V*
18
Zion’s Landmarks: Wilson, N. C.
oise it everywhere. The gift of
propjiecy \va.s not, as a regular flis-
jj^ensation of the gospel, confined to
men. The only restriction was, that
she “ be covered ” in token of her ac
knowledged subjection, and which
subjection forbids the place (as polpit
or stand) aiS well as tlie w’ork of a
Minister of the gospel. ■ See 1st Cor.
11: 5, 13.
This gift In that day was accom
panied with the power to tell future
eveijis ; wheilier, ever in this day, I
^0 not know. But every sound gift
is not measured to all alike. But
•' the testimony of Jesus is the spirit
V)! prophecy,Rev. 19 : 10. So
every one, man or woman—who hafe
been enabled by divine revelation to
testify of Jesus Christ, has the spirit
>1 prophecy—even that he is their
Saviour.
Some men and women we see have
n to a greater extent than others, and
transcending a mei’e knowhdge of
Jesus Christ as their Savior; and
(bat to the edification, strength, and
romfort of the Church, And may be
exercised in any lawful wa^', wheth
er as at home or abroad ; with the
tongue or pen t and without the shad-
. ow of usurpation or confusion. And
that a sister under the sound of the
gospel in the house of God, in an
swering spirit to the same, testifies
^f®oud to Jesus Christ in praises, &c.,
not that she has infringed that
special silence. Nor could she do so
except as usurping its autlior:ty, or
by a disputatious or enquiring dis
turbance.
AiAtliat th£»Spii’it of ^.sus in any
itbe aVtov
return witness'
sweetly held 1 Jv r- ^
■mmforting, edifyin'g''^ or strengthen
ing assurance, is proof that it is all of
the same Spirit, and that the spirit
of prophecy is subject to prophets.
Otherwise, how dare a woman sing,
or praise, or vote, or even tell her ex-
I'crienoe, or speak at all in Church ?
How dare those women to “ labor in
the gospel ”—not for, hut in the gos-
—^yith Paul? * And others to be
allwl “ fellow-1 ihorers’’ with him?
Phil. 4 : 3. How came Priscilla his
'• helper in Jesus?” Rom. 16 : 3.—
And if women must not teach, in
neither s{>eaking or writing—not even
“to write out their experience”—by
what usurpation of authority and
right did Priscilla take Apollos aside
and ^‘expound to him the way of
God more perfectly?” Acts 18 : 26.
And by v/hat rule were women to lie
teachers of good things ?” Tit 2 : 3.
' every wo-
propliesieth
A'ith her head uncovered dishonoreth
her her head,” if they may not s{>eak
or teach at all in the Church ? Jesus
revealed hlmsidf risen first to woman
and told her to go and declare it to
(he brethren. And they went and
were the first to proclaim a risea Je
sus.
That'a woman should never pre
sume upou the gift ol a public minis-
trv, of- aiiv position in Church as
h:u3. in the regulation of any system,
in any department, and so far from it
tiiat she wa.s there passive or silent
y)mpouent; and that her subjection
ta Gcni ami may be impiUs-l by all
her words and acts, I firmly believe
to be her place and duty.
But the subjection mostly, or per
haps, entirely as direct injunctions,
enjohied by the Apostles upon women
profi-ssing godliness, refers more par
ticularly to private, domestic rela-
tioli- ; and are enforced more strongly
because, however good in themselves,
they imply by their force and figure
that higher parallel .principle of sub
jection as contained in the gospel as of
the Church to Christ as to her own
husband : hence, “ wives be in sub
jection to your own husbands” is no
Church relation refered to at all;
but by it, as a forcible figure’ oiie-
aud none so well as a wife—may see,
and kii(»w, and ftel, her true relative
position, spiritually, to Jesus Christ
—as husband—as head over all
things to his Church. And as such
the Church should be in subjection.
So should a woman, to her own
husband, not only according to God’s
original lavv and order, (which was
itself a figure ot him that was to
come and take the government upon
his shoulder) hut also as unto the
Lord in obedience to the principles
involved in the gospel system regulat
ing the relative positions of Christ
and his Church.
The Apostles so refer to, and enjoin
thus upon women so often, and
strong, because she, in the relation
of wife, is a perfect figure of the
Church in that relationsliip in which
tliey would enjoin silence and subjec
tion, without usurpation of law-mak
ing, or law-’nterfering power; but
receive the law in matter from hi
and 3j|'learn
Why did Paul sav that
man that prayeth or
iaimnfoi Chri
Hence, a woman, by marriage'
compact, professing herself lost or
hid in her own husband, (in a legal
sense) becomes passive as a poster to
dictate in law, or to rule: her own
personal head is covered, that is, her
personal authority is silenml. ‘ Law
makes the stipulation binding but
honorable: and htve makes the bond
age and subjection sweet and willing.
And her great glory is her covering
of head In token of subjection to
her own husband, and her own si
lenced authority; that she may be
seen and known as exalted in her
husband.
And this woman, also professing
godliness—which is to jirofess Christ
as her Spiritual husband in whom
she IS lost—hid—and thus under
standing and respecting the same
prinoip'es, will the more meekly en
ter the Church of the living God and
be in silent subjection to^.rnen, as the
ordained of God to fill this high
place, indicative of law and^rule, and
rmdve its exposition fronf men, as
representing the Head, or law-power
of a system. And Heads must be as
Husbands, and these men. And
here also glory in her covering that
subjects her in silence, and is as her
crown. r(-flecting the image and glory
of God in the fiiee of her husband—
her own legal Head. And thus she
strengthens the figure witli a double
fold. And becomes a living type of
the Church in subjection and obedi
ence to Christ, her Head and Hus
band, ljearinr rule by right* of law
and love. Thiw she learns at hi«
feet.
