Dr. John Campbell

The circumstances under which I first met Dr. Campbell were likely to make a vivid impression upon the memory. By his invitation I went to London to assist him in his ministerial work, and on reaching my temporary home in Hackney was informed that the Doctor wished to see me precisely at seven oclock the following evening in his own house. At that time (1852) he was the popular and influential editor of the British Banner, which was published at 69, Fleet Street. In order to graduate my approach to what was then, in my estimation, a formidable presence, I made it my business to spend part of the following morning in walkmg backward and forward in front of the Banner window, in the hope of catching a glimpse of the notorious denominational editor, — so little, alas, did I then know of editors and their windows! The window might have been opaque for any good it did me; no editor, no publisher, no clerk, was to be seen, — nothing, in fact, was to be seen but the last number of the British Banner laid out at its full length, having, to my eye, quite a defiant aspect. I looked, and wondered, and looked again, and again wondered; what if the editor should come out and I should see him without his being aware of that circumstance! Yery foolish, no doubt; yet such was my plight; to my rustic simplicity the second

Dr. John Campbell. 169

great fact in creation was Dr. Campbell and my rustic timidity quite staggered under fhe probability that there might be only a sheet of plate glass between us. A youth who had been born within hearing of Bow bells would probably have felt a contemptuous pity for such backwardnesSj for what could he know of life among the hills, where the proportions of supposed greatness were exaggerated partly by distance and partly by denominational pride? Be that as it may, my preliminary survey brought me nothing but disappointment. In the evening I set out for Dr. CampbelFs residence; but, being a total stranger in London, I had the misfortune of getting on the wrong track, and landing, not at Tabernacle House, but at Tottenham Court Chapel, — something like three miles from my proper destination. While standing there lost in such wonder as only a youth from the far-away hills can know anything about — a half stupid wonder which made me feel as if every cabman knew my mistake, and every policeman thought that I was meditating a deep and dangerous design — a taunting clock pitilessly struck seven. There was a malevolent mockery in the deliberateness with which it struck, as if the whole metropolis were sneering maliciously at the provinces. In less than half an hour, however, by the aid of a cabman who seemed to know by cruel instinct that I had come from that barbaric region which the cockney knows as” the kentry,’’^ I stood, or rather trembled, on the steps of Tabernacle House. I am not sure whether the right hand had forgot its cunning, but I have a distinct recollection that my tongue would gladly have cleaved to the roof of my mouth. Bow-bells will say again that this was very silly, but Bow-bells cannot know the disadvantages of being born in ‘^ the kentry/^ On ringing Dr. CampbelPs bell, I felt as if I had. bronglit upon myself a storm which. might end in my ruin; it did ring; I heard the tingling through the door and through the windows, and all round about me, — oh! how it rung. Poe must not have heard it when he wrote of the bells, for if he had heard it another verse would certainly have suggested itself on the spot. In half a minute my hand was in Dr. CampbelFs, and there was comfort in the warm grip! Commend me to a man who has a hearty way of shaking hands, and save me from cold bones and palms of steel. Dr. Campbell shook hands in a most welcoming manner, and so did much to recall my ease. Look at him I Broad, erect, with abundant grey hair standing up as if it had been suddenly startled into disorder, and with linen enough around- his neck to dress half a denomination. What a collar! At the back of the head it rose as high as the organ of philoprogcnitiveness, on the cheeks it stood up like a protest against the ears, and in front pointed itself against society with a desperation that would have been alarming if it had not been comical. I had seen collars like it in engravings, but until that moment had seen nothing like it in actual linen. Then the voice, — what nervous young man from the mountains could be quite easy under such gruff tones? Its very gentleness was a kind of muffled roar; what then must it have been when sounding in full compass! There was joositively a sound of doom in it. Who could safely contradict what it declared? In the Doctor’s hand there was a long strip of paper, such as I had never seen; I did not know what it was, but afterwards found that it was the proof of a newspaper article — in other words, a

Vr. John Caonjphell. 171

long, thick rough rope for the scourging of any man who ventured to have a will of his own. That was the beginning of my acquaintance with newspaper proof sheets — excellent material no doubt provided always that they are in excellent hands. I could not but notice a peculiar habit of breathing in my reverend host; that operation seemed to be conducted entirely through the mouth, and appeared to have been reduced to a system of powerful gasping, by which he was constantly declaring that he was not in the least asthmatic, notwithstanding the plainest evidence to the contrary. Happily I soon forgot everything in the gentle smile, which quite enlightened and softened the rugged Roman face and almost overflowed the snowy collar. Dr. CampbelFs friends will often think of his characteristic smile, how it played upon his shaggy eyebrows, wreathed his Caesar-like lips into dignified complacency, kindled a genial glow on his broad brow, and lost itself in the forest of his upright and redundant hair. Does not everybody’s smile do pretty much the same thing? Grant that, if you please, and still there will remain a peculiarity of expression which distinguished Dr. Campbell’s smile from every other which I have seen.

“What age are you, sir?” the Doctor inquired in his blandest manner, laying down the proof sheet, and breathing in the way described.

