any other.

Here in faithful and often unnoticed work, we can write deep into the heart of our Country, and inspire the whole world as no one else can. We write deep, but we do not sign our names to what we write, as the men do! We are the Mothers of the Nation, and through the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ that is the highest vocation of which it is possible to conceive.

DISCUSSION.

The CHAIRMAN (Dr. A. T. SCHOFIELD): We have all been much delighted with Miss Maynard's paper, which marks a high standard of thought and feeling. As we should like a good discussion I will content myself with a very few brief remarks.

On p. 30 I note that it is said that the principle amongst little children that "Might is Right" is not wrong. I venture to suggest that what Miss Maynard would convey is that "the man-spirit" (in the child)" claiming his inheritance" is not wrong.

That Might is Right" is a lie, we all know, and for years we have suffered and bled to prove it so. Moreover, on p. 33, line 10,

Miss Maynard points out that one is but a means," and the other "an end," and that Might is not Right. What is right is beautifully brought out on p. 31.

I think no man would have the courage to have made the statement on p. 32 that women " have no power of invention": in the face of many thousands of patents taken out by them, may we not qualify this a little? The fact, however, that the best cooks, musicians, and dressmakers are men certainly strengthens Miss Maynard's position, and is most remarkable.

Lower down on p. 32 we get the great principle that while man fights for his own present life woman "looks for the future," a point of enormous importance that is fully dealt with by Benjamin Kidd in his last work, The Science of Power. There can be no doubt that our ideals are changing. We are far indeed from the time when the typical "John Bull had any resemblance to a typical Englishman, and to me it is quite clear that as civilization advances, the typical man and woman tend more and more in many ways to resemble each other. Our Lord was, as we know, · born of a woman," and students have long observed that the characteristics revealed in the Gospels are rather those of typical

humanity than of the typical masculine; and there can be no doubt that with the spread of Christianity what I may call human characteristics are slowly replacing the purely masculine.

Still the truth on p. 43 will ever stand, that while Adam can and does “subdue the earth," Eve is ever "the mother of all living," and as Miss Maynard so beautifully concludes her most admirable paper, women "write deep, but do not sign their names to what they write as men do"; but in the lives of our great men their noble mothers see the fruit of their labours. There is no fear for England so long as the principles embodied in this paper are the principles and aims of the women of our country, and the value of such ideals cannot be over-estimated in the present crisis.

Lt.-Col. MACKINLAY said: I rise to propose a hearty vote of thanks to Miss Maynard for the great assistance she has given to the Victoria Institute.

Noticing the immense help which our women have given to the nation in time of war, the Council determined to enlist their aid for the Victoria Institute more fully in the times before us, and Miss Maynard has well responded to their invitation. We gratefully remember that a few ladies in the past have read papers to us, notably Mrs. Maunder and Mrs. Lewis, the discoverer of the Sinaitic palimpsest, but we hope in the future that the number of lady readers will be largely increased and that many will follow the good lead which Miss Maynard has given at the beginning of this new era. Now that the war is, we trust, practically finished, the prospects of the Institute are bright, and many will turn with gladness to the important subjects which we consider.

We again thank Miss Maynard for her paper given to us at a time when the claims of womanhood are beginning to be appreciated.

tr

The Rev. JAMES THOMAS associated himself with the previous speakers in their expressions of appreciation of the value and beauty of the paper. Yet he wished to offer two or three criticisms upon it. On p. 34 it is stated that most ancient religions consisted of mere ceremonial . . . and had no connection with moral conduct.`` Such is not the case with the oldest of the religions of China, i.e. so-called Confucianism.

On p. 35 the writer states that " among the thousands of pictures of the social life (of Egypt) you find order and decency," but "no

representation of moral evil." Those who know the sculptures and pictures of the Temple of Luxor, not to mention others, will be unable to endorse that statement.

done for women.

The very word "family" witnesses to what Christianity has Familia," to the ear of a Roman, even when Rome was in the glory of her power, meant a dwelling with a multitude of idle, corrupt and corrupting slaves, ready for any treachery and reeking with every vice. It meant a despot who could kill his slaves when they were old and expose his children when they were born. It meant matrons among whom virtue was rare, divorces frequent, and re-marriage easy. To Christianity our great word family" owes all that makes it beautiful and sweet.

In setting forth the position of woman among the Jews Miss Maynard has wholly overlooked the fact that polygamy was common and concubinage allowed, both of which are forbidden in Christian lands.

tr

Lt.-Col. ALVES said: On p. 36 is an allusion to one most charming glimpse of the ordinary social life of the Old Testament, and that, curiously enough, is not in the Old Testament, but in the New." But in the Old Testament we have, notably, three such glimpses— that of Jephthah's daughter, of Ruth, and of Abigail-all showing that the women of Israel had considerable freedom, and were not bound by the restraints of the harem.

