"Odd-fellowship examined, in the light of Scripture and reason
None
HS 1031 "W >V\^:-X J>\&&*+ s\ik*,%, 5 **v% v **"% <r~& £$&* ^ % /.***« %*^.'> V^V %^>\*° L^ .."•• ^ o* ••v^ "o <ft. *> .t#.# «* &* ^\*«».< -&? # & ^ "ODD-FELLOWSHIP EXAMINED, V M IN THE LIGHT OF SCRIPTURE AND REASON, / BY REV. JOSEPH T. COOPER, D.D.", RE-EXAMINED, ACCORDING TO THE WORD OF GOD, AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS OF THE ORDER. BY A MEMBER OF HARMONY LODGE, NO. 16, I. 0. 0. F. Prove all things ; hold fast that which is good.— 1 Thess. iv. 21. 186? % /> PHILADELPHIA: cJ HIGGINS & PERKINPINE, No 40 NORTH FOURTH STREET. 1856. HS103 \ .07 £ Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1856, by HIGGINS & PERKINPINE, In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States, in and for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. STEREOTYPED BY E. B. MEARS. PRINTED BY SMITH & PETERS, Sranklin Buildings, Sixth Street, below Arch, Philadelphia- ESPECIALLY TO ALL WHO WOULD UNDERSTAND ITS MORAL AND -RELIGIOUS BEARINGS, THIS VOLUME IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED. PREFACE This hook was written with a two-fold design. One part of the design was to answer some of the objections made against the Order of Odd-Fellows in a course of lectures published by the Rev. Joseph T. Cooper, D. D., some two years ago. The other part of the design was to correct certain erroneous impressions believed to be somewhat prevalent in the Order. Pr. Cooper's book serves as a convenient occasion for the ex- pression of the writer's opinions rather than originates new objections to the Fraternity of Odd-Fellows. The main force of his objections, and probably of all other objections, consists in the asserted incompatibility of the obligations of Odd-Fellowship with the institutions of religion. Can a professing Christian consistently be an Odd-Fellow ? Dr. Cooper answers this ques- tion in the negative. He is not a member of the Order, nor of any secret order, we infer from his book, and therefore his objections are raised from a mere external position to the Fra- ternity. In the absence of personal or other adequate know- ledge, he becomes dependent upon individual opinion, or such official documents as have been prepared expressly for mere external purposes. His objections are not founded on facts learned within the Order, but rather on general principles as applied to supposed facts. Some of his objections contain truth, but that truth is generally separated from its necessary connexions as found in the internal practical workings of the Order, so as fairly to subject his book to the charge of being a distortion of the natural features of the Fraternity taken as a whole. Many of his statements have been made without the 1* 5 Vi PREFACE. means of knowing whether true or false, however honestly and truthfully intended. To these, and to others, we have endea- voured to reply, not by counter-statements, nor by mere asser- tion, but by a direct appeal to official documents in the course of what seemed, to the writer at least, fair and legitimate argu- ment. Lengthy quotations have been given from Dr. Cooper's book on each of the "Objections" examined, so that the nature of his argument might be fully understood by the reader, and that justice might, as far as possible, be done to it. To answer all his objections did not enter into the plan of the writer ; but the more important ones, it is thought, have been referred to. The aim has been to discuss the principles involved in his state- ments, rather than the statements themselves, as the most ready way to dispose of a large amount of irrelevant matter. His book can be obtained at almost any of the bookstores, by any who may desire to follow him at greater length. In the following pages there are some views presented which may not meet the cordial approval of every Odd-Fellow. Uni- versal approbation the writer did not expect. This would be too much to ask for any book. He asks only the care- ful perusal of it by every Odd-Fellow. In what he has said of different classes of religionists, he has had no personal refer- ences ; he has merely referred to systems of religion. This was essential to his argument. For his opinions as expressed, he has no apology to make, nor would he take from any force which they may possess one jot by any modification or conces- sion, conceding, however, at the same time, to others the fullest right to the free expression of opinion. He may add, that he entertains high personal regard for many with whose religious sentiments he is at open and irreconcilable enmity. Religious toleration he believes to be essential to free government, to social well-being, and to religious liberty. Every good man will advocate it, and practise its precepts. Believing this to be a common sentiment of the country, he has spoken freely, frankly, and, as he believes, truthfully. The reader must be the judge. CONTENTS. PAGE Purpose of Dr. Cooper's Lectures, 9 Objection I. The Name, Origin, and Dress, 25 Objection II. The Order Liable to the Suspicions of the Virtuous, . 