“Twenty-two, sir.-”

“Ah! ‘’ (gasping and smiling) “you are very young, very young; and though, sir, this is not the day for boys,’’ (smiling very kindly) “we must have youthful energy; yes, yes” (gasping as if punctuating). “Well, sir, and what texts have you for to-morrow?”

^’ In the mornings sir, I think of preaching from Heb. xii. 18: ‘Ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, etc.; and in the evening from Luke ix. 9: * John have I beheaded, but who is this of whom I hear such things? ‘”

“Just so, sir, just so,^’ the Doctor replied with an ominous gasp, very good; but now let me see, to-morrow is Easter Sunday, and some reference should be made to the resurrection; I tell you therefore what we shall do. I shall read a portion of Scripture bearing upon it and offer a running comment; I shall then offer prayer, and leave you about forty minutes for your sermon.’’^ Having said so, he smiled, as if the brightest of ideas had been propounded.

The idea did not lay hold of me in the same happy manner, but there was doom in the voice! Secretly I wished that the running comment could be postponed until some other Easter Sunday, but dare not have said so for the world. My own sermon might, I thought as I returned to Hackney, pass muster if it went by itself, but it will utterly fail under the strain of contrast. My own dream was a running comment, in a sense that is not exegetical, and in fear and trembling I appeared on the following morning to undergo the culminating trial of my life. AVhen we met in the vestry, the first time I had seen the Doctor in daylight, I thought I had never looked upon a more intensely masculine and powerful face. There was not one weak line in it, one soft and plastic spot to which a young man from ‘^ the kentry ‘’ might trust in the event of failure; all was solidity, massiveness, force; and in the daylight I thought I saw even in the smile itself a curious wrinkle which looked a good deal like a mark

Dr. John CamjjheU. 173

of interrogation. Certainly it did not look so credulous as it did the night before; there was evident inquiry in it, and, as it appeared to my terror, a touch of prophetic success in the matter of the running comment. The forehead did not convey to me a strongly favourable impression of the Doctors benevolence; but the whole head by its magnitude, its broad base line, and its firm set, showed that its owner was a man of no little intellectual capacity. The eye was small, deep- set, not piercing, but calmly observant. I never saw the faintest sign of fire in it j it seemed to be a merely receptive eye, taking minute and general surveys, but never telegraphing to others any hint of the surveyor’s impressions and reflections. One can sometimes catch a revelation in other men’s eyes, even when the men themselves are doing their best to keep their secret thoughts; but Dr. Campbell’s eye never showed a sign that betrayed his feeling. The nose was of the boldest Roman type, extremely large and most clearly outlined, the nostrils being particularly well curved and expressive. Not one man in ten thousand has such a nose; if it was not really as good as ten talents, it was certainly an excellent fortune to begin the world with. Behind so vast and energetic a nose there might have been volumes of martial poetry, several military romances, and at least ten victorious battles. And such lips, — lips* enough and to spare! They overhung, they revelled in strength, they shut like iron doors! As for the mouth, it was not a mere mouth, it was nothing short of a cavern; and when a laugh came out of it the sound was not the most refined which has ever been heard among men. There he stood on that memorable Easter Sunday morning, primed with a running comment; and there was I,

17i Ad Clerum: Advices to a Young Vrcadicr,

rustic, hesitant, wonder-struck, with a few sheets of paper in my pocket, wkicli seemed to me to be the most unsatisfactory sheets tkat ever were written. Friends at home. had seen them, or heard their words, and with too partial love had spoken well of them; but on that Easter Sunday morning the very ink had almost faded out, and the orthodoxy appeared to have got a heretical twist. To my great alarm, the Doctor decided that we should go into the pulpit together; and having taken several papers in his left hand, away he went, his right arm swinging energetically and striking back his coat with regular blows; he might have been going to fight a battle instead of giving a running comment; his port evidently meant war to any one who might have come in his way. Having opened the service very solemnly, he gave his proposed comment very much to my satisfaction. Without any attempt at verbal criticism, there was an intelligent apprehension of the idea, and an evident desire to bring the hearers into sympathy with the historic spirit of the day of triumph. There was no attempt at style, no critical choice of words, no aim at rhetcric; but there was a very solemn and urgent earnestness which well befitted the occasion; most of the, sentences were short, some of them coldly glittering, all of them practical, and throughout the whole a reverence mingled with joy which became those who were in imagination standing beside the empty tomb of their Lord. Dr. Cam^Dbell did not strike me, either on that occasion or any other, as a pulpit orator in the ordinary sense of the term. In the pulpit he was very formal, quite stifi” in fact, as if he had suddenly become all collar together; he never fell into ease, or conciliatory famili’ arity, but always stood aloof as an imperial, an unap*

