« AnteriorContinuar »
you ask him my question, sir ?” “ Yes, and he was affected by it. He told me to tell you be hoped you did not suspect him, whoever else did; that if he thought you had any doubts of his guilt, he would not say a word; but he did not mistrust you ; he knew you suffered more than himself, and therefore he told you he had sins enough, he felt, to answer for; but he was clear of this, and he entreated you, if you believed him, not to give way to grief, but to put your trust in God, and to pray for yourself and him.'
* Then he is innocent!' cried Kate. “God be praised, that is all I want!' and in full and beautiful reliance in his truth, the poor thing went away from the prison without another word.'
(To be continued.)
A MORE dangerous opinion cannot be well entertained (and mortal foes to religion and their country are those who propagate it) than the opinion, that intolerance is a mere accident of Popery, and not its very essence. Repeatedly has it been shewn, from the authentic articles of the Romish church, from its legal constitutions, and out of writers of the highest authority within its pale, as well as by an overbalancing induction of historical facts, that the spirit of the popedom never relents towards those who refuse it implicit obedience.-Rev. J. N. Pearson.
PROFANITY OF WORKMEN.
MY DEAR MADAM, I HAVE lately received a letter from a much-valued friend, who is also one of your subscribers, and as it relates to a very important subject, in which some of your readers may feel interested, I transmit it to you, hoping that you may find it worthy of insertion.
• Can you, my dear friend, contrive to insert a few words in our favourite little Magazine, upon a subject in which I have felt a deep interest? Lately, when the front of the house where I lodge was in course of repair and painting, I was greatly annoyed by the swearing and bad language of the workpeople. They looked very decent men, and were steady at their work ; but in their talk with each other, they frequently used very profane expressions, and you will imagine how much I was pained and shocked by it. Now, if every Christian family, when engaging work-people from a builder, painter, or other master tradesman, would stipulate that the men sent should be such as do not swear, (both for the sake of their servants and themselves,) I cannot but think it would have a good effect in repressiog profanity among the lower orders. The master would be interested in the suppression of swearing among his men, because he would know it to be a check to his custom ; and the men, in their turn, would feel it to be a check to their employment,
while, knowing the importance of the thing themselves, they would restrain the younger branches of their families, when guilty of this great sin. Perhaps a few hints to the “Christian Ladies” might be useful in promoting this object.'
Now, this is surely a very good suggestion for heads of families to act upon; not only those • Christian ladies' on whom my friend seems to rely, but all who are friendly to common decency and morality of conduct. Any scheme which may tend to diminish the contagious vice of profaneness among our lower orders is worthy of attention, even though it proceed upon motives of self-interest.
That such a stipulation as to the character of work-people is very practicable, is evident from the request so often made when an inhabited house is about to be repaired or painted : • Pray send me men whom you can trust; such as I need not be afraid of, with regard to their honesty.'
If householders can thus stipulate for one quality in the character of workmen, they can do the same for another; and surely if we take such care of our property, we may be at some pains to preserve the ears of our servants from evil communications,' which corrupt good manners, as well as to check open profanity among working-men themselves.
Hoping that some of your readers may act upon this hint, I remain, &c. &c.
THE FAVOURED SHEPHERD.
DAVID AND JONATHAN.
THE scripture account of the intercourse that existed between David and the son of his. persecutor, Saul, is not only one of much interest as exciting our sympathy, but is also one of much usefulness, regarded as a model for Christian friendship. Constancy, simplicity, sincerity, and piety, distinguished it throughout, and to those who have at times been tempted hastily to say,
“ All men are liars,” and to conclude that nought of friendship is now left but the name, it is pleasing to look back upon its reality as here recorded ; and at least to make the example a model for themselves, if they cannot discern its likeness in others; always remembering that friendship, like every other fair fruit of the tree of righteousness, must have its basis fixed on the love of Christ, and its exercise guided by His example.
“ The soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.” (1 Sam. xviii. 1, 3.) What can be more simple, and yet more expressive than scripture language, and in the present instance how appropriate and beautiful ! It expresses a closeness of union, a oneness of interest, a reciprocity of spirit, which must be felt to be AUGUST, 1839.
understood, and which differs as widely from that which passes for friendship in the world, as shadow differs from substance, or cold from heat.
It was not long before the fidelity of Jonatban to the covenant made with David was put to the test. (1 Sam. xix.) Once he pleaded successfully with his father for his friend, and he was re-admitted into the royal presence as in times past, till his prowess again stirred up the rage of Saul, and he fled for his life to Ramah, the residence of the prophet Samuel. But the second time the faithful Jonathan pleaded in behalf of David, the infatuated monarch burst forth upon his son, and threatened his life in the same manner as he had before done that of his unoffending servant. Their interviews in the field, before and after this event, and the account of their mutual sorrow at parting, are passages full of touching interest. They meet once more,-David in the fainting of his heart, after having practised deceit with Abimelech the priest, and Achish king of Gath, (about which time were written Psalms lvi. xxxiv.) and unwittingly caused the death of eighty-five of the priests of the Lord, (Psą. lii. cix. xvii. cxl. xxxv. Ixiv.) escaped from the treacherous men of Keilah (Psa. xxxi.) into a wood in the wilderness of Ziph. (Psa. liv.) There his faithful Jonathan sought him out, and strengthened his hand in God; what a meeting must this have been, (1 Sam. xxiii. 16—18.) and how refreshing to the weary, hunted, persecuted David was that last interview, when in the silence of the wood they mutually cheered their hopes, and encouraged their confidence in God! They met not again. The next mention made of Jonathan (1 Sam. xxxi.) is the simple statement of his being slain in