35 Objection III. The Risk incurred in applying for Membership, . . 48 Objection IV. Abuse of an Oath, 55 Objection V. The Order ensnaring to the Conscience, .... 59 Objection VI. The Order usurps the Place of the Church,  Objection IX. Inconsistent with Devotion to the Cause of Truth, . 165 7 THE PURPOSE OF DR. COOPER'S LECTURES. Toward the close-of the last lecture, we find a state- ment of what Dr. Cooper declares he has accomplished in a course of seven lectures, delivered against Odd- Fellowship. It will be found on page 291, as follows : "My hearers, we shall pursue this subject by way of argu- mentation no farther. We think that we have dwelt upon the matter sufficiently long to show you that Odd-Fellowship is in- consistent with the public good, and therefore that it deserves not the countenance and co-operation of those who love the Saviour, and are anxious to promote the interests of society at large. Have we not "shown you that the society justly exposes itself to the contempt and ridicule of the wise and manly? Have we not shown you that it renders itself justly liable to the suspicions of the virtuous ? Have we not shown you that a person, in making application for admission into the Order, subjects himself to a risk which no man who regards his repu- tation and his interests, should be willing to incur ? Have we not shown you that there is in the very pledge given the abuse of the ordinance of an oath? Have we not shown you that a connexion with it is ensnaring to the conscience ? Have we (9) 10 THE PURPOSE OF not shown you that a connexion with it is inconsistent with that feeling of individual responsibility and independence which it is our right and our duty at all times to cherish ? Have we not shown you that the society falsifies its own pretensions ? Have we not shown you that it is not in reality, as it assumes to be, a benevolent society ? Have we not shown you that it is such an organization as is, in its own nature, liable to operate in- juriously to the rights and interests of the community? Have we not shown you that, in the objects which it proposes to ac- complish, and in the mode of its operations, it usurps the place of the church ? Have we not shown you that the religion which it incorporates into its system is a Christless religion, and con- sequently that the society is a Christless society ? Have we not shown you that a connexion with it is inconsistent with our de- votion to the truth and cause of Christ ? Have we- not shown you that it exalts the material above the spiritual ? Have we not shown you that it is chargeable with a profanation of that which is sacred? Have we not shown you that it has a demo- ralizing tendendency ? Have we not shown you that the Bible forbids Christians to enter into such covenants of friendship and love as a connexion with this society involves ? We repeat it, have we not established each and all of these positions in re- lation to the Order V These are grave charges, and should be well estab- lished before they obtain general credit. Cooper seems himself to have considered this neces- sary ; and hence we find the following declaration on page 52 of his book : DR. COOPER'S LECTURES. 11 " And here I wish in advance to say, that I am abundantly provided with materials for the discussion of this subject. I have had lying before me the following works, the title-pages of which you will allow me to read. The first is, ' Digest of the Laws of the Independent Order of Odd-Fellows, to which is added an Appendix, containing the Constitution, By-Laws, and Rules of the Order ; all necessary Forms and Funeral Cere- monies ; prepared by the following Committees, appointed by Grand Sire Sherlock, at the Communication of 1846: — James L. Ridgeley, Howell Hopkins, Robert H. Griffin, Wm. E. Par- meter. Published by order of the Grand Lodge of the United States.' We have also had for consultation, 'The Constitution, By-Laws, and Rules of La Fayette Lodge, No. 18, of the Inde- pendent Order of Qdd-Fellows of the State of Pennsylvania/ This book was kindly presented to me by the gentleman who has charge of the Odd-Fellows' store in Sixth street, and from whom I purchased the one previously mentioned, and the very important one recently published, containing 384 duodecimo pages, of which the following is the title : — ' The Odd-Fellows' Manual, illustrating the History, Principles, and Government of the Order, and the Instructions and Duties of every Degree, Station, and Office in Odd-Fellowship, with Directions for Lay- ing Corner Stones, Dedicating Cemeteries, Chapels, Halls, and other Public Edifices ; Marshalling Funeral and other Proces- sions ; Forms for Petitions, Appeals, etc. ; also, Odes, with Music, for various occasions ; embellished with numerous Engravings of the Emblems, etc. By Rev. Aaron B. Grosh, P. G. in Lodge No. 164, and P. C. P. in Encampment No. 59 of Northern New York ; late Grand Conductor in the R. W. Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, and P. G. D. G. Patriarch of the R. W. Grand Encampment of Pennsylvania. Berks District. 1852.' From 12 DR. Grand Lodge of the Independent Order of Odd-Fellows of Penn- sylvania, and late Grand Representative from the same to the R. "W. Grand Lodge of the United States/ We have still more indubitable evidence of the trustworthy character of the Manual. It bears what is called ' Endorsement of the Manual by the Grand Representatives of the Session, September, 1852/ This 'endorsement' is signed by the Grand Representatives of no less than twenty-seven States of the Union, including seventy- four names of the most distinguished dignitaries of the Order. The ' endorsement' is in the following words : — ' The under- signed members of the Grand Lodge of the United States, at its annual session, 1852, hereby recommend to the brethren at large the Manual of Odd-Fellowship of Bro. P. G. A. B. Grosh, as a complete and faithful history of the principles, instruc- tions, work, and Organization of the Order. It is full and accurate in its details, harmonious in conception and execu- tion, and its instructions may ie confidently relied upon as cor- rect. It is a work that should be in the hands of every brother desirous of having an intelligent comprehension of Odd-Fellow- ship. ' "Such are the materials with which your speaker has fur- nished himself, and upon a careful and impartial examination of which he bases his objections to this Order. Let no one, then, say that he is ignorant of the ' principles, instructions, SOURCES OF INFORMATION. 13 work, and organization of the Order ;' that he has not an ' intel- ligent comprehension of Odd-Fellowship/ Let me remark, that since I entered upon the examination of this subject, I have not read a single line written in opposition to this or any other secret society. The remarks which I shall have occasion to make, in the course of this discussion, have not been suggested by the testimony of enemies, but founded directly upon the representation of its friends and defenders. From these we take our premises, and on these base our conclusions, and shall leave you to judge of their fairness." From the foregoing it will be seen that Dr. Cooper relies solely upon the Digest, the Constitution and By-Laws of La Fayette Lodge, and Grosh's Manual of Odd-Fellowship, for all he professes to know of the Order. He relies, however, almost entirely upon the Manual, as will be seen as we pass along. Of these three books, the Digest is alone reliable and authori- tative. The constitution of a subordinate Lodge cannot lawfully differ from the Digest. The Manual is not authoritative, not even a reliable source of information for Dr. Cooper's purpose. The purpose which he has in view requires that it be an exposition of Odd-Fellowship, that it really dis- closes the secret work of the Order, and that it fur- nishes ample means for a " careful and impartial examination" of its entire system, and his argument proceeds upon that supposition. As we differ widely on this point, it may be very proper to bestow a few 2 14 THE MANUAL. thoughts in the beginning, upon the grounds of this difference, especially as jnuch, indeed everything, will depend upon the character of proof furnished in sup- port of charges so serious as those which Dr. Cooper makes. If he has proved his charges from the Manual, and that Manual be, as he supposes, final in authority, then they must necessarily be unanswera- ble ; but if it should appear that he has allowed him- self to believe that this book bears the " imprimatur" of the Order, when in point of fact it has no farther authority than that belonging to individual opinion, he will scarcely expect that we shall pay much atten- tion to his constant appeals to it. But to the thoughts ; and the first is, It is inconsistent with the nature of the society, and with good membership, that the Manual should divulge any of its secrets. Odd-Fellowship is a secret asso- ciation. Its secrets consist in its secret written work, confined absolutely to its members, and the lodge room depositories ; and in its unwritten work, con- nected almost exclusively with the rites of initiation and advancement to the several degrees. Now, in the very nature of things, no member could lawfully publish these secrets. The act involves an absurdity. Just imagine a member of the Order publishing, under sanction of the highest official authority, as Dr. Cooper supposes, the very secrets which he has bound THE MANUAL. 