Dr. John CamphcU, 175

proacTiable presence. What soul would ever dare to go to such a man in the night of its trouble and wonder and weakness? His pulpit, a very volcano in the days of Whitefield, seemed to be a mountain of ice, and his words like storms of hail. This was the impression which strangers would often take, but I am bound to say that such an impression did not do Dr. Campbell full justice. He could be tender and sympathetic; after the hail could come the dew; out of the terrible mouth could come the gentle and healing word. Probably he knew nothing of the agonies which torment many speculative and sensitive souls; very likely he thought the Assembly’s Catechism furnished “a sovereign balm for every wound;’’ and possibly he did not know what to do with those adventurous spirits that prefer flying to walking; still, within the limits of technical theology he was no unskilful physician. In the pulpit he was lofty and stern; in the house he was familiar and gracious. His platform appearances were often very eff”ective. He had a happy word for everybody, and an agile way of escaping difficulties; sometimes he half threatened to be humorous, and though he never could sharpen a sentence into wit, yet he could nod his grey plume in a manner which indicated that only the restraints of grace kept him from the dissipation of jocularity. There was not much coherence in his speeches; they were like baskets full of fragments — a bit for everybody, not excepting his critics and opponents.

From the Easter Sunday in question Dr. Campbell and I worked a good deal together, and my association with him enables me to say something about his character and habits which no one else has the means of saying. His method of directing my own labours was liigHy cliaracteristiCj while the spirit in which lie gave his advice was often that of a truly Christian father. To pronounce him a perfect man would be to ignore many most distressing evidences of imperfection; to pronounce him always a just man would be to wink at some of the gravest and crudest injustice which disfigures the honour of public life; yet at the particular time of which I write there was enough about him to inspire confidence and beget a very cordial love. His advice was too mature to be treated with levity and his generous consideration disarmed a very rigorous criticism. The general impression which he made upon me was that,, in all cases requiring sound judgment, he was capable of rendering very valuable service; though if any prejudice should be at work in his mind he could never rise above it and speak with the serenity and candour of impartiality.

A sketch of the Doctor’s manner of directing my work as his assistant will show one view of his various life. Suppose it to be Saturday morning, and probably I shall receive a note to this effect: ‘^ My dear young friend, tea at five oclock, after which the preachers will go about their business. Yours cordially, J. C.’’’ Half an hour is spent at the tea table in the pleasantest manner, everybody is happy; the Doctor addresses minute inquiries to each guest as to health and pursuits, and hits each case so exactly that the guest supposes himself to have been enjoying the Doctor’s consideration for some time past, — a very innocent delusion on the part of the guest, yet showing to an observer the great advantage to a pastor if he can only remember every toothache, every cough, and every fever, which may have afflicted his congregation.

Dr. John Gamphell. 177

This was the Doctor’s forte. If there were twenty people at the table lie could have spoken to each some word indicative of strong individual interest and left the impression upon unsuspecting minds that when all other friends failed he would be their friend for ever.

“Now, sir, let us leave the ladies and betake ourselves to the study,” the Doctor would remark, smiling upon the ladies in a manner which made our exit very easy.

“Well, sir, read your morning’s sermon if you please, and let us see what can be done.” I would then read the morning’s sermon from beginning to end. On concluding it, the Doctor would offer his criticism.

“Too long, sir, I am afraid. Suppose you cut down the first division, say one half. Yes, do that.” Or again, “Too many headsp sir, too many by far. I don’t like to hear a sermon that is broken up into a thousand fragments. A good many of the heads may be given without formal specification.”

“Did not many of the aid preachers use a good many heads, sir?”

‘They did, but then they were old preachers, and the manners of the people were different. We must study what will be most effective and useful.”

On another occasion the Doctor would say: “The morning text is hardly suitable for you; come now, suppose we try something else: let me see; yes; take so and so (naming another text), and let me hear what you can make of it in the morning.”

“But there ’s no time, sir!”

‘^ No time! So, so! Never say that, sir; time enough! Come now, let me break the bones of the text for you; in the first place there is,” etc. And so he

N would go tbrongli the leading ideas of the passage, and wish me to write according to his exposition, never for a moment allowing me to escape on the plea that there was not time to do what he proposed.

“Now, sir, will yon proceed with the evening
sermon/^

The evening sermon was read accordingly. I am not quite sure, sir, that you are right in your exegesis; let me see.^^ The original would then be appealed to, and one or two of the best critical authorities consulted. On all occasions the grammar, the rhetoric, and the theology of the sermons which had been prepared were freely criticised, so that I received the benefit of a life-timers education and thirty years varied ministerial experience.

The sermons having been disposed of, I was next called upon to read my literary diary. Every Saturday the Doctor gave me theological, critical, or biographical works which I was expected to read, and on the following week I had to present him with a careful analysis of their contents, with criticisms upon the argument and style of each author. The thing which struck me most was the Doctor’s clear recollection of books which he had read twenty or thirty years ago, a recollection which was shown not only by precise reference but occasionally by almost literal quotation. I was glad of this, as I had the advantage of it, not only as a moral check but as an intellectual stimulus.

When the sermons and the diary had received due attention, a part of the evening’s engagement came which I can seldom recall without tender emotion. We knelt together in the study, and the Doctor offered prayer which was truly the “preparation before the sabbath.” I

I)r, John Cawihell. 179

never heard any one so gifted in private prayer. The solemnity the simplicity, the fervour, were deeply impressive. The special supplications which he never failed to offer for myself were most pathetic, and so powerfully did he plead for a blessing that often my heart was enlarged in holy and loving desire towards God as if the answer had been given “whiles he was praying/^ However much business the Doctor had on hand the prayer was never omitted; and each prayer was as new as if the spirit of devotion was never exhausted.