But the chief point to which I would draw attention is the remark, on pp. 38 and 39, regarding the supposed "three great fundamental errors," viz., the superiority (1) of one nation to another, (2) of one social rank to another, and (3) of one sex to the other, concerning which the reader quotes Gal. iii, 28: . . . neither Jew nor Greek . . . neither bond nor free . . . neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

It is evident, however, that this passage refers solely to their spiritual position "in Christ Jesus"; for we find the distinctions still remaining, the first two in the millennium, the last in this age also.

The Old Testament is full of allusions to the supremacy of Israel in the millennium, a supremacy, however, which may be shared by Gentiles who choose it, submitting to the ceremonial law (Ezek. xlvii, 22-23). Gentile nations must send representatives to

Jerusalem to keep the Feast of Tabernacles (Zech. xiv, 16-19), and on these the rite of circumcision will be enforced (Ezek. xliv, 6-9). From Joel iii, 1-8, we learn that slavery, as a punishment, will be enforced in the millennium.

In 1 Tim. ii, 11-12, an epistle written some years later than that to the Galatians, we read: “Let (the) woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over (the) man, but to be in silence."

From these passages we see that the passage quoted in Galatians refers solely to the spiritual condition of believers, who in other places are constantly referred to proleptically as if they were already in the resurrection condition.

Mr. THEODORE ROBERTS desired to record his protest against the lecturer's statement, on p. 40, that the restrictions on women imposed in St. Paul's Epistles were transitory. He considered St. Paul's words as having his Master's authority, and referred to his saying, "Doth not even nature herself teach you? as proving that the distinction between the sexes in the Christian community were intended to be permanent.

He considered that the lecturer's quotation from the Galatian Epistle referred exclusively to what was to be spiritually realised.

He instanced the message sent by the risen Lord to his disciples by Mary Magdalene, "Go tell my brethren, I ascend to my Father and your Father," etc., as showing the important part women had in the Church, for this message was the Magna Charta of our Christian blessing.

Mr. W. HOSTE sends the following remarks: I have read Miss Maynard's illuminating paper with the greatest interest. It affords quite a liberal education on the question to a mere man. I cannot help feeling, however, that her historical survey and philosophy of things are better based than her Scriptural exegesis. I entirely agree with her estimate, on p. 39, of the teaching of the apostle Paul, only I would leave out the far" and read we never go wrong," for he claims that "the things he writes are the commandments of the Lord" (1 Cor. xiv, 37). I cannot, moreover, find any hint that he understood his teaching, on the relations of the sexes, to be temporary. He grounds them on two historical facts unaffected by the lapse of time-the priority of man in Creation, and the

E

I

priority of woman in the Fall (1 Tim. ii, 13, 14). The passage in Galatians, referred to at length on p. 39, deals with the position "in Christ Jesus" of all believers, not at all with their relations in the world, nor even with their place "in ecclesiâ," as a reference to I Cor. xi, 3-15 and 1 Tim. ii, 8-12, shows. There we see hierarchical distinction fully recognized: "the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man.” When, too, we read of slavery in the Bible, is it necessary to read into it the abominations of the African slave trade, as carried on by whites and Arabs? Would it not be more assimilated to the mild form of household slavery practised by the natives themselves, which one has come in contact with when travelling in Central Africa, where the slave is treated as one of the family, and sometimes owns land and cattle, and, mirabile dictu," even in some cases, I believe, slaves himself? Otherwise it would seem strange that the apostle should have to exhort a Christian slave to take his freedom, if the occasion presented itself (1 Cor. vii, 21).

Mr. SIDNEY COLLETT sends the following: The Lecturer has spoken of the "education" of girls in general; and at the foot of p. 43 says: "They leave college ready to take up the immense. responsibilities of womanhood."

Now, is that really so? My experience is that girls, generally speaking, when they leave such colleges, are really much better fitted to become teachers in other schools (for which indeed their education has qualified them) than to assume the responsibilities of a wife and a mother. What domestic training have they had in the way of household work, cooking, and the care of little children, etc.? It is surely the lack of this practical womanly training, of which the Lecturer has said nothing at all, which so often produces -not wives and mothers-but what is colloquially called Blue Stockings."

Another, and even more serious lack, I could not help noticing in the Lecture, is the absence of any insistence upon the importance of definite Christian training, on Bible lines, in our colleges. It is well known that in most of the colleges for men (even the theological ones) the Bible, as the inspired Word of God, is increasingly discredited; and it is somewhat disappointing that Miss Maynard should not have brought this vitally important matter into