not displaced from its divine elevation, endeavours to lend a helping hand to those who desire to advance, and to awaken those who slumber in a fearful indifference to eternal things. It is true, she has drawn a faithful picture of the difficulties, the temptations and dangers of the followers of Christ, but let those who are discouraged refer to her picture of the death-bed of a Christian; let them declare if all the privations and anxieties which can be endured in a life of a few short years, may not willingly be undergone to secure the peace and tranquillity, nay, more, the hope and joy which she describes as being the portion of the good man, even on the bed of pain, of sickness and of death. Who would not resign the world and its fleeting pleasures, for an immortal inheritance, and for such a transition to it as is here described? "The power of distinguishing objects increases with our approach to them. The Christian feels that he is entering on a state where every care will cease, every fear vanish, every desire be fulfilled, every sin be done away, every grace perfected. Where there will be no more temptations to resist, no more passions to subdue, no more insensibility to mercies, no more deadness in service, no more wandering in prayer, no more sorrows to be felt for himself, nor tears to be shed for others. He is going where his devotion will be without languor, his love without alloy, his doubts certainty, his expectation enjoyment, his hope fruition. All will be perfect, for God will be all in all." "From God he knows that he shall derive immediately all his happiness. It will no longer pass through any of those channels which now sully its purity. It will be offered him through no second cause which may fail, no intermediate agent which may deceive, no uncertain medium which may disappoint. The felicity is not only certain, but perfect; not only perfect, but eternal."-" As he approaches the land of realities, the shadows of this earth cease to interest or mislead him. The films are removed from his eyes. Objects are stripped of their false lustre. Nothing that is really little, any longer looks great. The mists of vanity are dispersed. Every thing which is to have an end appears small, appears nothing. Eternal things assume their proper magnitude-for he beholds them in the true point of vision. He has ceased to lean on the world, for he has found it both a reed and a spear; it has failed, and it has pierced him. He leans not on himself, for he has long known his weakness. He leans not on his virtues, for they can do nothing for him. Had he no better refuge, he feels that his sun would set in darkness, his life close in despair."-"But he knows in whom he has trusted, and therefore knows not what he should fear. He looks upwards with holy but humble confidence to that great Shepherd, who, having long since conducted him into green pastures, having by his rod corrected and by his staff supported him, will, he humbly trusts, guide him through the dark valley of the shadow of death, and safely conduct him to the peaceful realms of everlasting rest."-Practical Piety, Vol. II. Chap. xxi. This work has often been objected to by those of different religious opinions from Mrs. More, on account of its doctrines, but this appears to me highly unreasonable. I differ nearly as much from the author, with respect to religious belief, as one Protestant can from another; but I find nothing really offensive to my feelings in comparison with those portions which excite my high admiration. There are opinions grounded on a belief in the doctrines of the atonement, of original sin, of the pre-existence of our Saviour, and some others; but these may be either omitted, or made to rest on another foundation. At all events, it appears highly unreasonable and absurd to decline receiving instruction from a work, because some parts do not accord with our opinions. The other works of Mrs. More do not come under the description of those which I propose at present to consider, and are in the main points so similar in design and execution, that it will be unnecessary for me to observe more than that they all deserve a serious perusal, and that from the effects which they have already produced, much benefit may be anticipated from the further diffusion of them. I propose in my next article to offer some remarks on the productions of other authors of the same class. DISCIPULUS. BBG to submit the following propositions to the readers of the Repository, which I intend successively to discuss. My object is merely to attract the public attention to the views I entertain, and shall therefore content myself with the outlines of the evidence which can be adduced in their support. 1. Such was the genius of Heathenism, that its votaries, as soon as they had heard of, and had reason to believe, the miracles of Christ, were unavoidably led to consider him as a God. 2. The Pagan philosophers accounted for the miracles and resurrection of our Saviour, by the supposition that he was a supernatural being; in other words, they adopted the doctrine of his divinity to set aside the claims of his gospel. 3. Certain leading men in Judea and other countries, finding all open and avowed hostility to the gospel unavailing to check its progress, pretended to become its friends and teachers; and thus formed an artful scheme to sink it in Heathenism on one hand, and Judaism on the other, making the divinity and supernatural birth of the Saviour a fundamental principle in the new system. Their system being adapted to prejudices both of the Jews and Gentiles, and favouring the worst passions of the human heart, mightily prevailed in direct opposition to the authority and efforts of the apostles; and its introduction into the several churches founded by Paul, proved the principal means in the hands of Providence to call forth the apostolic epistles. 4. The rapid immersion of the gospel in Jewish and Pagan superstition, led Philo and Josephus to separate it from this unnatural alloy. They, therefore, under those names in which they had been accustomed to speak of the religion of Moses and the prophets, held forth the religion of Jesus as a sublime and pure system of morals, calculated to enlighten and reform the world; while, at the same time, they pass by Jesus himself unnoticed on all occasions, and that with no other view than to impress on the minds of men in distant clines and in future ages, the certain con clusion that his divinity, supernatural birth, and other doctrines connected with his death, and represented by many as essential to Christianity, in reality formed no part of that divine system, but were altogether foreign to it. 5. The miraculous conception is a fiction of those impostors who sought to sink Christianity in Heathenism, in order to bolster up the doctrine of our Lord's divinity, and to assimilate with more plausibility his history with the fables of Hercules, Perseus and other sons of Jupiter. 