thors which he has selected, there are frequent allusions to ancient manners and customs, ancient instruments and modes of warfare, &c., it seems absolutely necessary that explanatory references and observations should be introduced at the time of translation, in order to render the author intelligible to the scholar. With all due deference to Mr. S., I think this plan would fix instead of interrupting attention, and tend to render the classics " one of the most agreeable branches of study." The fifth rule contains nothing which would not be thought of by almost all instructors of youth.

The five rules are followed by an observation which clearly demonstrates that Hamiltonian tuition, if at all worthy of adoption, is so only in the case of adults, or of very precocions boys. In sooth, as Hamilton designs to give " a knowledge of words," boys need to be taught their own language ou his method, before they engage in the acquisition of any other. Mr. Stevens entertains extravagant no

tions of a boy's power over his native
tongue; which circumstance is attribut-
able to his professed habit of prompting
his pupils. At the part of his narration
which we have reached, Mr. S. thiuks
that "the manner in which the Hamil..
tonian system has been applied, has been
fully explained," an idea respecting his
details which bears witness to his self-
deception. In our scrutiny hitherto,
how many particles of genuine Hamilto.
nianism have been discernible? Preju-
dice blinds Mr. S. to his own discovery
of the impracticability of the innovator's
system. The passively injected brain,
like the passively injected corpse, pre-
sents a very humble imitation of that im-
portant and admirable energy in the ae-
tive subject which diffuses vital power
through the frame. Such methods of
making humanity useful, are impotent
to communicate animation and vigour;
they are useful only as faintly exemplify-
ing the much higher purposes for which
the parts so treated are designed.

We have now advanced with Mr. S. to
that part of his statement where he de-
velops the nature of his parsing lessons.
Having been "favourably impressed with
the intrinsic merits" of the Hamiltonian
system, he does not attach nearly enough
importance to the very material difference
in his mode of using the common plan
(which renders it not the common plan)
and that generally adopted. No person
who is at all acquainted with education,
can wonder that Dr. Morell, or any one
else, should find the pupils of Mr. Stevens
more versed in classical construction than
"the great majority of boys that had
read Nepos, Cæsar and Sallust in the
usual way," when he is told with what
minuteness the Stevensians were con-
stantly exercised in parsing. That "the
usual way" is a very slovenly and super-
ficial one, is seriously to be apprehended;
and this is well accounted for in the ex-
ordium of your article on the London
University. "Tis true, 'tis pity; and
pity 'tis, 'tis true." No one who has
observed the gradual process by which
the intellectual operations, especially of
children, are carried on, by which the
mind, like the body, performs its work
of mastication, deglutition, digestion, se-
cretion,-can hesitate to ascribe Mr. Ste-
vens's success in teaching the classics to
this decomposition, this scrutinizing ana-
lysis of sentences into their parts, and of
single parts into their component parts,
with the discovery of their derivations
and affinities. In this portion of his plan
he is not siugular. He who now writes
was so trained by his highly revered in-

• I must take laudatory notice of Mr. Stevens' use of a Classical Grammar with an English syntax, though I pretend not to an acquaintance with the one which he adopts. According to Mr. S.'s prin ciple of the pupil seeing what he may hear, (which should be applied very cautiously,) it is not only just that the pupil should learn rules in the same language in which the tutor inakes his observations; but it is much more sensible than "the common plan" of repeating by rote, whether with stammering or with glibness, rules that are rarely explained and more rarely understood. May we not also hail with pleasure and with praise the introduction (chiefly, I believe, by Valpy) of English notes to classical authors? Boys find it hard to dissolve and digest Latin notes in addition to a Latin tert, and are in most instances frightened from the task. Hence they often lose scraps of information, interesting, instructive, and necessary, and are debarred from the useful assistance which explanations without literal inter-pretations would give them. But for trauslations, especially those without note or comment, the shop of the cheesemonger is undoubtedly a better receptacle than the hands of the learner. And may not the use of English in classical Annotations, Lexicons, and Grammars, tend much to add dignity to our language, whose study is now an object of ambition among literary men in various parts of the world?