15 himself by a sacred pledge of honour not to divulge, a pledge given to the very body which sanctions his act. Could anything more effectually stultify the character of the whole fraternity ? We have here not only a highhanded violation of the obligation, but we have it perpetrated by the fathers and masters of the frater- nity. A house divided against itself cannot stand. Odd-Fellowship is no exception to this rule. If the official guardians of its household wage war uporuits hearth, the whole family must speedily go asunder. Surely, if the Manual has accomplished what Dr. C. would have us believe, he might have spared himself the pains and labour of making a book of some three hundred pages against a secret association ! On the supposition that this Manual really contains an expo- sition of the secret writings and work of Odd-Fellow- ship, the "endorsement" greatly aggravates the criminality of individual infidelity. If Dr. Cooper was able to impose upon himself so egregiously as to believe that this book, with the " endorsement," di- vulged the secrets of the Order, or so much of them as to enable him to enter upon a " careful and impar- tial examination" of its real character, it is too much to suppose that this imposition will extend to the thoughtful reader. The supposition that the Manual does any such thing, carries its own refutation on its very face. The next reason is, 16 INDIVIDUAL OPINION NOT RELIABLE. Individual opinion is not reliable, in the absence of the secret ivorlc. It will not be denied that the Manual throws some light upon the general character of Odd- Fellowship. The real character of the Order is de- rived from its secret work ; but consistency requires that work to be kept under the veil of absolute se- crecy. Does the Manual attempt to remove that veil ? Does it not contain merely an expression of individual opinion as to the principles and practices which grow out of this secret work ? Must this not be the case in view of the declaration which the author makes in the preface : " But the written and the unwritten work of the Order I have considered sacred from revelation"? This is precisely what it does contain. A glance will show that this is not reliable information for Dr. Cooper's purpose. That purpose requires the secret written and unwritten work. Men differ widely in their views of the import of words and signs, and es- pecially when they relate to morals. The religious creed of a man will materially modify his opinions and judgment. This fact, so well known, renders an infallible standard of revealed truth absolutely essen- tial to any unity in religious belief; and the same necessity which renders such a standard necessary at all, makes it necessary to place it within the reach of every human being. That man who accepts another's explanation of a thing when his own personal exami- INDIVIDUAL OPINION NOT RELIABLE. IT nation of it is essential to his proper understanding of it, perpetrates an outrage upon Lis own rational nature. And if this is /true in regard to any subject, it has a thousand times more force when involving the subject of moral and religious truth. No man should take the interpretations of another until he has him- self examined the source of information. It is un- safe to do so, unsafe in the extreme ! It is unsafe even when the text is accessible to all ; but how much more when the text is hidden ! A man publishes a book containing his opinions of the genius and work- ing of Odd-Fellowship, based upon the secret work or text of the Order, with a fixed determination and positive declaration that " the written as well as the unwritten work of the Order" shall be "sacred from revelation," and this is accepted by Dr. Cooper as reliable and authoritative, and answering all the ends of a "careful and impartial examination" and expo- sition of the order ! The religious creed of the writer has entered into his opinions, more or less, of the se- cret text, and we have the individual views influenced by the peculiar creed of the writer. Now, let another Manual come into existence, the product of a man of different religious creed, and we shall have the indi- vidual views so modified as to present the order in another moral and religious light. This is especially true where the difference in belief is in regard to fun- 2* 18 WESTMINSTER CONFESSION. damental Christian doctrine. This is a law, common to the free expression of opinion. It is everywhere operative. Let us trace it for a moment. The Westminster Confession is claimed by the Pres- byterian branch of the Church of Christ. Let that confession be concealed from the view of all who are not in the Presbyterian Church. Now let us have Dr. Cooper's views of the doctrinal teachings of that in- strument— the secret written work of that church for the time being. They claim to be Calvinistic. He declares that it teaches a limited atonement — the re- presentative headship of Adam, with the imputation of his guilt to his posterity — and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ to his people. This is all very -well ; but what does Mr. Barnes say ? He claims to be Calvinistic too, and is pledged to the same con- fession. He denies that it teaches the doctrine of a limited atonement, and earnestly proclaims a general one — Adam was not the federal representative of his people — moral character cannot be transferred, and therefore Adam's guilt cannot be transferred or im- puted to his posterity any more than the righteousness of Christ can be imputed to his people. Carry this examination through all the ramifications of Old and New Schoolism, of orthodoxy and heterodoxy, and the views of men will be found to be so discrepant as to induce the belief that the Confession of Faith is at once the best and worst of books ! THE BIBLE. 