Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1881-05-10
THE COMMANDMENTS.

the shorter CatechisIn, a. hpprVNtu W Le.uo,
and the Lutheran and Reformed hurches, AM
a. 10 also sppesrs in numbers OF the Church
Iiturgies and Catholic Manuals anu A. u l.
most commonly taught In the Saooath schoo.s
This is according 10 the 50 called tirst Ns-or'
.,tc Diyision in which the commandment con
lining the worship OF God and that concern
ing images make but one, ana IN Mhich tne
second commandment Is, Thou shait nor s sske
the name OF thy God in vain" and the nfth.
.sThou shalt not kill" The Longer Cstecni-n,
which makes these COMMANDMENT ne ,nlr ,
and sixth, is probably the one when Mr, Ns,.
Yin. studied as he has mind powerful cnouSn
10 commit the greater one 10 memory. IN the
Rible the divisions are not made OF numoetSN'
And the exact order in which they SHOULD oe
divided has long been mst.es ~ a,iop on
.he s,biect We would refer them 10 the article
"Decalogue" in any OF the popular cyciopeNi,llSs,
especially McClintock and >trongs bioa i',''s
Cyclopedia where the suoleet VIII % 'O"'''
very fully treated->ew Religion
When we commented on the order of the
commandments a. referred To in >cribHeT :
we presumed the author had carelessly
quoted from memory and that attention
being called TO the error, he would "ac-
knowledge the corn, or let the matter
mass. If not. we should have written more
fnlly on the subject. But the editor OF the
y,1v ReligioH takes up the glove, and wei
comes a religious controversy. His style
n, argument In the article above quoted, =
similar to that employed by +. NJ. Fogg in
political debate With great flourish OF
authorities he goes TO the assault either
misouotiug them, or so using his facts As
10 deceive and mislead.
In the first place we do not believe that
Mr.. ID. c. SeitI Intended 20 use the MasoT-
etc division. bnt the fact that the order
piyen il sustained by that version allows
A loop-hole through which an escape NAV
he made. The article was intended Tor
popular reading. aud not for theologisnS-
WHY then should the author quote a rem
,iering known only 10 theolOsianS: As
commonly accepted, and a. il IS known
among the people. the trSt commandment
reads
Thou shall, have no other Gods before me %
The second prohibits idol worship or
the Intervention OF symbols between man
and God in devotional services II our
learned theologian will institute an inquiry
among all the sabbath Schools in OXFORD
County Except that dat school OF New
Religion fame which became noted for the
disQuisitions on theological subjects given
before its teachers every week we venture
the assertion that he will iud no school In
which the con mandmentS are not taught
in the order above given. We also venture
the assertion thst no. one-tenth part of the
scholars and teachers in these schools viii
know that there i or ever was any other
division. He may Institute Ike Inquiry
throughout the SSte and ChrtStendom.
emitting the Catholic and Lutheran socie-
ties, AMI we predict like result. That II
the universal rendering or division OF the
drst commandments, and No author writ
ing for the general public, could quote
another version unless he expected 20 be
corrected. Nor would he he Justified 10
using such version, a. il would convey a
wrong impression 10 his readers. The
Encyclopedia Britannica SuStains this
position by declaring the division used by
Mr.. Se.tl 70 DC exploded. We quote IS
follows
The Church O; ROME and the Lutherans
adopt the Augusiinian division, combining
into ore the fir~t and second commandments
Of Philo. and splitting the tenth commandment
into I've. To gain a clear distinction between
the ninth ard tenth commandment, on tnl,
scheme. 10 has usually been iet necessary 20
follow the Deuteronomic text, and make the
ninth commandment Thou shalt not eovet
thy ncighbOr's wife. As scarcely any scholar
will now claim priority Tor the text OF Deuter-
onomy. This division may be regarded as e1'
ploded.'
WHY should this author seek not only
an obscure version, but one declared by the
latest edition OF the most elaborate ency-
clOpsdia 10 be superseded or set aside by
ripe scholars: As he j n man OF sense we
therefore believe we are justified IN not ac-
Cepting this excuse offered for him.
But the editor Of the Nee Religion pro-
ceedS 20 belabOr the publisher Of this pa
per with a sneer aud slur, as II he had
been in fault in his criticism, and speaks
a. If the version used BY Mr.. ID. {. SeitZ
were the shorter and more commonly
known. The tact j., this version Is only
used by the Catholic aud Lutheran de-
nominations. The terms, Shorter Cate
echism aud longer catechism, are artf0lly
use,l by the editor. Everybody has heard
OF the shorter Catechism. 1t was in the
New England Primer had when a child
most elderly people will say. SO or course
everybody will presume that there must
have been longer catechism IL the one
they knew was designated Is shorter.
But again, this deep thinker is talking
above his hearers. lie does not mean %
speak OF the commonly known cateehism.
lie only means 20 make you think so. he
has put in the saving theological salt in
these words las approved by Luther.
lie is writing now OF Luther'S shorter
catechism, used In the Lutheran church,
and known 20 but few outside OF that de-
nomination. The shorter Catechism, as
known 20 most people contains the first
commandment a. We have quoted it. AS
adopted by Luther" saves him on that
point, but he proceeds 20 blunder, in the
next words, and follows IL up throughout.
Ijr. Bethune Of New York, probably the
most scholarly OF the Reformed Church
theologians, has published a series OF
lectures on the Heidelberg Catechism. v
he saws that the Reformed Church does
not adopt the division as given by Mr..
SeItz. and declares that even the learned
Iutherans do not hold 20 10 with any de-
gree OF tenscity. He gives good reasons
for this, a. follows:
The Rome Catholics combine the first and
second commandments, giving them IN their
,,a.echi-rns abridged so As 20 avoid the strength
1f the prohibition against employing images
in their dovOtions- Thus reducing the number
Of commandments in the first table 10 three,
they are obliged. that they may keep the num-
Der ten. TO divide the tenth into two. which Is
lone BY making the first clause of the tenth.
(as given Deut. V: q, Thou shalt not covet thy
neighhors wife the ninth, and the rest OF II
The tenth; 20 which the Reformed churches
object, as that would be merely repetition
OF the seventh, whereas the closing precept i
intended 70 forbid all envious cravings OF what
ever Is our neighbours. Many Of the Luther
ans, being partial TO pictures in churches, Tor
the illustration Of divine truths, 10 the laity,
have followed the course OF the Papists with
regard 20 the disposition OF the ten precepts
but II il fair 10 add that their best diNines lay
little stress on the matter.
DR.. Bethune goes on 10 quote ''Walchius,
very famous among them and says 'In
this liberal sentiment the eminent Turren-
tin agrees So It seems from the best