for another self-but that other self did not exist: there was no helpmeet for him. The visible creatures which surrounded him, were too much beneath him: the invisible Being who gave him life, was too much above him, to permit him to unite their condition with his own. Whereupon God made the woman, and the great problem was immediately solved.

It was, then, the characteristic of unfallen man to want some one to sympathize with him in his joys, as it is of fallen man to want some one to sympathize with him in his sorrows. Whether Adam was so far conscious of his wants as to ask for a companion, we are not informed. It would appear from the inspired record, as if the design of this precious boon originated with God; and as if Eve, like so many of his other mercies, was the spontaneous bestowment of his own free-will. Thus Adam would have to say, as did one of his most illustrious descendants many ages afterward, "Thou preventest" (anticipatest) "me with thy goodness." Here, then, is the design of God in creating woman, to be a suitable helpmate to man. Man needed a companion, and God gave him woman. And as there was no other man than Adam at the time in existence, Eve was designed exclusively for Adam's comfort; thus, teaching us from the beginning, that whatever mission woman may have to accomplish in reference to man, in a generic sense, her mission, at least in wedded life, is to be a suitable helpmate for that one man to whom she is united. It was declared from the beginning, that every other

tie, though not cut by marriage, shall be rendered subordinate, and a man shall "leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh." If then, woman's mission in Paradise was to be man's companion and joy, it must be the case still. Her vocation has not been changed by the fall. By that catastrophe, man needs still more urgently a companion, and God has rendered this, her mission, still more explicit by the declaration, "Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." It has been often shewn that by being taken from himself, she was equal to man in nature; while the very part of the body from which she was abstracted indicated the position she was intended to occupy. She was not taken from the head, to show she was not to rule over him; nor from his foot, to teach that she was not to be his slave; nor from his hand, to show that she was not to be his tool: but from his side, to show that she was to be his companion. There may perhaps be more of ingenuity and fancy in this, than of God's original design, but if a mere conceit, it is at once both pardonable and instructive.

That woman was intended to occupy a position of subordination and dependence is clear enough from every part of the Word of God. This is declared in language already quoted: "Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." This referred not only to Eve personally, but to Eve representatively. It was the divine law of the relation of the sexes, then promulgated for

all time. The preceding language has placed her, as a punishment for her sin, in a state of sorrow; this places her in a state of subjection. Her hus band was to be the center of her earthly desires, and, to a certain extent, the regulator of them also; and she was to be in subjection to him. What was enacted in paradise has been confirmed by every subsequent dispensation of grace. Judaism is full of it in all its provisions; and Christianity equally establishes it.

I shall here introduce and explain the words of the apostle, "I would have you to know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man." He then goes on to direct that women should not appear and exercise those miraculous gifts which were sometimes bestowed upon them, unvailed and with their hair cut off. He adds, "A man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man"-1 Cor. xi. 3-9. For the explanation of this passage, I remark, that in the times of the apostle there were two recognized characteristic emblems of the fe male sex, when they appeared in public-vails, and the preservation of their tresses. It would seem from the apostle's remarks, as if some of the fe male members of the Corinthian Church, during the time that the inspiration of the Holy Spirit was

upon them, cast off their vails, after the manner of the heathen priestesses when they delivered the responses of the oracles. This conduct the apostle reproves, and informs them that if the vail were thrown aside they might as well also cut off their flowing hair, which is one of woman's distinctions from man, and by all nations considered the ornament as well as the peculiarity of the sex. We may pause for a moment to observe how constantly and completely Christianity is the parent of order and the enemy of indecorum of every kind. But why were not the women to lay aside their vails? Because it would be forgetting their subordination and dependence, and assuming an equal rank with man. This is the gist of the apostle's reason. It was not merely indecorous and contrary to modesty, but it was ambitious, and violating the order of heaven. The other expressions of the apostle in this passage are very strong. As Christ is the head or ruler of man, so man is the head and ruler of woman in the domestic economy. Man was made to show forth God's glory and praise; to be in subordination to him, and only to him; while woman was created to be, in addition to this, the glory of man, by being in subordination to him, as his help, his ornament, and his glory. She was not only made out of him, but for him. All her loveliness, comeliness, and purity are not only the expressions of her excellence, but of his honor and dignity, since all were not only derived from him but made for him.

Here, then, is woman's true position, and if any thing more need be said to prove it from the records of Christianity, we may refer to other apostolic language, in which wives are enjoined to be subject to their husbands in all things, even as the church is subject to Christ-Ephes. v. Nor is the apostle Paul alone in this, for Peter writes in the same strain-1 Epistle iii. 1. Let woman then bow to this authority, nor feel herself degraded by such submission. It has been said that in domestic life man shines as the sun, but woman as the moon, with a splendor borrowed from the man. May it not be said with greater truth and propriety, and to render the comparison less invidious, man shines as the primary planet, reflecting the glory of God, who is the orb of the moral universe; and woman shines as the satellite of man, deriving her splendor from the same source, and while equally obeying the law of the central luminary, is created for the primary dependent body, revolves in its attraction, follows in its course, and ministers to its comfort.

Behold, then, we say again, woman's position and mission; it is summed up in two words-HUMILITY and LOVE. Of love and subjection to her husband. Every thing connected with the relationship of man and woman has, however, since the fall, a more serious character; her love has become more anxious; her humility more profound. Bashful of her own defects, and anxious to reinstate herself in her husband's heart, woman lives to repair the wrong she has inflicted on man, and lav