19 Again, let the doctrinal views of Mr. Barnes, Mr. Finney, or Mr. Duffield, or those of all of them, be offered as the doctrinal teaching of the Presbyterian Church; and let the party to whose judgment and decision this exposition of doctrine is submitted, be a committee of the Old School divines, with Dr. Cooper among them : with what holy wrath would they denounce the Church as heretical, disseminating doctrines subversive of all righteousness and truth ! Look at the case conversely, and you behold the New School apostles heated with righteous indignation which they cast upon the opponents of what they de- clare to be the obvious and necessary teachings of the Westminster Confession. In the prevalence of this multiform theological opinion, how shall we judge of the real character and merits of the Confession ? Every one will say, the book, the book, the book alone will satisfy ! The secret written text from which all these different theologians have been preaching is what is needed. Confine the Bible to a few who shall alone explain its teachings, and who can understand its real charac- ter? Go back more than a dozen centuries, and listen to Augustine. He deduces from that book the doctrine of efficacious grace — that man is wholly fallen — that the will is in absolute bondage — that Christ died for his elect people — that election to eter- 20 THE BIBLE. nal life is absolute, not from foreseen obedience and holiness, but from the good pleasure of God. Pela- gius, his opponent, on the other hand, declares that human nature is not entirely fallen — that the will is absolutely free — that Christ died for all men, and that election depends upon the will of man. Call to mind the interminable disputes among the theologians on these and kindred points, before the Reformation; hear Calvin affirm the views of Augustine, Arminius those of Pelagius ; come down to our own day, and the controversy has not abated one whit. Let " Ed- wards on the Will" represent, as in truth it does, the necessitarian doctrines of Augustine and Calvin, and then look at the works of his opponents, from his day down to that of Bledsoe's "Theodicy," and a prac- tised eye will discern every material point of dispute between Augustine and Pelagius, Calvin and Armi- nius, as much unsettled now as ever in the judgment of the respective disputants. Now, amid this contra- riety of opinion in regard to the same language, what is necessary to enable the reader to decide for him- self what is really taught in the Word of God ? Will not every one say, the book, the book about which all this is written ! Let a man who is radically unsound in doctrine attempt to explain the Bible ; let him, for example, ieny the doctrine of eternal punishment. Let that THE BIBLE. 21 man make a book expressive of his views of the doc- trines and practices inculcated by the Word of God, and who does not see that these views would contain and tend to disseminate his religious creed? Let him write a book presenting his opinions of the " princi- ples, instruction, and work" of the Order of Odd- Fellows, and in whatever relates to religion, we must look for such a modification as would be favourable to his peculiar form of infidelity. It is not possible for him to do otherwise if he would be true to himself and to his creed ; and the very distortions which he would present of Odd-Fellowship he might sincerely believe to be fairly drawn from its principles as he under- stands them in the light of his own creed. The very great uncertainty there is in relying upon mere individual opinion in the circumstances, must be apparent at a glance. But this uncertainty is im- mensely increased in Dr. Cooper's case, when it is recollected that he has taken up a book containing an expression of mere individual opinions about the nature of Odd-Fellowship, and these opinions professedly so expressed as to render all references in them to the secret wTork of the Order absolutely unintelligible to any but the initiated. Thus slenderly furnished, he declares himself "abundantly provided with mate- rials" for the full and faithful exposition of the secrets, usages, and evils of the Fraternity! The Manual, the reader will mark, is not prepared for the 22 THE ENDORSEMENT general public; it is merely "a full and complete Manual for the Order." (Pg. 6, Pref.) Again, " the written as well as the unwritten work of the Order I have considered sacred from revelation." The "en- dorsement" recommends it "to the brethren at large." The endorsement not official. The endorsement, signed by 74 members of the Grand Lodge of the United States, is not an official act of that body. This is a very important fact. If the manual were thus officially en- dorsed, it would be indeed all that Dr. Cooper supposes of its authority ; for it would be final. But it is not so. The endorsement is merely that of