obeisances, upon which, in the world, and more especially in the upper classes of society, a scrupulous attention is very generally bestowed. In presenting ourselves before our fellow-creatures, we believe it right to avoid the submissive inflection of the body and the taking-off of the hat, as a token of personal homage.

The principles on which is founded our objection to these practices are, in part, the same as those which have been stated under the last head. The bowingdown of the body and the pulling-off of the hat, in honor of man, are actions perfectly coincident with a servile and complimentary phraseology. Words in the one case, and actions in the other, are obviously intended to denote the same thing; namely, that the person addressing submits himself to the superior dignity and authority of the person addressed. Whether, then, it be by our expressions or by our carriage that we cherish and foment the vanity one of another— whether the complimentary falsehood be spoken or acted-we cannot but entertain the sentiment, that, in adopting, in either way, the customs prevalent in the world, we should be departing from that simplicity and godly sincerity by which our conversation among men ought ever to be regulated.

There is, however, another reason, of a very substantial nature, why Friends conceive it to be their duty to avoid some of these obeisances; namely, that they are the very signs by which Christians are accustomed to denote their submission to the Almighty himself. This is generally understood to be the case, more particularly with the taking-off of the hat, as a

mark of homage-a practice usual among Friends, as well as among other Christians, on certain occasions of a religious nature. When we approach God in prayer, or address others in his name, we uniformly take off the hat, and kneel or stand uncovered before him. It is probable that, in every age of the world, there have been certain customary external marks of the worship of Jehovah; and this, undoubtedly, is one of those marks, in the present day. The action, in itself, is absolutely indifferent; but, through the force of custom, it has become significant of religious homage offered to the Supreme Being. Now, we consider it to be inconsistent with that reverence which is exclusively due to the Deity, and hold that it involves a very dangerous confusion, to address to our fellow-creatures, however exalted they may be, those very acts which, on other occasions, denote nothing less than the worship of Him who "bringeth the princes to nothing, and maketh the judges of the earth as vanity."

Such are the principles which have given rise to one of the most conspicuous peculiarities in the deportment of the plain Quaker. It is generally known that, when a person of this description approaches even the earthly monarch to whom he both owes and feels a real allegiance, he dares not either to bend the knee, or to uncover the head, in token of that allegiance; and for this plain and, as it appears to me, fully sufficient reason; that these are the very outward signs by which he is accustomed to designate his submissive approaches to the Lord of lords, and the King of kings-the God and Father of us all.

In bearing this testimony against the semi-idolatrous practices of the world, I cannot but consider it plain that Friends are acting in conformity with the divine law, which, while it forbids us either to flatter or deceive our neighbours, is, if possible, still more imperative as to the restriction of the acknowledged acts of worship to their only proper object-Jehovah. "All these things will I give thee," said the tempter to Jesus," if thou wilt fall down and worship me; Then saith Jesus unto him, "Get thee hence, Satan : for it is written, Thou shalt worship2 the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

The prostration of the body on the ground (like the taking-off of the hat, or kneeling, among modern Europeans) was one of those tokens by which the ancient inhabitants of the east were accustomed to designate worship, whether that worship was addressed as homage to their superiors among men, or as religious adoration to the Deity himself; and the Greek verb, signifying to worship, literally imports such a prostration. Had that divine mandate, which our Saviour quoted in answer to the tempter, been fully observed by the Israelites of old, they would surely have confined these obeisances to the Lord himself; and their not having done so appears to afford one proof, among many, that even the more enlightened of their number fell short of a just apprehension of the extent and perfection of the law of God. But the history of the New Testament affords satisfactory evidence that, under the purer light

1 προσκυνήσῃς.

2 προσκυνήσεις

3 Ma't. iv, 9, 10.

of the Gospel dispensation, so dangerous a confusion in the application of these obeisances, is strictly precluded. We find, from the records of that sacred volume, that the prostration of the body on the ground was an act frequently employed by Christians in the worship of the Father, and also in that of the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God, partaking in the Father's nature, and one with him. It was, I think, plainly for this reason, that Jesus never refused to receive such a homage: but no sooner was it addressed to the creature than it called forth the just and earnest reprehension of the Lord's servants. Two instances of this kind are recorded in the New Testament. When the apostle Peter was coming into the house of Cornelius, the latter "met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him, (or prostrated himself before him :) but Peter took him up, saying, Stand up, I myself also am a man.” 6 So again, in the book of Revelation, we read that the apostle John, greatly smitten, as we may presume, with the glory of the angel who showed him the vision, fell down at his feet "to worship him," or to prostrate himself before him. Yet the angel earnestly forbade his doing so; -"See thou do it not," said he; "I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus; worship God."7

It cannot, with any reason, be supposed, that the act of reverence addressed by Cornelius to Peter, and

4 1 Cor. xiv, 25; Rev. vii, 11, &c.

5 Matt. xiv, 33; John ix, 38.

6 Acts x, 25, 26.

7 Rev. xix, 10.

any

by John to the ministering angel, was, in either case, intended as a sign of spiritual worship. Cornelius, who was a devout man, redeemed from the errors of idolatry, and taught to live in the fear of the Lord, could never for a moment have entertained the notion that Peter was to be adored as a god; nor is there real probability in the supposition, that the apostle John, after having been favored with so repeated a vision of the glory both of the Father and of the Son, should mistake for either of them that messenger of Christ, who was appointed to shew him these things.8 We may conclude, therefore, that this act of reverence, as employed by Cornelius and the apostle, was, like the obeisances of the present day, directed solely to the purpose of evincing respect and subjection in the presence of a superior. Nevertheless, since it was otherwise used as a sign of religious adoration, it was on both these occasions strenuously forbidden, on that main and simple principle of religion, that God alone is the object of worship. Now, this principle appears to be applied, with equal propriety, in prohibition of the modern and similar practices of kneeling and uncovering the head, as tokens of our submission to men.

In the observations which have now been offered on plainness of speech and behaviour, I have been very far from any intention to disparage so useful and amiable a quality as courtesy. On the contrary, experience has thoroughly convinced me of the great practical importance of that quality, as a means of smoothing down the little asperities of society, and

8 Rev. xxii, 8.