<-No. LXXXV.j
THE TABLET
No. LXXXV.
" From annexing different ideas to words, men muji
always be at variance in their speculative reason-
ings."
A LITERARY correspondent has favored the
editor with the following Eflay refpedling
the use of certain terms as applied by some reli
gious fedts. The learning and good sense it dis
covers, induce us thus early to lay it before the
public.
FOR THE TABLET.
"TT is laid that the inanichean system of The-
X ology, excluding a few absurdities, forms a
part of our orthodox creed. The principal dif
ference in the two systems is this—that the Ma
nicheans believe the evil principle to be co-equal
with the good principle ; and both supreme in
their refpe<flive departments ; one the sovereign
author of good ; the other, of evil. The chris
tian scheme places this point on a confident foot
ing, by informing us that there is but one supreme ;
but at the fame time, it makes the devil, afubor
dinate being, the immediate author of evil. It
informs us that the firft fin in paradise was caused
by the instigation of this evil spirit or principle,
and the whole tenor of scripture proves that he
has ftilla material influence over human adlions.
The heathen systems of mythology all supposed
a number of created inferior deities, or demons,*
both good and bad spirits, which were inftru
lnentalin executingtne purposes of the Supreme
Being. The scripture declares this tobe a faift—
the angels are minillering spirits, and the devil
and his fellow apoftatesmay be permitted to ex
ecute the decrees of heaven upon the wicked.
All nations feein to have had some notions of a
chaos, prior to the creation. The scripture fays
the earth was without form and void, and dark
r ess was upon the face of the deep ? The Edda, ■)■
which contains the opinions of our Gothic ances
tors, fays, " Before creation, all was one vast
" abyss."
The scripture tells us that the " world and all
" things that are in it shall be deftroyedby fire."
The Kdda fays, " Surtur, the blacks, shall come
tl at the end of the Vvorld—vanquish the Gods,
" and give up the universe a prey to the flames."
'1 he bible informs us, that woman was made
out of the man's fide or rib. The Edda, repre
sents, that " Ymer, the firft man or giant, slept
" and fell into a sweat, and from the pit of his
" leftarin were born male and female."
The scripture gives us a particular account of
a deluge that deltroyed the whole human race,
except tight persons. The Edda fays, " the ions
" or Bore flew the giant Ymer, and all the giants
" of the froft were drowned, except Bergelmer,
" who was saved in his bark." In all tliefe par
ticulars, we can fee a striking analogy of ideas ;
and a strong proof of some briginal revelations,
from which these notions were derived.
The ancient northern nations believed in one
fnprenie being ; but they supposed that in the
Agdrdor divine abode, he had twelve names, of
which Allfadcr\ was the firft or molt considera
ble. They had likewise foine idea of a place of
misery, as oppoled to the Agard, the abode of the
Gods. This they called Hela, which fignifies,
Death, and is the origin of our word hell. The
English therefore, like the Latins, who used infe
ri or imus, for the inhabitants of the lower re
gions, as well as for the regions themfelvea, have
no word for he/1 which fignifies any thing more
than th£ place of the dead.
The opinions which nations had of a Deity may
he collected from the names which they used to
denote his exiitence. The Greek word Tbeot is
derived from a verb that flgnifies to run, to move-,
ones sets- —a term that proves they considered
hiin as a setf -moving power ; but it is said this
■word was originally appropriated to the stars
which they worshiped as deities. The Latin
word Dens is perhaps a derivative of Theos ; the
Romans however did notufe ittoexprefsthe One
Supreme ; but generally to denote one God of
many. It was equivalent to le Dteu in French, or
the Co J ; and it implied a plurality of Gods. The
* The word dxtnon originally fignified a good spirit as well as
cad one. So it is used by Herodotus, Book 7, ("peaking of the
Grecian oracle, he fays " Such was the will of the Daemon."
+ This is said to have been written in Teutonic or Scandanavian
language, by Snorro Sturlefon, an Icelander, -who lived in the
J.uli century. It was trail(lated into French by Mon. Mallet.
+ I his void may be a compound of all-father, that is father oj
. like rlu? Jupiter of the Greeks ; or it may be a Hebrew-Gothic
word, from el and Jaier\ elfignii'ying the beneficent.