individuals who were members of the Grand Lodge, in their individual or unofficial capacity. It reads, " The undersigned, members of the Grand Lodge of the United States." Again, the endorsement was signed by these 74 gentlemen without a critical examination of the work. Every one accustomed to see such things done will easily understand how this may have occurred. Here comes the publisher of a book with a commendatory instrument of writing drawn up, presents it to 74 men at a time when the business of the session of the lodge presses upon them, and upon the strength of turning 9ver the leaves of the book, reading a paragraph here and there, they sign it. In confirmation of these views, we submit the following letter to the writer from J. Alexander Simpson, Esqr., a member of that Grand Lodge, and one of. the signers of the endorsement, at NOT OFFICIAL. 23 present chief presiding officer of the Grand Encamp- ment of this state. The letter will also throw some light upon the nature of an Odd-Fellow's obligation, which the reader will please connect with the discus- sion of that subject in the body of the book. Dear Sir and Bro. Your favour has been duly received, and in reply I would state that the recommendation of Bro. A. B. Grosh's Manual by the officers and members of the Grand Lodge of the United States, at the Annual Communication of 1852, was not an official act, but an individual one on the part of each person, and was given after such an examination as is usual by critics who do not make publication their trade — that is, not after careful reading, to see that no error had been committed either by Bro. Grosh or the persons under him, engaged in the preparation of the work, but from a cursory examination, glancing over its pages and forming an opinion upon what was said here and there through the work. Permit me to say, likewise, that in his work against Odd-Fel- lowship, the Rev. Joseph T. Cooper, D. D., is in error in sup- posing that Odd-Fellowship is an oath-bound institution. There is no oath required anywhere. Bro. Grosh, in speaking of the Grand Encampment Degree, in his work, says : " The receiver of this Degree appeals to Heaven and earth," (page 306,) but he does not mean thereby that an oath is taken ; he alludes to a sacred pledge of honor, made without appeal of any kind, for no other is required or given. My attention was directed to that expression in the Manual by Dr. Cooper's work, and, although had I been the author of it I would not have used the same language, yet it does not follow that any other meaning is intended, and, perhaps, had I not seen Dr. Cooper's work, the 24 THE MANUAL. idea that presents itself in that connexion to him would never have suggested itself to my mind. I am, very respectfully, yours, J. Alexander Simpson, Grand Patriarch of the Grand Encampment of Pa. May 1, 1856. Dr. Cooper, it will be seen, has imposed upon him- self again, when he declares, "I propose to confine myself to the examination of the authentic documents which the society, under its own imprimatur, has seen proper to publish to the world." Here the impression is undoubtedly made, that the Manual bears the offi- cial authority and sanction of the Order. The im- pression is not according to the facts, as we have shown. Dr. Cooper may not have known this ; or he may have overlooked it in his anxiety to make good his objec- tions against the Order. He may thus have been be- trayed into a belief of the truth of statements having little other foundation than his own desire that they should possess such weight as would answer the ends of his argument. His own statements he takes as so many facts ; he selects statements from the Manual to suit his own views, perhaps not always with strict regard to their connexion, and then forces the whole upon the attention of the reader as so much law, from which there is no appeal. Whatever merit the Manual may possess in itself, it does not possess such authority as Dr. Coo- per's argument requires ; it does not claim to possess it. THE OBJECTIONS. Dr. Cooper has raised a number of objections to the Order of Odd-Fellows, which we now propose to con- sider pretty much in the order in which he makes them. Some of his objections are involved in others, and, although we have not strictly observed this rule, we have so considered them. His book proceeding on -the supposition that the Manual is an exposition of Odd-Fellowship, many of his objections grow out of this mistaken supposition, and are entitled to no better fate than the supposition itself. We (waive this, however, as they are substantially those made by other persons who are not. favourable to the Order, and pro- ceed at once to consider them. OBJECTION I.