1

:

i

1

standing the efforts of their opponents
to stigmatize them as heretics, we cou-
sider ourselves to be the true worshipers.
The use of these words, therefore, in
their particular connexion, appears to
be apposite, which is all that I am con-
cerned to vindicate; but whilst I admire
the valuable observations of your cor-
respondent on the importance of the
practice of Christian duty, I must still
be allowed to express a difference of
opinion in respect to the proper applica-
tion of the words "true worshipers,"
lest I should appear indifferent to the
great object which the Southern Uni-
tarian Fund Society was instituted to
promote. I am ready to allow that a
considerable number of those who are
called Trinitarians may be considered
"true worshipers," since, although their
creed may be nominally Trinitarian, they
practically sink the adoration of two of
the persons of the Trinity, and, in point
of fact, pay their worship exclusively to
the Supreme Being; but where a Trini-
tarian feels it to be his duty to address
Jesus Christ or the Holy Spirit as ob-
jects of divine worship, and thus trans-
fers to them a part of that homage which
the Deity has declared he "will not
give to another," it does not appear to
me that such a person can be looked
upon by the Unitarian as a "true wor-
shiper." The language of your corre-
spondent would seem to imply that he
considered all as "true worshipers,"
whatever their creed; "our fellow-crea-
tures of every shade and colour," who
are sincere in their worship; but surely
the definition of a "true worshiper"
must embrace the consideration of the
right direction, as well as the sincerity,
of the worship, otherwise Pagan idola-
ters, who doubtless are, many of them,
sincere in their devotion, must be re-
garded as true worshipers, and the dis-
tinction between true and false worship
is abolished. Perhaps the best mode of
forming a correct opinion on the sub-
ject is a reference to the passage in
John iv. 23, in which the words occur,
where it will be found that our Saviour
does not say, and would probably then
have been much surprised to hear the
sentiment expressed, that those who
worship himself or the Holy Spirit are
"true worshipers," but limits the appli-
cation of the words to those who adore
the only proper object of religious
homage: "But the hour cometh, and
now is, when the true worshipers'
shall worship the Father in spirit and in

SIR,

The True Worshipers.

To the Editor.

THE Observations at page 862 of the last volume of your Repository on this expression of E. K.'s, bring to my recollection a splendid passage which occurs in a sermon by Fawcett, on the subject of pure and spiritual worship, and which, as it illustrates in so beautiful a manner the ideas of P. S. R., I make no apology for introducing to the notice of your readers. "The wide theatre of virtuous activity, the ample field of generous labour, which Providence has opened to man, is the grand cathedral of piety: the place, whatever it be, in which prayers are said, in which praises are sung, in which any sort of religious ceremony is performed, is but the porch to this. He who, at whichever of its numerous doors, enters into this temple, is a true worshiper of the Father; whilst he who stops in the porch, whichever of them it be, is no servant of God's, with whatever solemnity he may sit there. The ground, wherever it be, upon which honest goodness relieves the indigent, consoles the dejected, protects the oppressed, defends the defamed, communicates truth, or inculcates virtue; the ground, wherever it be, upon which good is done from a good principle, or upon which impotent pity drops an honest tear, and but wishes to do it, is better consecrated in the eye of Heaven by such transactions, or by such tears, than by all the religious ceremonies that could have been performed upon it. The house of mourning, the hovel of poverty, the prison of despair, when they receive the visit of charity, are temples upon which the Object of worship looks down with more complacency than upon any other temples. The sphere of usefulness is the chief church of man: this is the most 'holy place;' the holy of holies; the most sacred court in the temple of God. Those that minister here are the highest priests, whose office has most sanctity in his sight. Devotedness to society is the truest dedication to God. Generous offices are the noblest sort of religious exercises. He that teaches the sighing 'heart to sing for joy,' awakes the harp which best befits the fingers of devotion. He that tunes this animated instrument; he that raises this holy hymn; he that sends up this sacred music; he is the psalmist that, in the ear of Heaven, excels all others in sweetness. Whoever wipes another's tear, lifts another's head,

Unitarian Chapel, Devonport, Devon- but think deserved encouragement. Not

but if they avail themselves of this pre-
tence to withhold all other aid, our dear
and excellent friend Dr. Thomson would
lament, did he know it, that ever he had
afforded them so plausible a pretext for
lessening the amount of their charity.

