The Nashville daily union. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1862-1866, 1864-12-23
gaaalrille &Inioll.
wM. CAMEROS . CO.. Publishers.
FRIDAY, pECEMBER %, 1864
For the Nashville Union.
POlitenesS vs.. Profanity.


kindness. 1t consists not ID forms pre-
scribed by rules of art. 1t springs
naturally and most swinningly from
kind and loving heart, which, happy in
itself, wishes to make every body else
happy; and which, panied to see any
one else constrained and ill-at-ease in
his presence, hastens instinctiyely to
relieve him in any way and by any
means in his power. He cares not now
for the forms of etiquette. He is guided
solely by the law of kindness, by the
claims of brotherly love- Sdch is the
politeness of true religion.
Worldly politeness is an imitation Of
this. 1t clothes itself in smiles and
graceful gestures, which in the jostle,
misery and rude intercourse of life are
very pleasant indications both of love to
others, and of happiness within; and
especially are they pleasing to those
who from familiarity know how to re
ceive them and to answer them by cor
responding signs But to others they
/ often increase embarrassment and add
a poignancy of pain. When this result
is seen, christian courtesy and true po-
liteness will instantly lay aside all rules
of art and all forms of etiquette, and
seek only the relief of the sufferer
In other, words true politeness is ex-
ternal religion and seeks always either
to minister qualification or to relieve
pain. OF course it never willingly
shocks the sensibilities or hurts the
feelings of any one, except where con-
science and the calls Of duty require it.
Hence the obscene and the prQlane
bridle their tongues when in the pres
enee of virtuous women. Restrained
by no fear of God, against whom they
daily sin without cOmpunctiOn or con-
cern, they are instantly brought under
the restraints of politeness when in the
company Of ladies. Selfrespect and
the desire to be thought gentlemen,
along with the wish to crafty or at
least not to offend their fair company, |
makes them put on for the nonce the |
garb of religion, They call it poltsness,
and would probably spurn the imputa>
ton of religion. But pohtsness, I repeat,
Is external religion, or a mask for it. |
And all true politeness springing from
the heart and benevolently seeking the
welfare of others is, so far, true relig- !
ion. And then if it be coupled with a
proper regard for God as the source of
all good and with desire to please
Him, it is the very religion Of Jesus.
Fdr kindness to man is service to God /
And it is higher and better service than
prayer and praise without it.
Now while this law oS kindness
while the claims of mere politeness re-
strain men from swearing in the pres
ence of ladies and thus wounding their
sensibilities, why does it not equally
guard the sensibilities of men, who re
we're the name of God and are panied
to hear it blasphemed2 WHY'S not the
minister of rehgion-why is not the
devout Christian, however humble, thus
protected from insult to his holiest feel
ings and from outrage to his tenderest
sensibilities? Often am / panied by
men otherwise estimable and kind, who
would by no means rudely jostle any /
body or insultingly use any name, or
the name Of any earthly friend dear to
me, and who yet pain me daily and
most deeply by the Profans and some
times blasphemous use of a Name
dearer to me and more, ,venerated than
any other name
Why is this2 Can those who do so
be gentle men2 Are they truly polits7
Are they really regardful Of the sensi-
bilities Of others, or are they trying oc-
casionally to put on the comely robes
of politeness, merely to hide a dark,
depraved heart, whose ugliness they
fain would conceal from the other sex,
not 0enevolently, with the desire Of
adding to their pleasures or diminish~
ing some pain, but selfishly and merely
for private and personal ends
I leave them TO answer. I viii not
charge their discrimination against me
to mere selfshness, to deception, and
seduction. And yet do charge them
with breach Of politeness-with de-
lection from true courtesy-with
blemish to the character Of true gen
tleman, whenever they knowingly,
however undesignedly and thoughtless-
", hurt the sensibilities Of q christian
brother by taking the name Of God in =
vain. They ough to think, as they would q
If lady we're present They ought to q
the feelingsof christian bro
Lher, and especially Of minister Diff
ference or sameness Of sex makes no
in the atrocity Of crime, or !,
The guilt of sin He that ofeuds q !
brother is as guilty as he that offends a <
sister. p
Swear not at all Thou shalt not q
axe the name Of the Lord thy God in
rain. For the Lord viii not hold him q
guiltness that taketh his name in vain
And politeness as much forbids the ug )
mess as religion condemns the sin Of :
Nashville, Dec. 81 CHAPLAIN 81
A