Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1826-11-02

"ChrlStlanity may De denned II he love aiiu
service of God gas taught by Jesus Christ. -
The remarks of the author are: "Ihe phrase,
ssthe love and service of Cod makes Cop the De-
ing who loves, and GoDthe being who serves;
that is TO say, Jesus Christ taught GoD how 10
worship man''!!!!!! "Thus see, Che adds,) thae
this de6Hition, penned in bitterness agains. ms
reduces God to man, eleyates man 10 ,'ou'
and distinguishes C. 'as ph"osoPner anu 20.
uine''t!,!!! Now, Messrs. Editors, TO what out
the low state Of pathological knowieoge, IS y -
be ascribed, that, the writer OF such crl'ie's''
as that. here noticed, should be publicly auded,
as being far superior to Lindley Murray, as
writer upon English Grammar
Christianity may be defined me fooe ana ser
nice of God. need not offer many authorlues
in support Of this manner OF using the prePosi-
ton, OF; for every person, In 'he ieas' oes'e1 :
yersed in literature, knows, that no moae o.
sneech is better established It's manner OF
construction, which obtains in the hofned Ian.
puapes. as we'll as in the English. "A learned
writer. upon classical literature, whilst wr'tlng
mon this identical construction, observes; that
when the noui substantive, in the geniuve, Gas
Cod is in the condemned sentence) signifies
nerson. the noun may be taken either In an dc-
tire or Dassive senses thus .4mor Del, the love OF
Cod. either means the iove of God to ms,or orr
love towards him SO caritas pairs sgnitles eth
er. the affection of Father TO his children, or
theiys 10 him. "But often the substantive can
only be taken either in an active, or In passive
sense; thus, 1imor Del, always implies. Deus
time tar; and proyidentia Del, Deus provldet .
In like manner, "God," in the sentence under
consideration, is represented as the passive OBJ
iect Of the love and service OF men; as the being
TO ,ohom love and service are due the manner OF
rendering ,ohich, is taught by Jesus Christ Hav-
ing, bv authorities, established the construction
condemned BY Mr. Brown, let us for moment,
INQUIRE into what some call the philosophy Of
language. But that we may not lose sight Of
the text, repeat, Language is the principle
vehicle of thought" l ask Mr.. Brown, what part
of speech is this particle, Of go! it is prepo-
sition Very well; But what is the office or use
of pre- position? For, il is said, swords are the
counters Of a0iSe men, but the money, OF Jools: q
my favorite Dir. Johnson says, words are The
daughters, Of earth but things the sons OF He'd
zen % Let us, then,fo the present, SO In search
of some of these sons Of ReaUen for what, OBJ
tains in this case, is the reverse OF what obtains
among the real sons and daughters OF earth, that
the former, are more desirable, than the latter.
"Well then, proposition is used TO show the
relation between words, or things signlhed by
words So far so good; but what is meant by
relation9 And what particular relation is slgni-
fed by of? would fain wait for an answer from
Mr.. Brown, or his admirers, to these last ques-
lions 1t would, at once, put into our posses
sior some ofthese sons of Heaven, that have, SO
long, ands successfully, eluded the mistaken
search Of other philosophers besides Mr. Brown.
But. as nv present design forblds my walt
ing for the desired Information, from the
source alluded to, will proceed to amuse the
curious. with the speculations and accounts oil
ADLER men, of learned men, and acknowledged 'phi
LospDhers" DR.. Smith, the author OF the wealth
of nations, has spent many very ingenious
thoughts upon this proposition, In his "consi-
derations concerning the hrst formation oil
languages" And the learned and Justly cele-
braled author of the "Derversions of Purley,'
has taken much pains TO find out the birth place
and genealogy Of this willy daughter OF earth;
and has been, in my humble opinion, completely
successful; and whether we are now, TO consider
this proposition as a son of hedUen, or as
DAUGHTER Of earth coke has satisfactorily
proved, that it is, indeed, the "o0spring" OF the
Saxons. These two writer's upon language,
tho both are exceeding able and ingenious, pro-
coed uponprint ples somewhat different, at least,
in treating Of the indeclinable parts of speee h.
DR.. Smlth thinks, that propositions were OF
comparatively late invention, and not resorted,
to, until the first makers Of language had made
considerable advancement, not only in language,
but also in metaphysics. He says, That a pre-
position is general word, & from the beginning
expresses relation, and nothing but relation
"Bu, before men could institute word which
signi6ed relation, and nothing but relation,
they must have been able, in some degree, TO
consider this relation abstractedly from the re
lated objects, since the idea Of those Objects does
not, in any respect, enter into the sgnhcataon OF
the preposition.' The relations Of things, he
thinks, are exceedingly metaphysical things;
therefore, the invention of propositions, to ex-
press these relations, must have required con-
siderable degree Of abstraction and generaza-
ton. "Mankind, therefore, in the first forma
ton of languages, seems to have esaded the ne
cessity of this difficult invention, by varying the
termination of the names of things" The dit
ferent cases in the ancient languages is contri-
vance of this kind. The genitive and dative
cases in the Greek and Latin languages, supply
the place of the propositions and by variation
in the noun substantive, that stands Tor the COR
relative term pxDress the relation which sub