Yet, Sir, it has occurred to me in se-
veral instances to be told by rich men
that the Fellowship Fund was formed
for the express purpose of obviating the
necessity of personal applications; and,
when their support of that Fund extended
only to one or at most two pounds, they
have pleaded it as a reason why they
declined giving. I state this fact
with sorrow: but let me subjoin an an-
tidote to the pain it will inflict on your
readers. In one of the towns of De-
vonshire, I was advised to call on some
Trinitarian Calvinists and make known
my want of money to build a Unitarian
Chapel; and expressing my surprise at
the proposal, my friend replied, "They
are often coming to us for money; I
don't see why we should not go to them."
Accordingly, I did obtain money in that
town from zealous Calvinists. Having
stated to one of them why I had called
on him, he at once flatly refused to give
any assistance in building chapels; but
when I added it was for a Unitarian
Meeting - house, "Oh! a Unitarian
Meeting-house; well, then, I'll give you
something. Now if you had been asking
for a Trinitarian Chapel, I would not
have given a sixpence; they are always
teazing us for money; but the Unitarians
are good people; they do a deal of good,
and often help us; so I'll give you some-
thing." This gentleman sent for me
again and doubled the sum. "Sir,"
said I, "I thank you: I value this more
than any other sum I have received: it
is an offering to liberality and Christian
love."

immediately put my paper into my pocket,
and desired that not one word more
should be said that no one ought to
give in charity of this kind what is want-
ed for necessary purposes. I have also
with pleasure added, "I do not doubt
that we shall get all we require, and
would by no means take it from those
who cannot conveniently spare it;" and
we have parted quite as good friends as
if we had stood in the relation of giver
and receiver to one another. I have in
many, very many, instances been gratified
by the respectful and kind reception I
have met with in the applications I have
made. The Unitarian public at large are
liberal, very liberal, often where they are
not wealthy. I have seen much of this
in many instances. They are zealous,
too, when put to their energies, and kind
when sympathy moves them. In the
formation of the Fellowship Funds they
hare adopted a noble institution; they
have created an engine of great power,
and it is effective of great good; but, in
general, not to the extent that it might
be; while it furnishes an excuse for not
giving what, if these Funds did not exist,
could not well be refused. It is not al-
ways considered, as it ought to be, that
this Fund is designed, not to receive the
whole gratuity which rich men have it in
their power to afford to objects of charity
or benevolence, to the cause of Christ
and of God; but rather to receive the
small sums which the middling and lower
classes in our societies are willing to con-
tribute, and which are better collected in
this way than in boxes held at the doors of
the chapels. If the rich intend to make
these Funds the medium of all that be-
nevolence which is connected with their
religious opinions, it becomes them to
look back into former years, to recollect
how much they have contributed on an
average of one year with another, to
consider the increasing spread of the
principles they highly value, and the in-
creasing calls that will, in all probability,
be made on them for their support, and
furnish the Fund with a sum sufficient to
supply these demands. If this were
done and fairly done, there would in-
deed be no need of any personal applica-
tions being made to them in any case of
need: there would be store to furnish
liberally in every want. Our small funds
need not then dole out their charities in
twos and threes, nor our larger ones in
fives and tens of pounds, nor need any of
us travel abroad to ask assistance in
building our chapels or in repairing
them. The rich will of course insert
their names as subscribers to the Funds,

Allow me to suggest, that publishing Reports of our Funds from time to time is an object much to be desired, since it keeps the attention of the subscribers awake, shews them the value of their exertions, and gives even the poorest among them the pleasure of knowing that his mite is not despised. I have been gratified by that which was lately issued by the Committee of the Sheffield Society, in which the subject I have particularly alluded to is set forth in a proper light.

ISRAEL WORSLEY.

P. S. I should add, that the walls of the Devonport Chapel are up and the roof is on; the interior of the work, the flooring and the pews, are preparing by