So ended the Saturday evening in Dr. Campbells study, and I returned to my own to give effect as far as possible to his suggestions. On the sabbath morning there was always a smile for me, and some word of encouragement in relation to the day. On sabbath evenings we spent many a happy hour in the Tabernacle House, reviewing the public engagements, relating incidents which illustrated the doctrine which had been taught, or listening to the Doctor’s reminiscences of pastoral life. The Doctor, though ever genial, never allowed us to sink into frivolity; in his most relaxed moods ho was always so self-restrained as to be able, without violent transition, to advert to the most serious subjects; and even in his liveliest moments, when he was indulging his most humorous sallies, he was .quoting poetry, epigrams, or biographic incidents, all of which gave his lightest conversation a rare and most graphic instructiveness.

On fe Monday morning after my first Sunday at the Tabernacle I went by invitation to the editorial office of the British Banner — a dark dirty room, literally crammed with books and papers of the most miscellaneous description. Near the window sat the editor at his desk,

N 2 and before him lay a scrap of paper on wliicli lie had jotted what lie called a few “catch- words/^ On the other side of the table sat one of the Doctor s shorthand writers. The process of dictating a leading article was about to begin, and the Doctor having warned me to be “as still as a monse/^ the editorial steam was turned on. A look at the scrap of paper, and then a paragraph; another look, and another paragraph; the great voice sounding, and the grey plumage of the noble head nodding, in the most characteristic manner. Sentence after sentence, paragraph after paragraph, now very epigrammatic and anon bordering on the rhetorical; here very sensible, and there nearly bombastic; one sentence striking like a dart, and another stunning like the blow of a hammer. As soon as the first leading article was finished the bell was tingled and reporter No. two came to the desk. The process was repeated; with a Johnsonian copiousness and often with a Johnsonian precision, the editor proceeded. Was it a personal article? Then let the victim be pulled bone from bone, and limb from limb, and let him be pounded in a mortar, and let the pounded victim be thrown to the dogs. Was it a church article? Then let great principles be asserted, let” the law and the testimony ‘’ speak, and whoever opposes, let him fall. Was it a favourable article? Then let all superlatives be called to the front, and summon every word that can be pressed into the service of praise; then the delineation will stand thus — unrivalled, matchless, magnificent, stupendous, overwhelming. Was it a condemnatory article? Then reverse the process, and the caserwill stand thus — presumptuous, outrageous, mendacious, flagitious, infamous, and diabolical. It may easily

D) John Gamphell. 181

be conceived that as a young man I listened to this literary Niagara with some alarm, and not until I had learned that the Doctor did not really mean all that he said did I feel in any measure composed as a listener. When I say that he did not really mean it, the expression must not be misunderstood. He himself was personally sincere, else he would not have braved and even defied public opinion as he did; but he did not accept the great words in the sense in which they would be generally understood. For example, where an ordinary man would express simple regret Dr. Campbell would express the uttermost anguish and horror of soul; where such a man would say that he did not approve of a certain course Dr. Campbell would characterise that course as one which outraged alike reason and propriety, and rose to the point of shameless and scandalous mendacity; where the said ordinary man would nod approbation Dr. Campbell would pronounce the commended object as the most magnificent and illustrious display of genius on which he had ever fixed his admiring and enraptured attention. Both the ordinary man and Dr. Campbell would mean pretty much the same thing, only Dr. Campbell always carried a longer ladder than was necessary to reach the object he had in view. Dr. Johnson speaks of somebody laying a forty-pounder to the door of a pigsty, and certainly Dr. Campbell would not have hesitated to have turned an Armstrong gun upon a dove-cote or a dog-kennel. His weapons were very often out of proportion to the battle; he often overlaid himself with instruments and armour, and so came in many cases to have the appearance of defending a garden wicket with a park of artillery. There was nothing ordinary in Dr. Camp-

1S2 Ad Gleriim: Advices to a Young Freacher.

belFs world. All the geese were swaiis, all the swans were eagles, all the eagles were seraphs in disguise. It was a very stupendous world. Some of the Grerman horse-trainers are said to be in the habit of putting highly magnifying spectacles upon young horses, that they, being deceived as to the magnitude of the stones upon the street, may acquire a high step. By some means the same kind of spectacles had been put upon Dr. CampbelFs nose; so pebbles became paving stones, and the paving stones were the hugest boulders. He believed it most sincerely, and all his public course was more or less affected by the strange infatuation. Hence we find that if any speculative brother broached a novel theory, we were, according to Dr. Campbell, about to be lost in German mysticism if any man hinted that the Westminster Confession of Faith was strict, the spirit of scepticism was coming in like a flood; if the pope wrote an extra letter, England was about to be carried away as with a whirlwind!