— (Page 59.) " It justly exposes itself to the contempt ana) ridicule of the wise and manly. The very name it bears is calculated to awaken such feelings in the breasts of enlightened men." The Name. The question, "What's in a name?" we thought had long ago been answered; we were mistaken, it appears. An ugly name signifies an ugly 3 M 26 NAME. character ! In passing along the street the other day, we saw a name on a sign — Midnight ! Think of that, doctor. Mr. Midnight ! There's one of your shady fellows ! How he delights in darkness ! One of your secret, stealthy villains ! Who can ever see or hear that name but in connexion with burglary, arson, and assassination — the very embodiment of skeleton keys, dark lanterns, and boring implements ! Nay, but my good doctor, might not the man have got his name in a way that he could not help, and therefore it should be looked upon as his misfortune I Is it not very pos- sible that under his very bad name he may have a very good character ? So we Odd-Fellows think. No ; "names ought to be descriptive of character." They ought to be ; this is well said ; but your argument de- mands that they are so ! • We suppose the rule will work both ways, of course, doctor ? " Sister of Charity — Sister of Mercy — Sister of the Sacred Heart." Why, what's the matter, doctor — a cloud gathers on your countenance ? " Mystery ! Iniquity ! Popery ! What ! are not these beautiful names ? Could names be more £ descriptive of cha- racter' the most meek and holy ? Away with them, they are an abomination ; the ' position which our church' has taken in regard to the things with which they are connected, compels me to cry out against them." ORIGIN. 27 " Should a society be formed in the community, bearing the name of The Order of Silly-Fellows, would not this name bring upon it the contempt of men who had any regard for their re- spectability ?" Well, yes, doctor, according to the rule of judgment which you so much regard, doubtless it would ; but, according to the same rule, the name of The Order of Good-Fellows, or Wise-Fellows, would secure the approbation of all who valued reputable character and associations, even of yourself and friends. The reader might meanwhile wonder whether the doctor's rule of judgment might not very properly be made one of the code which should govern his Order of Silly-Fellows ! Origin. mation of that new Order of Sillv-Fellows ! Even to it we might venture to suggest, that according to a moral power, of which man, as " a rational and intelli- gent being," is the subject, the moral state of a society must not always remain the same. Is it true that good is never brought out of evil in the order of Divine Providence ? We are not merely asking for facts which go to demonstrate that Odd-Fellowship is more than " anything but respectable" now, but we are speaking of a principle in morals, the operation of which might dissever its present from its original cha- racter, and its character at any time from any immo- rality which its ugly name might be supposed to imply. Man's name is sinner, sufficiently and lamentably in- dicative of his moral character, but were the inference which Dr. Cooper's rule implies true, that of saint could never be coupled with it. Dress. " But not only is the very name calculated to awaken such feeling, but what intelligent man can contemplate with any other feelings many of the exhibitions of this Order ? Are not the regalia worn by Odd-Fellows utterly inconsistent with that simplicity and gravity which should ever characterize full- grown men ? Just think, my friends, of a company of men with aprons, and ribands, and rosettes, and other tinsels, fastened about them, and having drawn swords in their hands! We know that there is no disputing about tastes ; but we cannot help thinking that the taste of a person who can glory in such paraphernalia must be, to say the least, rather childish." DRESS. 29 Here we have a question of dress ; a question not materially differing from that of name. The worth of a man consists not in his clothes, but in the princi- ples which influence the conduct of the man inside of the clothes. This is sound truth ; truth taught by the word of God, and subscribed to by Odd-Fellows. None will dispute that there is such a thing as " con- sistency and gravity" in dress, but what is the standard by which that simplicity and gravity shall be judged ? Wherever found, the dress of an Odd-Fellow is not in accordance with it, Dr. Cooper being the judge ! Now, if this were final, if his judgment were law, the case of Odd-Fellowship would be settled, but unfortu- nately for his purpose, it is one of those very queer subjects of dispute in which the opinion of one man, or of a dozen men, will not establish the needed standard, Dr. Cooper dresses, doubtless, according to some rule of "simplicity and gravity," which he approves, and it is right and proper that he should, but, in order to show him how very far he may be from the true stan- dard, we respectfully exhort him duly to consider the following judgment of his own style of dress, and that of his flock, furnished by one who is a professed dis- ciple of " simplicity and gravity :" — " But alas ! ye conform to the world notwithstanding. Look ye, friends — your women wear ribbons of unholy colours ; rings of gold, polluted by the profane hands of the silversmith; yea, 80 