« VorigeDoorgaan »
not being furnished with inaterials from whence we could form our own opinions, instead of being obliged to take upon trust the assertions and conclusions of Mr. Belshain, I should have thought her frequent visits to the poor, with her conversations and advice; her conduct to her superiors, and her equals; the reasoning powers of her mind; her domestic system of conduct, &c. would have afforded ample scope for Mr. B's. pen, and been much more consistent with the exemplification of the Christian character.
EXTRACTS FROM A PORT-FOLIO.
ATONEMENT. The word atonement is rcconciltation, and not as is commonly and
erroneously supposed, an expiatory sacrifice: that originally it was written and called at one ment, being the opposite of at variance; that reconciliation (as is very obvious) was understood by it, that is, the reconciliation of man to God by means of the Messiah ; that in the lapse of some centuries the pronunciation of the word became corrupted, the three words were united, and a meaning was mistakenly attached to the term, which was much more corrupt than the pronunciation: Upon this subject Dr. Johnson informs us, that atore is derived from “ at one;" as the ety, mologists remark“ to be at one is the same as to be in concord," and this explanation, he says, is remarkably confirmed by Shakespeare's use of the word. Bailey gives the derivation from at one,” and says it implies" to be friends again. Reconciliation, or union, was the signification of the term 'atonement in the reigns of Elizabeth and James the First, as during that period it was so understood and so used by Shakespeare, whose words appear to be decisive on this point !--" He and Aufidius can no inore atone than violentest contrariety.” In another place he says," he seeks to make atonement between the Duke of Gloster and your brother.” In both these instances there can be no doubt that the word is used to express agreement or friendship Shakespeare, it should be remembered, died in 1616, three years after the publication of the present translation of the scriptures, which was begun under royal authority in 1603, and completed in 1613 ; from which it appears that the translators engaged by King James, who were the contemporaries of Shakespeare, adopted the word at the very tiine when it bore the meaning above-mentioned; and at the period when the bard of Warwickshire used it to express that meaning
ON THE DEPRAVITY OF HUMAN POWER. » Who can ever read the fate of Poland, and not heave a sigh for the depravity of power? How long will men, deluded by their stupid prejudices, by their ignorance of the duties they owe to themselves, hire themselves out, the passive instruments of ambitious and wicked chiets? How long will they consent to be the despoilers of their own felicity, by supporting the wretched policy of usurpers and tyrarils? Cannot the massacre of thirty thousand of their fellow creatures at Ismael, the murder of twenty thousand at Prague, the starving a million of souls in Hindostan, to favour a rice contract, the devastation and carnage that follow wars, the misery, and beggars that attend the countries engaged in them; I say, cannot these things point out to man the folly of quitting society, to range him. self under the banners of those who so much abuse the power entrusted in their hands ? Cannot man see, when deluded by the thirst of gain, be VOL. II.
is enslaving his fellow man, the poor wretched African; that those means which are employed to induce him to undertake this shameful and disgraceful traffic, so destructive of his own happiness, may be ultimately turned against himself ? Does he not see, that without his assistance, the vile machinations of courts would be useless ? That it is he that must execute their bloody mandates? And what security has he, that he shall not himself become the victim of that dreadful system of slaughter and robbery, to which he so readily gives his aid and support? Oh, man! poor deluded being ! how long wilt thou neglect thy reason, and thy expę, Tience ? How long wilt thou persevere in imbruing thy hands in the blood of thy fellow man? How long wilt thou forget thyself, and that every human þeing is thy brother ? Happiness, the only end of thy existence, does ngt consist in murder, in sacking of cities and towns, in starving of nations, in collecting from thy fellow-ereatures, whose poverty should claim thy cominiseration, the means that ought to be applied to satisfy the wants of nature ; to pamper the overgrown luxury, and shameful debaucherics of a few worthless individuals, equally careless of thy well-being as of their own ; in cutting the throats of innocent women and children; in dragging thy fellow-creatures, whom nature has made of a different complexion, from bis wife--from his children--frum his parents--from his country=and selling him for yellow earth, to a cruel and avaricious master ; in becoming a spy and informer to a vicious government; or in wars !! But in cultivating thy reason, in consulting thy experience, in cherishing thy fellow-creatures, in administering relief to the needy, in instructing the igrorant, in healing the sick, in thy industry in making the earth bring forth her fruits in due season, and in cultivating the social arts of peace and fraternity amongst thy fellow-creatures : do these things, oh! man, and thou shalt find that serenity and felicity will crown thy daysthat tyrants, finding no one to second their diabolical projects, will relipquish thein, and become of necessity virtuous and useful citizens--that tortures and punishments will vanish from the earth--that truth will become the order of the day--that honesty will be in a state of requisition --that knavery and falsehood will be obliged to emigrate--that the con. vention of justice will pass a decree prohibiting their return--and that Jiberty, smiling liberty, will sound the tocsin of general and universal happiness!! Oh! nations, ye who call yourselves Christians, and men who profess Christianity, and call yourselves Christians, read this mouroful picture of power, and blush.--W. Hodson.
THE WANDERER-A FRAGMENT.
"! DARKNESS now wraps the world in sleep,
"Tis midnight's heavy hour! Or only wretches wake to weep
Misfortune's baleful power. “Dreary and cold the north wind blows,
Like man's ungrateful breath; Here let me mourn iny countless woes,
And court the shades of death. Fit emblem of that dreary night,
'That shuts man's little day: Yo sound the ear, no form the sight, Directs the trackless
« So ends the strife that mortals wage,
So flies their dreary doom;
And midnight of the tomb.'
Oppress'd by gloomy care;
A refuge from despair.
Terrific forms arose :
'Twixt more than mostal foes.
Harmonious swept the lawn,
To hail the smiling mora.
Blaz'd o'er the blooming year ;
DEIGN, fost'ring guardian of my infant days,
to lay a mine in store,
ON THE NEW TESTAMENT.
To the Editor of the Freethinking Christians' Magazine.
others, that the historians of the New Testament do not in all points agree in their accounts. Either the events theinselves are not always related with the same circumstances, or the period of time to which they refer them is different. These discrepances between the several statements have had the harsh term of contradictions bestowed upon them.
Now, in order to see how the matter stands in general, let us represent to ourselves four men, who have lived at a court, undertaking, after the death of the prince, to write the history of his life. Suppose them all honest and impartial persons, determined to relate the truth. Suppose farther, that all four were either eye-witnesses of what they did relate, or have heard it from those that were. Suppose finally, that no one of them has concerted with the rest, but that each for himself sets down the acts and sayings of the prince, just as he recollects to have seen and heard them. What think ye? Will these four historians, though they have all equal capacities, equal strength of memory, a like taste, like dispositions towards the prince, verbally agree? You say, no; that is altogether impossible : and you are in the right. For these four men, with all their pre-supposed equality, remain still as different as all men are from one another--- different at the time of seeing and hearing -different at the time of writing down.
Each saw and heard at the same time otherwise than the other. One stood, for example, close by, the other at some distance. One was at that moment more attentive than the other : for our mental faculties are not always in equal tension, nor can be so. On the one an act or a speech of the prince makes a quite different impression than upon the other. The one found in the transaction this, the other another circumstance important or remarkable. To the one this expression of the prince was striking and surprising, to the other another.