6. Our Divine Master foresaw the prevalence of his divinity and miraculous birth as the means of corrupting his religion; and he directed the historians of his life to record facts which, when investigated and ascertained, would infallibly prove them to be falsehoods, contradicted by himself and his apostles. 7. A Jew, stigmatised as an impostor by Josephus, composed a gospel, called the Gospel of the Birth of Mary; while certain Egyptian priests, his associates in iniquity, composed the Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus. From the former, about the beginning of the second century, were taken, after certain modifications, the contents of the first two chapters ascribed to Luke. About the same time the introductory chapters in Matthew were copied from the Gospel of the Infancy. The original spurious gospels were then kept secret for above three hundred years, when, at length, Jerome translated and published them as the genuine compositions of Matthew. I would now proceed to the first proposition stated above; but I will defer the discussion to my next letter, as I here wish to add what I have left unsaid in my last answer to Dr. Smith (pp. 350-354). Peter has the following passage: "Wherefore, beloved, since you look for these things earnestly, endeavour to be found by him in peace without spots and without blemishes; and consider the long delay of our Lord as intended for your salvation as our beloved brother Paul, according to the learning which is given to him, speaking in his Epistle to you, as indeed he does in all his Epistles, concerning these things, among which things some are hard to be understood, and these the uninformed and unstable wrest, as they also do the other scriptures, to their own destruction. Being then forewarned, beloved, be on your uard, lest you be led astray by the deception of these impious men, and all from the firm foundation of your faith." 2 Peter iii. 14. In this passage Peter alludes to the disputed verse in the Philippians. This will appear evident if we compare the words of the two apostles as they stand in the original. They both warn their readers against certain impostors who claimed, as versed in the Heathen philosophy, superior wisdom, while, in reality, they were uninformed; that is, however wise in their own esteem or in a worldly sense, they were themselves ignorant of that gospel which they pretended to teach to others. Paul says that they gloried in their shame. Peter calls them abop, lawless violators of all law, human and divine. Paul again says of them, w TO TEλos aπwheid, which carries an allusion to their lofty pretensions as the saviours of others, asserting that their end will be their own destruction. Peter understood this precisely, and he expresses the contrast more fully, προς την ίδιαν αυτων απωλειαν, “ to their own peculiar destruction." From the passage in the Philippians it appears, that the deceivers endeavoured, and too successfully endeavoured, to withdraw the converts from the pattern of virtue and truth exemplified in Jesus. Paul is eloquent and earnest in defeat ing their end in this respect; and the same purpose Peter has in view when he says, "Being then forewarned, beloved, be on your guard lest you be misled by the deception of impious men." It was the advice of Paul that the converts should be αμεμπτοι και AkεpaιOI TEKYA @ev aμwμnta. Phil. ii. 15. Peter had these words of Paul in his memory, and virtually repeats them; σTodaσate actiñoi nai auμNTOI AUTã EuρEOña y spy, in peace, which last words Paul expresses by xwpis oprys kai diaλoyoμãy," without anger and wranglings." Farther, Peter holds forth his brother Paul as having "wisdom," or, as the term might be rendered, "learning," learning peculiar to himself, or learning in which the other apostles had no share. Now I have shewn that in the letter to the Philippians, Paul does actually allude to the cele brated Ode of Aristotle, on Virtue ; and the peculiar terms which Paul has copied from that source, constitutes the obscurity of which Peter complains. This last apostle was doubtless unacquainted with the writings of Aristotle; and hence the language of Paul must have contained on this occasion something that appeared to him difficult to be understood. There is no other passage in the writings of Paul, respecting which the apostle Peter could have made the same remark with equal propriety. Now it is certain that the men whom Paul and Peter here have in view, did pretend to teach the divinity of Christ. The impostors availed themselves of the borrowed language of Paul on this occasion, and when addressing persons who had not an opportunity to know the truth, they produced and interpreted his words as inculcating that doctrine. The "orthodox" divines have ever done the same thing, though without the guilt of those Gnostics who set them the example; and we have the authority of Peter for saying, that in doing this they wrest the language of the apostle, that is, violently pervert it to support a doctrine which it was intended to refute. It is a remarkable fact, that Peter in the above passage recognizes the Epistle to the Hebrews as the composition of Paul. The former addressed his two Epistles to the Hebrew believers, most of whom were dispersed in Heathen countries. These were the men for whose use Paul composed his Epistle to the Hebrews, and it seems they were all in possession of this Epistle, and knew it to be the work of Paul, when Peter addressed to them his two letters. I mention this because Mr. Belsham, in his great and most valuable Commentary on the Epistles, now happily before the public, denies its authenticity; following chiefly the authority of Origen, of whom, notwithstanding his voluminous works, as Erasmus has observed, we know little but that he was always in the wrong. I SIR, JOHN JONES. HAVE as strong a disapprobation as your correspondent S. C., (pp. 459-464,) of prosecutions against |