field of theology, he commenced with the doctrine of demoniacs; and this is the reason why the supernaturalists of the last generation, as Knapp, laid so much stress upon the defence of demoniacal possessions. It was the starting point of Rationalism. The most important doctrinal production of Semler is the history of theological opinions, prefixed to Baumgarten's Theological Controversies. Here, as in all his writings, his chief object appears to have been to point out the origin and character of the various views which have prevailed in theology; or, in other words, to show the difference between religion and theology.

Semler's chief merit was in church history and the history of religious doctrines. As Baumgarten-Crusius says, "he is undoubtedly the first who directed the attention of scholars to the history of theological opinions; and in this new department he furnished many valuable materials." But, as we have already said, we are here concerned not with his merits as a scholar, but with his influence in the introduction of Rationalism. This was occasioned in his historical labors by his evident aversion to the doctrines of the church. He labored to set the state of the early Christians, the character of the church generally, and especially the champions of orthodoxy in an unfavorable light. It was natural for him to do so; for he himself was destitute of that depth of religious feeling, which alone. could enable him to enter into the spirit of the early Christian teachers, and to draw out the true ideas from the obscure language of writers so unlike himself as Tertullian. Such men as Tertullian, Augustine, Bernard and Thomas Aquinas were highly repulsive to his feelings. Hence, he calls Tertullian "singularly strange," and "fanatical," Augustine, "hair-splitting," though "sometimes right,' and Bernard, "monkish." Thus was the way prepared for Spitler and Henke. Even such men as Chrysostom and Theodoret, where they departed from the spirit of the eighteenth century, were represented in the most unfavorable light. Chiliasts, Gnostics, monks and eremites, were, in his view, all blind fanatics. But when he falls upon a "free-thinking" spirit like himself, upon a Pelagius, for example, he cordially embraces him, and publishes his works with notes of encomium and defence. So extensive was his reading and so rare his knowledge, that his dis

coveries in church history were read with avidity, not only by the superficial, but by men of true learning; and he left a general impression upon the public mind that, until the torch of modern illumination was lighted up, Christianity had borne little or no fruit, and that men of lunatic brains had enjoyed the highest renown in theology. Some of his disciples wished to reduce church history to a mere collection of ridiculous tales about priests and monks. When we consider how much the young theologians of the present age are benefited by having returned to the study of the Christian Fathers and Reformers, and to what an honorable rank the study of church history in general has justly risen, we shall be prepared to estimate the extent of the evil of Semler's influence in this respect. [TO BE CONTINued.]

ARTICLE VIII.

ON THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF WOMAN.

Ir is not our purpose, in the present article, to institute a comparison between the sexes, either in their physical or intellectual constitution; much less to enter into the controversy, in regard to the political and social relations of woman, which now agitates a portion of the community. This subject has been the medium of much unjust reproach on our institutions. The public ear has been filled with declamation upon the wrongs of woman,-her political and legal non-existence,-her natural equality,-her inalienable rights, and her degrading servitude; as though the sex, at some early period, had been conquered and subjugated by man, and were still held in a state of bondage. Disquietudes, deep and distressing, are thus created, where peace and confidence ought to prevail; and we are made to overlook that most essential preliminary in every proposed reform,-an exact knowledge of the subject to be reformed. Our first step, therefore, is to dis

abuse ourselves of existing prejudices, by inquiring into the true and actual position of woman, as defined by our laws, and considering the reasons on which they are founded.

We shall better understand the value of her position in this country, and in our own day, by first briefly considering her condition in other nations, both in ancient and modern times, and the depths from which she has been raised to her present most just elevation of rank in the Christian world.

It is superfluous to advert to the state of females among savage tribes. It was always, and every where, a state of abject slavery. Even at this day, among the red men of the West, the severest punishment that can be inflicted on a warrior, is to strip him of his war dress, and degrade him to the rank and garb of a squaw. If we look to the semi-barbarous nations of the north, her lot was but little better. By the early feudal constitutions she could not own lands; and this, not merely because she was incapable of performing the personal military services due to the lord paramount; but also because, as the feudists allege, by reason of the imbecility of her understanding, she could render him no aid by her advice, nor keep his counsels, when confided to her. Nor was she admissible, as a witness, in any feudal court; being, in this respect, classed with children, excommunicates, and persons rendered infamous by crime.*

The condition of the Greek female partook of the characters of eastern voluptuousness and northern degradation. She could hardly act at all, without the intervention of a guardian. She was not permitted to give testimony. She could make no contract, beyond the value of a medimnus of barley. She was literally "given away" in marriage; and might again be given away by her husband to a stranger; or become the common property of him and his brethren.+

If in the country of Plato and Solon, the sex was thus humbled, we may look in vain for a juster estimate of the rights of woman in that of Cicero and Gaius and Tribonian. The whole fabric of the Roman law, in regard to

Crag., Jus. Feud., 63, 66, 523.