NOTES.
WEDNESDAY February 3, 1790.
Greeks and Romans seem to have had some idea
ot afupreme, independent, felf-exifting power ;
but their Theoi, Dei,Divi and Demotict, were con
sidered as spirits merely superior to man, and
having an influence over their a&ions and the e
vents of the natural world.
Were the English to found their theological
creed upon the literal meaning of the two words
Cod and Devil, they must all be Manicheans ; for
originally God was the fame word as good, and
Devil it but the contrallion of the evil, or de
evil.
Our northern ancestors therefore made use of the
word good, to convey their idea of the cause of all
good ;&oftheword<?i>//,to exprefstheir belief of the
existence of a malignant spirit or principle. They
were not indebted to christianity for the names,
nor the ideas exprefled by the names ; for both
existed among the ancient Scandanavians, long
before their knowledge of the christian religion.*
Christianity has corrected our ideas of those be
ings, and the appropriations of the names—for
we do not use the word Cod by way of eminence,
merely to express an idea of superior excellence ;
but we use it to express the scripture ideas of Je
hovah,the fupreine felf-exillent being. The word
devil, or the evil one we use to denote the demons
or bad spirits mentioned in scripture, and parti
cularly to denote the chief of the apostate angels.
Much depends on the copioufnefsof a language.
The Ethiopeans had but one word for nature and
person ; consequently were not capable, on the
promulgation of christianity, of comprehending
the dodtrine of Christ's incarnation. The Chi
nese, it is said, have no word for Deity but that
which Signifies sky
Mr. Heviot, who was oils that attempted a fet
tleinent in Virginia, under Sirßicliard Grenville,
in 1585, observes that in explaining the christi
an religion to the savages, he found their curiosity
excited, but he could not make them understand
the scheme, on account of the poverty of their
language. Hence the absurdity of an attempt to
christianize the savages, before their languages
are enlarged and rendered capable of exprefling
metaphifical ideas. It is doubtless impoflible to
convert rude nations into rational chrjftians, till
their minds are in some degree improved by sci
ence, and their languages enriched with words
for expreffingabftra(stideas."j-
* The ward food was originally fpclt Gtd, and varied in the
Saxon form. Norn. god. Gen. godis, &c. See Hicke's Saxon
Grammar. In the German, the name of the Supreme Being is
Cell; d being changed into t after the usual manner.
+ I.anauagrs, in their infant ftatc, contain few words but names
of sensible objects.
THE OBSERVER—No. XV
AN aflumption of the State debts, is an event
which many think must eventually take
place : there may be doubts, and difficulties to
obviate, which will occasion a delay ; but the ef
forts of the Union, and of the States, to systema
tize their treasuries, will probably ultimate in
this measure.
Doubtless there will be persons enouglito raise
objections, and with an honest design ; for there
needs much deliberation to fee the propriety of
new measures, which will have so extenfire an ef
fe<t. If any of the States should now think the
measure againlt their interest, a short time will
open their eyes, by the confufion which must en
sue from a continuance in their present situation.
I f the State debts should be aflumed,it will become
a serious question, how shall funds be provided for
the aggregate sum ? Every poflible revenue from
trade will be inadequate, and the Treasury of the
United States, must befurnifhed with other ways
and means. The people will cheerfully pay
what justice requires, for it must be as much their
interest as it is their duty ; and a principal diffi
culty will be in conciliating the public feelings to
a system of uniform operation thro the whole.—
I will mention the several propositions which have
occuredtomy hearing. There yet remains a
very small number, who tell us that the old me
thod of requisition is best ; leaving every State to
its own way of taxing and collecting the sum de
manded—They fay further, that Congress now
poflefles the power of coercion, and after a State
hath proved delinquent, will be a proper time
for the general government to exert its coercive
authority, and enforce apayment.
The very proposition appears to me to be
fraught with evil, and must soon end in afubver
fion, either of the general, or of the State govern
ments, and probably of the latter. To make a
requisition on the States will be easy ; but
there is every reason to suppose sonic of them will
prove delinquent, which must lead to universal
NOTKS.
