Southern Argus. [volume] (Columbus, Miss.) 1834-1842, 1838-07-03
Miscellaneous.
From the Mobile Monitor.
PROFANE LANGUAGE.

IhOFAkNE hAlNOOAUE.
Mr.. Editor win you allow friend
to say a few words respecting the COM
mon use Of profane language, so preva-
lent in the community, that strangers no.
tice it with disgust and speak of it as
ominous of loose morals and extreme
wickedness. A gentleman, making
tour in this State, was asked what he OBJ
served as striking characteristics of the
people! He gave this answer -" Pro-
fame swearing, excessive drinking and
gambling;" and added, 1t is matter of
establishment that nothing is said in any
of your papers against these great evils.
Why are all your presses dumb on these
things! Are you all afraid to speak the
truth 2" This answer and these questions
deserve the attention of every good pan;
and especially of those who have the good
Of society at heart.
In looking over the works of DR.. Bar.
row, in the sixth volume of "Divines of
the Church Of England" find the fol-
lowing pertinent remarks, which are wor-
thy Of an attentive perusal.
",SUearing is very uncivil and unman-
nerly practice. 1t is not only gross
rudeness toward the main body of men,
who Justly reverence the name of God,
and loathe such abuses thereof; not only
an insolent defiance to the common pro-
fession and law of our country, which dis
allows and condemns it /; but is very obi
Gus and offensive to any particular socie-
ty, if at least there be one sober person
therein, who is in anywise concerned tor
Gods honor. No language or behavior
can be more disgustful nothing can more
CRATE the ear or grieve the heart of such
an one, than this kind Of rude talk. To
give him the lie were a compliment, in
i comparison thereto. Wherefore it is a
wonder, that any person, havingin him a
spark of selfrespect, or at all pretending
to good manners, should use profane Ian.
guage.
This practice also derogateth from the
credit of him that useth it, rendering tbe
truth of whatever he says in reason anC
Justice, suspected. For he that is so VoiC
of conscience as to swear vainly, wha
can engage him to speak truly? He tina
is so loose in one such point of obedienc'
to God and reason, why should we credI
him in regard to another.
It can be surely no wrong to distrus
hin, since he implies himself not to be
even in bis own opinion, credible person
since he judges not his own bare afirma
ton to deserve belief. For why, if b
takes his word to BE- competently good
doth he back Il with su.h asseyerations
Why unproyOked, calls he GCdto witness
if he thinks his own honesty sufficient 4
assure the truth Of what Re saws Z AI
4 honest man, methinks, should scorn thu
:, to inValidate his own credit, or to detrac
n from the authority of his word, whicI
should stand firm on itself, and not wan
: an oath to support it.
To excuse this, the swearer must B
forced to confess another ugly fault i
{ speaking; that is impertinence, or usln
Of waste and insignificant Wordsj to 5
= charged wherewith he is indeed hoWeve
: liable. For oaths, as they pass comnol
tly, are mere excrescences Of the speech
4 which do nothing else bus incunher an
3 deformits they enbellish discourse, il;
a. q wen ora scab does bsautifya face
las sp0t0r q patch do adoTn q garrnen'
For q wba purpose ! pray S God