But for a woman professing godli-
nes.= to assume torule her husband by
a usurpation of his position and of
fice in the domestic .system and house
hold, is to do violence to the princi
ples of the law of God which have es
tablished si securely here as in the
household of Christ:—it is to un
cover and find herself from being hid
in her husband ;—it is to make void
her subjection and silence, or pas
sive law position and hiding in him.
To uncover her own personal head as
law-power (usurped) to rule by her
own Independant authority is to ig
nore and liishonor her own husband.
Which not only does violence to the
law of God regulating the privatq do
mestic compact, but also to the cor
responding principle in tlie gospel
system and regulation, ot which this
is a given figure. To do violence to
the law and principle in one system
implies a violence to it in any and
all. One tlrnt respects them at all,
respects them in all, and that as unto
the Lord, and as set by the .band of
God.
And as a woman must be the rep
resenting figure of this position of si
lent subjection, so it is so often eiv
forced, “ wives be in subjection to
vour own husbands.” A woman
thus violating is a striking figure of
the Church ignoring and dishonoring
Christ in the assumption of her own
independent personal authority to
teach ; which to assume is as to un
cover ones head, and find and pro-
dut’e personal authority, after being
I swallowed up -- silenced — hid — in
by the legal compact of mar-
pation, ignoring and uislionorrng
Turn. And, which involves her orig
inal state and position,wbich is natural
or earthly, and in which interpret,
teach and expound the law of gov
ernment and life. This usurpation
is gross, and in unseemly violence to
the law and order of God, more par
ticularly In that theiwman would as
sume, by the unlawful usurpation, to
fill the place and office of the hus
band; in that the husband must be
Head, and the Head mast rule,
nor be in subjection.
bo we see the silence of the woman
in the Church of God is, according
to the given metaphor, and by what
is implied from the conpling fnjanc-
tions of the Apostles, synonymous
with her subjection to her own hus
band. One implies the other. Vio
lence to one is to violate the other.—-
The principle respected and held sa
cred and inviolable at all, is so re
spected and held everywhere. And
so the Apostle says “ Let the women
learn in silence with all subjection:
But I suffer not a woman to teach,
nor usurp authority over the man,
but to be in silence.”
But that a woman is bound to her
husband so long as he lives, and that
her personal authority is swallowed
up in his, and legally silenced by the
covering; and by which she acknowl
edges her subjection—her husband as
Head in the law or governing depart
ment, is not that she is lost etirely in
every sense, and swallowed up and
silenced in every dt(jartment, nor
must we sjieak, or lie heal'd, or e^^ea,
or known at all. No indeed I But
with the restriction only that she ao-
knowledges by word and deed—in all
thini’^s—her own husband as her le-
gal head and sole authority in law,
or as filling the office' of first and
higher principles of goven>mental
laws, she may in like manner with
himself be seen and heard in all
things of their common life. Noth
ing but this usurpation of higher
power, which includes the other for-
l)idden principles, displaces her.—
Respecting this, she may proclaim'
the system of laws held in his own-
hand, and taught her by him; and
that to his own glory and her com
fort and honor.
So a woman in the Church of God,.
or professing godrme.sa,;»t_^^ile she
may not fill the first position in
Church, or any position iaiplying »■
usurpation ; yet, according to the abil
ity the Lord gives her by a revela
tion of his gospel, she may, in like
manner with the males,.be heard in
any way and anywhere.
Now the question arises— is it a
usurpatioH of authority over men or
to deny subjection to her own hus
band, fiira wontan to write out her
experience of grace? or for her te-
speak or write of the salvation by
Jesus Ciirrst according to the gospel ?
Not according to the scriptures, nor
scriptural examples. David’s repre
sentation was nrt confined to men
when be said, “ come near, all ye that
fear God, and I will tell you, &c.,
Neither did Peter when he said “al
ways 1)© ready to give the reason of
the hope within yon.” Jesus was
too good to woman for that; and
took too much pains to leave them
^s hftnllyjrespmsible. *
TEVien my v pw is tqat a woman'^as \
the'same privileges that men do, ex-
cc|)t as mfringing the above, or as
filling the position "as Head.s of any
sj’stenv in Church, or Church regula
tion or government.
Let’s hear from others.
Affectionately,
E. Anna Philups.,
Ketrbat, Va., November 18,1876,
Elder P, D. Gold:—
i^j^^fepTER my kindest regards to
j desire to ask your |>er-
mission to publisli in the
Lanumarks, the following
explanation:
More th^n five years ago I wrote a
letter to Elder A. J. Cassell, through
Zion’s Landmarks, then edited by
Elder L. I. Bodenhamer. The letter
was jMihlished November 1st, 1870...
The publication of it greatly offended
Elder Cassell. Sometime after it
apiieared in print I met with the
Elder at brother Joseph France’s,
and he asked me to walk with him
he asked me why I had published
him, and told me that I had treated
him worse than he would treat an
African, and said that I .had put him
in the paper and he wanted me to
take him out; ‘•aid that he was hurt
and that many of the brethren were
offended at ray actions—that brother
Charles DeHart was mortally wound
ed at the course J had taken—and
that 1 had done it to place him low
in the estimation of the brethren, &c.
I assured him that I had no inten
tion of injuring his character ; that 1
had written to him merely tlirough