The habit of dictating his articles, instead of patiently and critically writing them with his own hand, while it enabled the Doctor to get through an immense amount of work, exposed him to very great peril. He often became rhetorical when he should have been judicial, and in rounding a period he was apt to be more careful about the curvature of the sentence than the absolute justness of the sentiment. Had he done less he would have done more. There can be no doubt that while the works which were written without the aid of an amanuensis contain many most vigorous and even beautiful paragraphs, replete with intelligence and exact in expression, many of his dictated productions are little better than

Br, John Campbell 183

waste paper. Undoubtedly there are sentences, and not a few of them, even in these productions, which are as accurate as they are vigorous; yet the productions as a whole are unworthy of the occasionally eloquent and graphic style of ‘’ The Martyr of Erromanga/^ For correspondence and brief notices of unimportant books dictation may serve every purpose; but close; correct, and polished composition demands most patient and critical elaboration. But how could such elaboration possibly be given to all the works which Dr. Campbell undertook? Think of one man editing two weekly newspapers and two monthly magazines, besides conducting a voluminous correspondence and occasionally preaching, and addressing public meetings! Nor was this all: in the midst of such engagements he wrote a commentary on the Bible! That all this could have been done by his own hand is simply a physical impossibility; hence the truth of a remark which he once made to me in his own house: throwing himself into his arm-chair he said, “I have done more work to-day than any six men could have done without the aid of shorthand. “That he soon felt the limit of his merely manual power is pretty evident from a paragraph written in the Christian Witness eighteen months after he undertook the editorship. “Experience,” he wrote, “has already taught us that most, if not all, our labours in connection with committees, public business, and public meetings appertaining to religion and humanity, with special services of all sorts both in town and country, must be abandoned. Nor is this all; regular courses of general study must henceforth subside into general excursions, and all further attempts at solid authorship be at an end.” When these words were

184 Ad Glerum: Advices to a Young Freaclicr,

wi:itteii Dr. Campbell was doing the full work of the pastorate; yet even allowing for that it is almost incredible that he could have added so much more literary work to the editorship of a magazine which taxed so heavily his time and strength — indeed it would have been absolutely impossible to have done it apart from the assistance of shorthand. But with a free use of shorthand came the most of his public mistakes, which were neither few nor trivial. Of course it is an easy thing for a man who to strong feeling adds an ample command of language, to sit in his editorial chair and fulminate against * men and things in general. There is a pleasant excitement about the exercise; the use of shorthand relieves the physical labour, and what is saved in fatigue of body is added to zest of mind; oratorical excitement too inflames the editorial mind, and gives a keen interest to all combative engagements. So long as the language is vigorous, who cares for the absolute equity of the sentiment? If the sentences fall rhythmically it is of small consequence what may be thought of the doctrine. This is the peril of dictation; the dictator finds it difficult to stop, the shorthand writer is waiting, the printers are crowding round the door, and the article must be finished. Under such circumstances many an ill selected word and many an ill fashioned sentence are allowed, to meet the exigency of the moment. Beyond most men Dr. Campbell was in danger from literary dictation. His sensibilities were strong; his turn of expression was naturally exaggerated; his prejudices were often unreasoned and generally very obstinate; so that to be hurried where he ought to have been calm, to be compelled to produce where he ouoht to have had leisure for the most critical

Dr. John Camfhell. ] 85

revision, was to be put in the way of a most urgent and flattering temptation. It must ever be much the same where any man has to write by quantity, where work is weighed by avoirdupois and not by troy, or where square yards of type are of more importance than literal exactness. In this way I find it less difficult, knowing Dr. Campbell as I did, to account for many of the extravagances which justly offended those who knew the man only by his fervid and often bombastic leaders.

One circumstance I remember well, as illustrating not only the perils of dictation but the method of Dr. CampbelFs reviewing. A book called The Eclipse of Faith ^’ was sent to the Banner for review; and the Doctor boldly began his dictation with the sentence, — ‘^ Another dart from the quiver of the enemy! That book I need not say is one of the ablest defences of Christianity which has appeared during the century, yet it was so described by the rhetorical dictator. When he came home on the evening of the day on which that review was published I was in his parlour, and well I remember him throwing himself into his arm-chair and exclaiming, “I have made the greatest mistake ever I made in my life! I would have recalled the whole edition of to-days Banner if I could.”

Others however must be left to offer judgment upon Dr. CampbelFs public position and services; my object is rather to cite such of his opinions and exhortations as were addressed to myself as a young preacher. In my youthful devotion I found time to write nearly all that my Mentor ever said to me respecting the ministry; and as many of his remarks have more than a personal interest

18(3 Ad Clerum: Aduices to a Young Preacher.

they may bo useful to other students and young ministers. Take a sample: —

“When I was a young minister a wet Sunday was a terrible annoyance; I would mourn that, after having laboured in preparation for a whole week, the chapel would be half filled. Age has taught me this lesson — to preach as willingly to two hundred as to two thousand, knowing that men are accountable as individuals, and not in their aggregate capacity. Pride is not entirely wanting, when a preacher can only minister to crowds. Always remember that one soul saved is enough to repay the most laborious preparation.

