entertain such a notion

Christianity accords to woman all the rights and privileges, and assigns her all the duties, with which 6he was originally constituted. In social intercourse, her conversation is charming as long as it is becoming to the nativo modesty of her sex. In the place of social prayer and conference she is not prohibited from mingling ber voice with the voices of men, but she ia
required to do it in a way appropriate to her peculiar nature. While a man praying or prophesying should keep his head uncovered, a woman praying or prophesying should keep her head covered. And she should do this to avoid appearing in tlie stylo of men; otherwise she " dishonoreth her head; for that is all one us if .she were shaven. For if the woman lie not covered, let her also be shorn; but if it be a shame for a woman to bo shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed- ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is tlie image and glory of God; but tho woman is tho glory of tho man." And this sign of subordination the woman should wear also, "bccause of the angels;" wbo, as Conybcare explains, uare sent as ministering servants to attend upon Christians, and Are especially present when the church assembles for public worship, and they would be offended by any violation of decency or order." To assume the position and style of men would injure her modesty. But while she may pray and converse upon spiritual things in tho meetings appointed for social worship, she is prohibited from public debate and public discourse. Paul chargcs," Lot the woman loam in silence with all subjection. But I suffer uot a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to bo in silenco." Why ? Was it because he depreciated woman ? By no means. It was because it is contrary to tlie order of nature that she should assumo such offices, and because of her greater deceivableness, and because bo was inspired to prohibit hor from such officcs. "For," says he, MBT Shoes "Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was uot deceived, but the woman bciug deceived was in the transgression." The order of creation assigns her to subjection, and tho characteristics in which sho is different from man unfit her for public teaching. The predominance of the affections and emotions over tho intellect and the will, renders ber liable to be deceived by the processes of her own mind and heart. Hor first impulse was to resist tl»e temptation. But when under the persuasive influence of tlie tempter sd»e " saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the
eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise; she took of tbe fruit thereof and did eat." And her greater liability to be deceived renders woman more liable than man to deccivc others, and therefore to be unsafe either as teacher or ruler. The woman accordingly, doubtless not in malice, but iu her desire that lie should share her new knowledge and experience, u gave unto l»cr husband with her, and he did eat."4 Ho kept U>c law perfectly till deceived by her.
The notion has bcon very persistently advocated in certain quarters, and has gained considerable prevalence, that the teachings of tho apostles on this subject were a mcrt> temporizing expediency, and that if tho age in which they lived had beeu as enlightened as the present, their teachings would have been very different. But is it not evident that to entertain such a notion is to discredit the MBT word of inspiration and thus insult God ? It savors eitlier of great ignorance, or of great craftiness and recklessness, to allege that the apostolic teaching was a noccssary expodiont to cure converted women of their former habits of public teaching and ruling, and was not intended to bo pcrmanont and universally applicable. Paul's prohibition was based on entirely different facts and principles, as has already been pointed out, and is as autboritativo for all women in every generation, as to those of the time and places of his labors.