Sidor som bilder

highest interests, but descending also to their minutest concerns, is a proof surely that he thought nothing beneath his notice, which might raise the dignity and add to the beauty of the female character. I should be very unwilling to suppose that their disapprobation arises from his having said, "She that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth." Nor could I presume to suspect, that his injunction of submission to their husbands,-of subordination always, and of silence sometimes, can possibly be the cause of the hostility of any Christian ladies.

Still less would I venture to suppose, that their displeasure is owing to his having recommended "that women should adorn themselves in modest apparel,”nor that they should object to him for his preference of "shamefacedness" to "costly array," of "sobriety" to "broidered hair," of "good works" to "gold and pearls."

It looks as if Saint Paul was of opinion, that the external appearance of women was an indication of the disposition of the mind; and this opinion it is probable made him so earnest in recommending these symbols of internal purity. He doubtless more strongly prohibits certain personal decorations, because they were the insignia of the notoriously unworthy females of his time. And it may be fairly presumed, that he never thought it could be construed into a hardship to be cautioned against wearing the badge of the profession of Lais.

* 1 Tim. ch. ii.

If they are of opinion, that his pointedly suggesting to them the ornaments of a meek and quiet spirit, was at least a superfluous injunction, they will forgive him on the ground that he might not think it unnecessary, even to the most gentle, to "stir up their pure mind by way of remembrance."

It is obvious that he could not possibly entertain any prejudices against a sex, in which he counted so many valuable friends. And let it be seriously observed, that in whatever relates to pious affections, to Christian practice, to disinterested kindness, to zeal and diligence, there was obviously, in Saint Paul's estimation, neither male nor female. For we do not hear more of his affectionate regard for good women, and of his generous testimony to their worth, than we hear of the friendship with the sex of any other character in history? He delights in their praises. "Phebe" is warmly commended for her good offices "to the Saints at Rome," not only as having been an important assistant to the apostle himself, but as "the succourer of many" Christians. "Priscilla" is honourably recorded as "his helper in Christ Jesus," as one who, with her husband, had "for his life laid down their necks." For this he thankfully observes, they are entitled not only to his thanks, but also to "the thanks of all the churches of the Gentiles." He acknowledges that "Mary had bestowed much labour on him and his converts." The name of "Apphia," and that of "Julia," is perpetuated by his affcetionate gratitude. That of "Chloe" stands prominent in his grateful page. "Tryphena and Tryphosa la

boured much in the Lord." To the honour of British ladies be it remembered, that his friend "Claudia" was our country-woman.*

Paul observes that, in the family of Timothy, piety on the female side was hereditary, and he congratulates his friend on the excellent principles of his two maternal relations; and virtually ascribes to these instructres"that from a child he was acquainted with the Scriptures." Others he has named, whose praise is not only in the churches, but whose names are in the book of life.


Are not these testimonies to female excellence from such an eulogist, and in such a cause,

"Above all Greek, above all Roman fame ?"

If it stands recorded on the monument of a noble Englishman, as his highest distinction, that he was friend to Sir Philip Sidney, it stands engraven on a monument more durable than brass, even in the indestructible records of the Book of God, that so many women were the honoured friend of the chiefest apostle of Jesus Christ.

*It any consideration could increase the interest we take in this blessed apostle, it would be the strong presumption, from testimonies recently adduced by a learned, pious, and laborious prelate, that Saint Paul, in all probability, preached the Gospel in Britain, to which country it is conjectured, after the most diligent research, that he returned with the family of Caractacus.

If Saint Paul has been further accused by some persons of being an enemy to the state of marriage, it must be by those who forget to take into the account what a calamitous time, that in which he wrote was for Christians, who forget also his own express declaration, that the suggested suspension of such an union was "good for the present distress." His compassionate mind foresaw the aggravated calamities to which the entrance into this tender connection would, at this particular juncture, involve the persecuted Christians. Is it not absurd to suppose that this zealous apostle of Christ would suggest, as a permanent practice, a measure which must in a few years, if persisted in, inevitably occasion the entire extinction of Christianity itself?

Since, then, it would be derogatory to any, especially of my own sex, to suspect that their objection to Saint Paul can arise from any of these causes, may we not more rationally conjecture, that it proceeds from a prejudice lightly taken up on hearsay evidence—a prejudice propagated without serious inquiry, without having themselves closely examined his writings? Such an examination, to which they are now earnestly invited, would convince them that, to all his exalted qualities, he added, in an eminent degree, urbanity, feeling, and liberality.

But nothing more raises our veneration for Saint Paul's character, than that his extreme sensibility of heart, and his rare delicacy in consulting the feelings of others, to which we have so frequently referred, is never exercised at the expense of his integrity. There are, as we have before observed, many upright minds,

whose honesty is yet somewhat disfigured by a harsh temper. They are too conscientious to censure unjustly, but, knowing the censure to be merited, they have rather a pleasure in inflicting the correction. And though they are not glad the offender deserves it, they are not sorry it is their duty to impart it. Saint Paul never se verely reproved another, that he did not inflict a wound on his own feelings. Yet though he would rather have spared another than himself, he would spare neither when the imperative voice of duty demanded plain dealing. Gentleness of manner in our apostle was the fruit of his piety; the good breeding of some men is a substitute for theirs.

The conduct of Saint Peter and Saint Paul presents at once a striking instance of the integrity of Christian friendship, and of the imperfection of human excellence. Before the apostles met at Antioch, Peter seems to have erred in a material point, not in associating freely with the Gentiles, but in disingenuously shunning their society on the return of his Jewish friends. This fear of human censure, which was not yet entirely extin guished in this great apostle, while it strengthened the prejudices of the Jews, weakened the influence of the other apostles; misled Barnabas "though a good man, and a just;" and not a little alarmed Paul.

This vigilant minister thought the example so fraught with dangerous consequences, that he boldly remonstrated on this act of duplicity,-an act unlike the gen. eral character of Peter, which, except in one awful instance, rather inclined to indiscreet frankness. Paul himself informs us, in his Epistle to the Galatians,


« FöregåendeFortsätt »