Be careful in rebuking ill heJiaviour from the pulpit; it is difficult sometimes to restrain indignation, yet when an angry word has been spoken it cannot be recalled; there is therefore great necessity for exercising discretion. In some cases a rebuke has been effectively administered by aged ministers — their seniority has been the best possible shield from retaliation; a word from their lips would be useful, when the very same expression from the mouth of a junior would be considered ill judged and worse than wasted. Private expostulation is more commendable than pulpit correction.

In the course of a lengthened ministry I have met with some mighty nuisances in the form of one-eyed men, one-legged individuals; for example, there are those who will liberally subpcribe to local missions who would not give a coin to the support of foreign missions; they will patronise the Bible Society, but have nothing to do with Sunday-schools; they will be superintendents or nothing. They have their own peculiar notions as to Christian duty and propriety, and to those they cling with unyielding tenacity. It is impossible for young ministers to work harmoniously with such onearmed men; and not only so, but they frequently prove l)r. John CamijheU. 187

sources of intense annoyance to all who are earnest-hearted and willing to do anything that goodness and truth may universally prevail.

All young ministers should abstain from occupying much of their time in political or other controversy. Their business is to preach the- gospel. As a father, I would entreat you to devote the first ten years of your ministerial life to the pulpit. There will be numerous calls upon you to advocate this and the other good cause; but if you spend your energies to any considerable extent in platform work, your preparation for the pulpit will be scanty and unsatisfactory. Nothing great will be accomplished without singleness of aim; there are indeed men who appear equal to any amount of work, however diverse; yet the majority of preachers are not so: therefore, whatever may be the exceptions, the general rule should stand thus, — devote supreme attention to sabbath duty, and if you have any leisure time you can devote it to other good purposes. After ten years’ laborious study you will be surprised to find how comparatively easy your work will then become; much however depends on the habits you form in the early part of your public life.

Dr. Campbeirs public prayers were unusually rich, and impressive. On the subject of prayer in public lie said to me: —

My custom for many years has been to ponder on a sabbath morning such facts concerning the fellowship as might have come to my knowledge during the course of the week; I have taken a slip of paper and jotted down the several items, e.g.-. — Are any sick? Is any member suiFering from sorrow, relative or personal? Has any death occurred? What is there in the sabbath-school demanding special notice? Are there any inquiring the way of salvation? By asking those questions you will be in a position to meet the”

188 Ad Clcriim: Advices to a Young Preacher.

wants of the people in an acceptable manner. Be assured that if you wish the congregation to follow the line of petition you must touch every heart, and as far as practicable allude to every case; in this way, the devotional exercise becomes thoroughly congregational. It is lamentable to observe how much of our petitionary agency is mere vapid formality, performed in so perfunctory a manner that the congregation feels quite relieved when the prayer is concluded. It has frequently happened that men have been brought to Grod in the act of public prayer — their case has been so strikingly marked out, and mercy so fervently’ implored, that they have been brought to consideration and penitence. It must of necessity arouse attention, when a professed worshipper can say, “that ’s my case,^’ while the minister is leading the devotion; and having excited attention, there is every prospect of creating sympathy. Observe, we must have praye7% not talk; the difference is essential. True prayer is the language of the heart; it is simple, earnest, scriptural. To succeed in public petition I know nothing so useful as a previous reading of the devotional portions of the Bible. There is no liturgy equal to many parts of David’s psalms — there you have the man’s heart poured out in the fulness of simplicity. In order to preserve variety in prayer — for it is as necessary in prayer as in preaching — endeavour to ground the main line on the scripture just read; it will be easy to bring in congregational thanks and necessities on this as a basis. Never try to be eloquent, flowery, or fine in prayer; be lowly, reverent, and simple. Avoid all eccentric expression — all trite, smart sayings, as incompatible with the spirit of acceptable devotion. “When man communes with Grod he should be utterly abased and filled with self-distrust; for only as man sees himself as nothing, and Grod as everything, will he learn to worship “with reverence and godly fear.” Some men have a peculiar habit of quoting scraps of hymns and even couplets from poems of another order, while engaged in prayer. Abjure this practice: it is unbecoming and unnatural for a beggar to ask

Dr. Johi Camphell. 189

an alms in rhyme, men would consider it so were the case their own. On every ground therefore, sing your hymns and praij jouv prayers, for this is the path of nature and propriety.

In the course of a lengthened pastorate Dr. Campbell did a good deal of Bible-class work; his opinion as to the value and conduct of such service will be approved by many pastors: —

