Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1841-03-31

existing
But to your Scripture objections, you
say, now the brother must know that the
Interpretation which he puts upon the
passages he cites, clashes with other
scripture, &c. Now Sir, the brother
knows that the passages he quotes do not
clash with any other scripture, with the
he has given them Now,
brother Murray should understand that
our controversy is not about what females
did, or ought to do when under the mir
aculous influence Of the Holy Ghost; but
what they did, or ought to do under Or
binary circumstances. Yet I am pre-
pared to show that females did not teach,
or possess the gift of teaching, even in the
age of miracles. Now, it is manifest as
the clear sun at noon day, that from the
l1th to the 18th of l Cor. the Apostle is
speaking of the exercises Of the church
under the special influence of the Spirit,
in its diverse operations upon different
members of the same body. The Cor
inthian brethren were converts from gen.
tilism, or idoatry, and had no means of
'instructing or edifying one another, but
by special influences, as they were with.
out law or gospel, this being the Apostles
fist letter to them. See l2h chap. 1st
to 1llh verse. Again see verse 28th,
same chapter, where the Apostle is speak
ing of the order Of these gifts: And God
hath set some in the Church; first Apos-
ties; secondariIy prophets; thirdly teach
ers; after that miracles; then gifts of
healing, &c: are all Apostles; are all
prophets; are all teachers; are all work
ers of miracles &c, from which it ap-
pears that the gift of teaching was not
included in that Of prophesying. Now
presume that brother Murray will admit
that Father Paul, and the Holy Ghost
are quite as good commentators on the
meaning of the word prophecy, as Adam
CLARK. If females, then, possessed only
the gift of prophecy, they did not possess
the qualifications to teach even under in
SEPARATION. There is not the least discrep-
ancy between my exposition of Paul. and
the prophesy Of Joel; for it was only IN
case of inspiration that females were to
prophesy according TO Joel; and l do not
suppose, as full Of the Holy Ghost as
was Father Paul, that he at all intended
to set himself up as dictator over inspired
brethren or sisters, who would speak as
they were moved by the Holy Ghost; to
say when they should speak, or when be
silent. But he is in this letter not only
regulating the manner Of inspired or gifted
persons, but laying down rules for there
future order in the Church under ordinary
circumstances. He speaks therefore, with
authority, Let your women keep silence
IN the churches; for it is not permitted
unto them to speak, SC. Mark the word
'churches,' plural; the rule, or prohibition
is not designed for the particular church
to which this letter was probably sent
but as standing rule for all the churches
Brother Murray seems to think bis
quotation from Adam Clark, on Cor.
IA: 81, nearly or quite settles the contro-
versy. But in my judgment Clark dis.
plays an almost objectionable ignorance
on the passage, for man of his acknowl-
edged attainments as a commentator on
the Bible. He says, in reference to this
passage, that it was a Jewish ordinance,
that women were not permitted to teach
in the assemblies, or even ask questions
This says he, was their condition till the
time of the Gospel, when according to
the prediction of Joel, the spirit of God
was to be poured out upon the women as
we'll as the men, that they might prophe-
sy;" that is, teach. Now, it is passing
strange that man of A. CIark's discern
ment, should have made so egregious
blunder for if the word pro2hesy when
applied to females means to teach, then
were these female teachers, approved and
sent by God: and also approved by the
Jewish Church. throughout its whole Pc
ried from the days of Moses when Mir
riam manifested tothe coming of Chris