†Taylor's Civil Law, pp. 250, 252.

females, is based on the assumption of their intellectual as well as physical imbecility. The Roman lady, it is true, appeared more in society than the Greek; and was permitted to be present at public spectacles and feasts; but, like her polished neighbor, her testimony was not received by the magistrates; she was not capable of acting but by her guardian or tutor; she could not dispose of herself in marriage; she became the property of her husband, who had the power of life and death over her. Though wine was an article of common beverage among men, she was interdicted its use, on account of the errors it might lead her to commit; and "this severity," says Polybius, "gave occasion to the custom so prevalent among them, of the wife's being frequently saluted by her husband and relations, in order to detect her disobedience." Dr. Taylor, in his Elements of the Civil Law, deduces the marriage custom of saluting the bride, from this practice of the Romans.

Shall we find her lot improved in Asia? Take, for example, the Chinese; among whose lower classes the wife drags the plough, while the husband sows the grain. No where, is the female permitted to lose sight of her legal inferiority and nothingness. She does not sit at the same table with the man, her master and lord,—she receives no intellectual culture; all her energies, of mind and heart, are repressed by the iron despotism under which they are Even the feet of females of the higher classes, are crushed by the hand of jealousy; compelling them to seclusion, and domestic virtue, by taking away the physical power to transgress.

If we would ascertain the legal rights of women in Central Asia, no source is so authentic as the institutes of the emperor Akber, the Justinian of the East; and the liberal patron of oriental learning. But though this code regulates marriages, in very general terms, it recognizes woman as possessed of very few legal rights. She cannot be a witness, in any cause; and to kill her, is but a "sin of the third degree;" and in the same degree is placed the sin, by that code equally heinous, of killing a cow, and of selling prohibited goods. *

The code of Gentoo laws, or ordinances of the Pundits

*2 Ayeen Akbery, 496, 542.

(ch. 20, p. 282), requires that "A man, both day and night, keep his wife so much in subjection, that she by no means be mistress of her own actions;" and it adds that "if the wife have her own free will, notwithstanding she be sprung from a superior cast, she will yet behave amiss." Indeed, throughout all Asia, our missionaries, in their benevolent attempts to instruct and educate the female mind, have excited astonishment and scorn.

It is therefore not to mere civilization,—not to advancement in the arts of life, or to intellectual culture alone, that we are to look, for the elevation of woman to her proper rank in social existence. Another element must be sought, in the composition of society, to effect this result; and that element has been found in the Christian religion. It is remarkable that the influence of Christianity, wherever it has been felt in any nation, has given woman a new station in society, releasing her from bondage, and rendering her at once the companion, the equal, and the friend of man. Hence Christianity has been scoffingly termed "the religion of women." And it is true, that while the obligations of us all to that religion are immense, hers are peculiar and emphatic. The secret spring of this great revolution is found in the spirit of religion; its spirit of justice, and truth, and love;its expanded views;-its lofty aims;-its enlightened philosophy.

We do not assert that the bare assumption of the form of Christianity has alone achieved this change. On the contrary, it has gone hand in hand with the true and liberal spirit of that religion, and has shared both its glory and its eclipse. Like all other revolutions which have been wrought in the mind or social state of man, its first movements have been vast and extravagant. Thus, the flood of light, poured upon a military people, produced the age of chivalry; and changed the state of woman, from that of servitude, to deification. And this, again, was succeeded by the age of frivolous gallantry and excessive politeness. In both, her position was a false one. She is justly neither the servant, nor the sovereign of man; neither the slave of his will, nor the proper object of his obsequious servitude, or his adoration;-but his equal, his fellow-being, his partner in the social state.