Some men are pre-eminently adapted to this kind of work. Men who could never occupy any distinguished pulpit position have made their way most effectively by devoting supreme attention to Bible classes. The talent required in these separate departments is quite of a different nature; the eloquent and impassioned orator seldom makes a calm and judicious teacher. He is too rhetorical to meet the wants of inquiring minds on the fundamental outlines of Christian theology. The same remark is conversely true respecting the mere teacher; he can break the truth into pieces, so to speak, suited to the capacities of all, but in the pulpit is destitute of that synthetic power which is necessary for rapid combination, so as to produce forcible and lasting impression on the minds of a popular auditory. Supposing however that a minister is adapted for class instruction, much of his success will depend on the manner in which it is conducted. As a rule, all controversial subjects should be avoided, and attention entirely confined to standard doctrine; when once young men begin to dispute and cavil there is no saying where the matter will end; let them therefore in the first instance be thoroughly grounded in the “faith once delivered to the saints,” and afterwards they will be in a position to encounter the various forms of error everywhere so abundant. Free inquiry should by no means be discountenanced; at the same time reason and experience concur in affirming that all men should be conversant with certain first principles before they venture to appear in the arena of intellectual or theological contesty. To enunciate and develop those first principles is one of the leading objects of every well conducted Bible class. So far as the students are concerned, it is vtell to cause tJiem to speak as much as the case may require; such a course will deepen individual interest, and facilitate correct and fluent expression. “When a man feels that he is expected to do something he is quickened into action, he thus begins to feel his own deficiencies and manifest anxiety for their supply. On the contrary, when he knows that the interest of the class depends entirely on the conductor, he sinks into a kind of intellectual passivity, assenting to everything and examining nothing. A portion of Scripture — say, one of the epistles — should be chosen; a given number of verses should be announced as the subject for the ensuing week; every member should then be separately interrogated as to the scope and design of the passage; it being understood that the verses are read in rotation, and that each reader has the priority of expression as to the signification of the verse read. In this manner an interest is excited and sustained, which would not attend any individual exposition, however apt or luminous. It is also an excellent practice for each student periodically to prepare an essay on some scriptural subject. By this means he is instructed in composition, and is affording to others an opportunity ,of exercising their critical skill. There is one difiiculty attending this matter, viz., when the choice of a subject is left to the class an amount of hesitation is felt which prevents definite action; to the end that this difiiculty be obviated, it is well for the minister himself to announce a theme and request an essay or essays upon it. This plan has been found to work admirably in the higher class of biblical tuition.

There is another object never to be forgotten, viz., at the conclusion of the service the conductor should detain one or more of the attendants, for the purpose of holding private spiritual conversation. This may be easily done, by stating that he wishes a brief interview in the vestry; persons who

Br. John Camjyhell. 191

would shrink from clo.^e religious scrutiny in the company of others will feel quite at liberty to converse on personal godliness under such circumstances as now defined. The conversion of the soul is the great end of all pastoral labour, therefore every possible means should be employed for realizing this momentous object. In the pulpit you can only speak in generalities, even in your most fervent and searching appeals; but when you are speaking to onlj one individual there can be no mistake as to the identity. In the sanctuary men hear for others, but in this close address the individual is compelled to hear for himself. Never shrink from this duty; sometimes it calls for much fortitude and self-denial, but be assured the reward is most abundant. The person will feel that his soul is cared for; he will see that whatever may have been his own carelessness there is at least one who has ventured in faith and love to introduce the most important of subjects. The most hardened have been subdued in this manner; the man who would charge a minister with preaching for money may be undeceived by that same minister daring to arrest his attention on the matter of his personal salvation.

No man values the pulpit more than I do as an instrumentality in the propagation of religious principle. At the same time there are certain adjuncts which are inconceivably important if not absolutely essential. Among these the Bible class is worthy of high rank. It affords opportunities for conversing upon subjects which could not be handled with equal advantage in the public ministry. The voice of inquiry may be heard, and the response of wisdom be returned. Wherever the exercises of the pulpit are sustained with vigour the Bible class will be found powerfully instrumental for good; and where pulpit duties are inefficiently discharged something is requisite to supplement their deficiencies and compensate for their weakness. Devote therefore your best energies to the encouragement and instruction of the young. They are the hope of the church, and as such imperatively demand the attention and sympathy of all who love the Lord Jesus. Wherever practicable it is well to encourage suitable reading among the members, by forming a library of select literature; financially, this could be easily accomplished by each individual contributing a given proportion towards a general fund.

The following advice upon church discipline commends itself alike on the ground of prudence and of feeling: —

A meeting of the church should never be convened until there is sufficient business to warrant doing so. To aet otherwise is simply to squander time. Church meetings are seldom conducted in a proper manner. Some men appear to be so entirely ignorant of public usage and decorum that they deport themselves on such occasions in the most unbecoming spirit. It is certain however that the wisest men are never the most forward to call attention to themselves. One of the most noted men of his day has been heard to say that, while a private member of a church, he never once opened his mouth in its meetings. Small fellowships are most likely to fall into mistakes on this, particular; every man thinks he has something to say which will enlighten the brethren, and very frequently when he has told his tale it amounts to nothing. The best way of preventing the introduction of foreign subjects is to establish the rule that no business of immediate importance shall be transacted, except such as has been previously submitted in the form of notice. In pursuing such a course the pastor can never be taken by surprise; he will have time for reflection, and will be thereby enabled to take a comprehensive view of the question in its varied ramifications. Every minister should talk over the forthcoming business with his deacons, so that the whole official staff may be prepared to move in harmony. Never be anxious to find out cases for church discipline; some men have wrought their official ruin by

Br. John Camplell. 193

making every little annoyance a subject for cliurcli interference. Be faithful in private remonstrance, but until every other means has failed refrain from submitting the matter to the judgment of the fellowship. A trifling sore may be healed by a little address, but if it is fretted it may enlarge and mortify. Remember however that when a case of known delinquency presents itself it is at the peril of the church to connive thereat. If the church is to be peaceable it must first be pure; the stillness which is caused by impurity is the ominous quietude which precedes the thunder shock and the earthquake! Care not about lessening the numerical strength of the body; be jealous for its purity, and labour patiently for its increase. It is well to call the church together for special prayer; this practice ever reminds the people of the Source of all their strength and mercy.

