Rutland herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1823-1847, 1843-01-24

"eNcrti "a a single instance" never found obe
instance. Do, does THIS provo that ihere is no tres
pass tic hospitality Of ministers Is II not raih-
ef reason why their hospitality should not be sin
ned against A. to the impulaiion OF concealng
my real motives. shall only replv n he who saws
this knows that he truth well II rot he has
hazarded wrong "opinion." Perhaps the Re
viewer would like 10 know something more Of the
character of"lTospitalitas." He is man whoio
his travels never calls upon strangers for entertain
men not generally his acquaintance If he can
fnd inn. lie provides cor himself, because a
private family may be SICK or company may not be |
convenient, tho hour may be unreasonable, or It
may cos, the family more to entertain him than his
bill would amount 10 at inn, and II neither Of
these inconyenienoes should h7gpan, il looks SO
much IKE grucgiug his psn osexpense Of his \
own entertainment, that he prefers with Henrv, to
be thankful for the inn, Having provided iinselfl
with entertainment, "IIospilaliias" sometimes calls
on a stranger acquaintance, and can Hen accep,
OF offered hospitality, not, seems best. BulI
he likes 10 put hnseC upon the hospitality Of
strangers, or acquantan,e and he has the impress
sion that his course is not only more scrpura but
makes the ministry more respectable IN the esteem
OF worldly men. Many good men, he could name,
have adopted the same rule and think II sanctioned
by the Gospel. Blu, if stranger thinks Otherwise,
and calls on me, will do unto him, | would
not that he should do unto me. But IL is left still
question in the court of conscience, whether we
are in duty bound TO receive any travellers who in
tlude themselves facern-t0ise upon Us. Hospitality
refused may subject US to the imputation OF "copt
ousness" but the intruder may be liable to the same
imputarion. If the host should not receive CUES,
when n ither necessity, nor charity obliges him,
where doe, the sin lie An offence supposes an
/ offender. Were | not Hospitality received in the
case supposed, would at least divide the blame
ami take half to myself But 1 am charged with
violating the golden rule in Math 18TH, and as at
is presumed" been guilty of great sin-even
a sin 'Gor which his brethren in the ministry, if he
is one of their number, should call him TO account
! an cause him 10 mako his confession public as
/ his sin. 1t is an outrage upon christian principles
which ought not to pass unrebuked" These are high
sounding charges, and their author has committed
the sin by condemning somebody untried and
| unheard On the whole if the Reviewer looked over
these smart paragraphs after they got cold 1t Is
"presumed" that he felt constrained himself to re-
gard them 'ebullition" either of pure passion,
or pure nonsense! The offences specified in my
article are public and sin before all is to be rebu3ed
openly. Therefore the rule in Matthew, does not
apply to the case Bu, let how far haste has
since, the n Y. Evangelist, with minister for an
Editor. severely condemned certain clerical man
ners and habits stating that fashionable people in a
city, who opened their houses al, the anniversaries
, were di, pleased by certain of their guests splitting
on the carpets, placing their feet mahogany
chairs using them two legs instead of four, and
perhaps deforming costly table cloths by making
; rings on them with or coffee cups. The editor
was no, called up for henious sin, bu, his article
hit those concerned, who were silent, and Others
had no personal interest in the matter. A few months
. ago, some minister, publicly complained, in The
, Vermont Chronicle, that no found tobacco quds II
his pulpit, and reprimande1 those concerned. Dit
he observe the private rule OF Msth loih or has M
a been called up for public censure But the Edi
tors of the Chroncle, recently said some hare
. things about certain minister from New lamp
shire, travelling in this State. have not heard 0
their being put trial for this sin. II IS hoped
in view Of such precedeu,s that "A Lover o
HOSPITALITY" will be so far also lover Of mercy
q not to single out "Hospitaitas" alone for extrem
O penance lie has called no names, and he has toll
n some truth; let those whom il concerns have the ben
eft But if his statements and arguments are al
q baseless, then nobody take the application
!, Tie oniy hesitation had in touching the subject
the former article occssioned 10y the fear TIA
n some would misunderstood the object. mere IS
certain class OF men so sensitive and prone suspeC
20 that they are intended when any thing is said io
the benefit OF others TINT they Become exri'ed viii
r out cause. la writer presumes to expose the g
A. rofs of certain Evangelisis, some good men M
IN looking at the two sides OF the question: will set hi
n down as an opposer Of revvals, in short, Delst-
-, If an article i published with design to counle
. act the decisions Of Miller or kindred enthusiast
% some will cali him a bad man, who does not b'
n, eye that the worl will ever come 10 an end 80
=, one ventures to specify what he regards as faults
7 relation TO hospitality, he must of course
oe in the the Judgment Of some, a very inhosp
IA table man. and OF very unchrlsan spirit
Bot such conclusions may all possibly be hasy al
p, fdse The roh nee f9ngtrc-dont iourh me arg
: men,s do not weigh much with me. have 10 ie
-. th,ttfuth will ultimately suffer from the exposure
-, error mingled with it and hiding under her ma
IN lie. nor III at the innocent will be injured by plhs
ing the faults Of the guilty. viii only add, 10 co
n elusion. that ia Liver Of Hospitality "ishss
., use nv language he is requested 10 quote At as IL
80, and not make !, ridiculous, or untrue hy i"ls'ng
tho word gentle" where speak Of ''lhl- hin' oni
a HosPrTALITts.
-