£>uus.
\_PubliJhec■ on IVedriefday and Saturday.]
delinquency. In this cafe who is the fiibjeift of*
coercion ? If it be the delinquent State in its cor
porate capacity, it can be done only by levying
war on the whole people, and fubvei ting their ex
iltence as a State ; if the private citizens coniid
ered as fubjetfts of the United States are to be
coerced, the process will be loaded with a thou
sand difficulties, for which an antidote cannot be
provided. Perhaps the delinquent State has made
a grant of the demanded sum ; part is collected
and in the State treasury, part in the hands of
fpecuiating collectors, over whom the gene
ralgovernment hath no power, and part un
paid in the hands of the people ; some di
striCts have contributed their whole quota, and
others no part of it; in this stage of the buftneis
how lhall the general government take hold and
coerce a collection ? and to new allefs the whole
sum on the people, would be a manifeft inju
llice by the operation of the two governments.
Or suppose the delinquent State nejajleCts to
make any grant of the requisition j will it not be
an ungrateful business, and have a most powerful
tendency to destroy all respeCt to State authority,
for the United States to come in and tell the peo
ple " we have made our demand on your Jegilla
" ture, and they have not done their duty—they
" have {hewn themselves to be either ignorant or
" dishonest ; we are therefore under a necessity
" of taxing you direCtly without their interven
" tion, your fitter States have paid their propor
" tion, and criminate your delay, blame not us
" but your own aflembly." Will a measure of
" this kind be pacific in its tendency ! Will it not
looklikeakingdomdividedagainftitfelf? will it
not be a source of contention, and either destroy
the union, which I think cannot now be done, or
annihilate all respeCt to the State government
where it happens ? Ye friends to the dignity of
your own States, be careful how you fprcad
a snare to destroy their legislative reverence?—
The doCtrine of requisition on the States, in every
point of view, is a dangerous and impracticable
one. Those who tells us, that it is become fea
fible, since the general government have a power
of coercion, either do not forefee consequences,
or intend gradually to subvert the government of*
individual States.
That the general government poflefles a coercive
power over an individual State, is allowed on all
hands ; but the matter ought to be so conducted,
that they may never have occafionto ufeit. In a
conflict of this kind, we know that any one State
mull ultimately bow to the joint decifionof all
the others ; but I should consider such an event
unpropitious. If we intend to preserve a refpec
tablenefsto thefeparate States, we muftgive the
United States, original and sole jurifdicftion and
executive power of all matters in their nature na
tional ; and a general system of finance, and pro
viding for the payment of the whole debt, by
whatever name called, is conceived to be such.
If the general government mult ever use coercion,
let it be to execute their own laws and grants ;
and let individuals and not States be the fubjeits
of it. These truths must lead every friend of the
union and of the separate States to reject the idea
of requisitions. If we defrgn to preserve a refpec
tablenefs to the State legislature and executive,
let us cordially, and in the firft instance give up
all those matters,which may be better conducted,
by a national aflembly and executive.
I have also heard another proportion which is
this. Let there be an apportionment to each
State of its quotaof the sum needed ; letCongrefs
directly tax the inhabitants, following in each
State the mode of taxation and collection, which
is used by their own government. This, it is
said, will be more familiar and pleasing to the
people than any other poflible method. On this
I observe, that the proposition keeps up the idea
of a previous apportionment on the States ; which
ever hath been, and while continued must be a
fourr.e of jealousy. By such jealousies nothing
is gained and much endangered.
This planpropofes as many modes of taxing
and collecting, as there are States, for no two
have a similar procedure—there must be thirteen,
bodies compleatly organized with limbs, joined to
one head, the treasury board of the United
States—is It poflible for this head to preserve or
der, cdntroul and give motion to so great a num
ber of bodies ? Is it poflible for the treasury
board to comprehend and a<ft on so complex a sy
stem ? Is the general government to have a com
pleat set of officers of their own appointment, ot
to make use of those appointed by the States ? If
the former, their number will be immense ; if
the latter, they will feel no dependence on the
union and cannot be brought to account.
The operation of a taxing system is much more
expeditions in some, than it is in other States;
in some it often runs into an arrearage of years.