Another hint on preaching is worthy of recollection: —

In choosing a text don’t be anxious to find anything very peculiar; some men indulge a kind of pride in preaching from mottoes; for example, such words as “if,” “so,” “now,” “but,” etc., have been adopted as texts. The ignorant and childish may be struck with admiration of the preacher’s talent who can “make a sermon out of so little;” but the more steady and intelligent will be grieved that Grod’s word is so little honoured. Never disjoint the sentence, always have complete sense; take the whole idea, and then you will have some ground to work upon. Here again comes up the old plan of expository preaching. He who honours God’s word may expect his people to grow in knowledge and in understanding; he who continually sets forth himself and introduces controversial subjects, which are of minor importance, can scarcely wonder if the people become dabblers in polemics and captious to an inconvenient degree. Having chosen a suitable text, confine yourself to it entirely, — make it speak: there is music in it; pray that your fingers may touch 194 Ad Clerum: Advices to a Young Preacher.

the cliords aright, so that melody may be evoked. Tou are not expected to preach a body of divinity in every discourse. Some pulpit ramblers range the whole ^eldi, flying everywhere, but digging nowhere. Be you a digger; sink the shaft fearlessly, the gold is embowelled in the deep places; go down, persevere, and bring it up. There is water even in the rock; smite it with a heaven-directed hand, and it will gush most freely: there is poetry in the old historic page; breathe on it with prayer, and the song w;ill be heard: whatever your text be, it is capable of turning out plenty of material to sustain a separate discourse; honour it so, and you will never lack scope and variety.

Dr. Campbell would have spared himself many a battle if he had acted upon his own advice as given in the following extract: —

Be careful to form and maintain a character; as to reputation, that must be left to take its own course. Character is what a man really is; reputation is what people say he is. A man may have a good character and a bad reputation. Tou cannot fail to enjoy esteem if you truly deserve it and thoroughly work for it. It will not come in a day; it may be a slow growth, but none the less certain on that account. Be firm in your principles, modest in their avowal, straightforward in your dealing; and men will value you at a proper price. A man’s character will be formed by his thought, reading, society; his reputation will be the estimate which observers place upon his objective developments. Character applies to spirit, feeling, desire; hence when these are brought to bear upon daily life we profess to see what a man’s character is by the actions which he performs. Be careful how you enter into any public defence of character; if you are called upon to sustain charges your course will be to acknowledge them ii true, and to leave them to a natural death li false. There are doubtless circumstances

Br. John Gamphell. 195

in wliicli a minister may be imperatively called upon to refute charges and “answer fools according to their folly,” but generally speaking it is best to “live” your enemies “liars.” Whatever you do in this particular, be careful how you tvrite, either privately or for the press. Never write in a passion, the document may remain a perpetual monument of your folly; a hasty word may be forgotten or modified in its meaning, a icritten statement will be judged by a different standard. Kever think of going to the press with any “Appeal,” “Statement,” or “Defence,” except you be placed in such circumstances as no minister ever was before you; and even then pause — pause! The public have nothing to do with church annoyances. A vitiated taste is ever craving for such disclosures, but men of wisdom and piety will be very slow to gratify such a morbid propensity. Speah with caution — fast and pray before you write!

Such is a sample of a rather large stock. It is not my present business to offer any detailed criticism upon Dr. CampbelFs public life, as such criticism would be out of place in a paper devoted to personal recollections. There cannot be any doubt that the severest charges against many of Dr. Campbell’s opinions and public practices could be sustained, as there cannot be any doubt that in innumerable cases he proved himself to be wise, generous, and just. One thing is pretty certain, the Congregational body will happily never have a second Dr. Campbell; it will have many men who can do the same kind of rough and ready public work, but if they presume to touch his hammer they will soon be compelled to lay it down again. The reign of the hammer has gone, and as civilisation pursues an ascending course there is happily no prospect of the return of so rude a sovereignty. Honouring the memory of Dr. Campbell in one or two of its aspects, I cannot but feel that lie outlived the time in which his peculiar influence could have any value, and that increasing life would have meant decreasing power. For patience, perseverance, and selfexpenditure in hard work, probably the most industrious man amongst us would yield the palm to Dr. Campbell; for vigour, sententiousness, and fervour of hurried composition, high praise is undoubtedly due to the most voluminous of denominational editors and authors; and if his defences of orthodoxy were often the severest blows that could be aimed at the very object which he sought to serve, he was not the only man whose services would have been improved by moderation.