BRESi*. ruffles, furbeloes, and heads frizzled up to enormous height, of downright French profaneness. * * * * Yea, examine but your clothes, ye who call yourselves gentlemen, and see what irreligion discovers itself in every part of their fabrication. Do you see, friends, your parsons wear clothes of an idolatrous black, and bands starched with superstition, after the manner of Popish hirelings. * * * Yea, your clothes are made of unholy colours, such as worn by servants of the flesh ; ye wear but- tons made of metal digged out of the bowels of the sinful earth ; even pocket-holes impiously gaping in the foreskirts of your upper garments ; and, to add to the height of your carnality, your hats are wickedly cocked, after the manner of the sons of Antichrist. I charge you all, ye Presbyterians, to turn to the light within you, and that will lead you to the substance. Then will ye forsake these lying worldly vanities."— Magowan's Dia- logues of Devils, p. 195. Dr. Cooper will see, after all, that exposure to the ?4 contempt and ridicule of the wise and manly," in regard to dress, depends very much upon who shall be the judge. Even he, regardful as he claims to be of "simplicity and gravity," falls under the ban of Friend Ephraim, who wears " cloth of a religious colour, even holy drab." If the clergy and member- ship of the Presbyterian church (and we dare say, if Eriend Ephraim could speak further, he would include other denominations), " who can glory in such para- phernalia" as black coats, white cravats, silk hats, cocked or turned up, gold rings and pins and chains, with bonnets and shawls, and other fashionable attire, DRESS. 31 be deemed absolutely irreligious and anti- Christian, by a professed student and advocate of the law of "simplicity and gravity" in dress, with what grace can Dr. Cooper charge the dress of an Odd-Fellow as being "rather childish!" He declares, we know, that he " cannot help thinking so of Odd-Fellows' re- galia;" but may not the Quaker who chides him be labouring under an equally great infirmity in regard to his dress and that of his people ? Until we have a standard of dress from an authori- tative source, which may not be departed from, and which shall be essential to the maintenance of moral and religious character, its form and style must de- pend upon the views and means of the wearer. The doctor has truly said, " there is no disputing about tastes." The simplicity of one mind will be the taw- dry of another. Opposite tastes will see opposite extremes in the same article of dress. The sense of propriety in dress with one individual will outrage all conceptions of modest attire which another may enter- tain, and yet both be equally free from unrighteous pride. The exterior is a very uncertain guide to the understanding of the interior. Calvin truthfully re- marks, " For it is truly observed, that a proud heart frequently dwells under coarse and ragged garments, and that simplicity and humility are sometimes con- cealed under purple and fine linen," 82 DEESS. Dressed for the occasion. Is there no rule' of pro- priety which adapts the dress to the occasion ? Dr. Cooper will appear in the nursery or in the study as he would not think it proper to appear in the pulpit. This has reference to what may be proper for a certain purpose, time and place ; it appeals directly to a sense of propriety in human society. There is such a thing, then, as adapting certain forms of dress to certain times and places. Those bidden to the wedding feast could not be admitted without a wedding garment. Of its form and style nothing is said ; but that it could not be dispensed with gives countenance to the rule of propriety adapting special dress to special purposes and occasions. It would indeed be "rather childish" if Odd-Fellows were to appear ordinarily in public attired in their regalia, but it may be very proper to wear it in the lodge room, or even on particular oc- casions in public. The devices which it bears may have a better use than that of mere display. Their significancy may be such as relates to things which are or should be deeply within the heart. The power of all right thinking and feeling is established there by God. To watch its operations should be man's constant care. The natural proclivity to forgetfulness and neglect of the heart's workings, renders it desirable that every object upon which the eye fails should refer to the great work in the heart. Man should indeed DRESS. 33 not require such aids, but that does not alter the fact that he may be profited by them. This is one use of the regalia of an Odd-Fellow, and let not Dr. Cooper fc denounce its wear as " rather childish" until he knows fully how this object is accomplished. The object itself is lawful, and Odd-Fellows only claim the exercise of the same right of judgment and taste in the man- ner of accomplishing it which Dr. Cooper enjoys when he- wears such dress as he thinks, according to his rule of " simplicity and gravity," best adapted to his pulpit or any other special place or season. 