Memoir of Rev. Gilbert Tennent, Continued

censures — New Brunswick presbytery protest against the synod’s act — Violate it — Are excluded irregularly from the synod — Form a separate Body — Judgment of their conduct.

We come now to a period of Gilbert Tennent’s life, in which he was called to act a very conspicuous part in the affairs of the Presbyterian church. A great schism took place in the synod, in bringing about which, it must be admitted, he had his full share. It took place, indeed, by the expulsion of himself, and the other members of the New Brunswick presbytery, from the synod: but he had provoked his opponents by one of the most severely abusive sermons which was ever penned, called, “The Nottingham Sermon,’ because it was preached at that place. And in the protests which he and Mr. Samuel Blair presented to the synod, in 1740, the majority of the members of the synod were exhibited in a very unenviable light. Mr. Gilbert Tennent felt himself called in providence to attempt to arouse the Presbyterian church from its profound sleep of carnal security, and to bring about a reformation in the body; but the majority of the clergy were opposed to his measures, and disparaged what had ah’eady been done. He seems, therefore, to have considered them as the enemies of the spiritual kingdom of Christ; and that it was his duty, in imitation of Christ and the ancient prophets, in the plainest and most solemn manner, to denounce, and expose their hypocrisy, as did our Lord that of the Pharisees. But here he made a grand mistake. He could not read the hearts of his opponents, and, therefore, had no authority to pronounce a sentence of condemnation on them. He should have remembered that precept of our Lord,” Judge not that ye be not judged. A difference of opinion from him respecting the true nature of the revival, and concerning Mr. Whitefield’s character, furnished no sufficient ground for him to censure and denounce them, as he did: and, especially, as a part of them, at least, were excellent men, and sound and judicious theologians. They were not the enemies of vital godliness, but were opposed to what they apprehended to be spurious religion. We may now see that they erred in their judgment, and pursued a course which was very injurious to the people under their care, and that they committed a great fault in opposing a glorious work of God on account of some irregularities which accompanied it. One of the greatest causes of complaint against Mr. Gilbert Tennent and his brethren was, that in violation of order and propriety, they passed beyond the bounds of their own presbytery, and intruded into congregations under the care of other ministers. This, these brethren attempted to justify by the sound maxim, employed by the apostles, when forbidden to preach by the Jewish rulers, that we should obey God rather But it may well be doubted, whether, in the circumstances in which they were placed, the maxim was applicable. The mmisters into whose congregations they intruded, belonged to the same synod with themselves, and had as good a right to judge what was right and expedient, as the” New Side’ ministers.

We think, therefore, that Mr. Tennent was much to be blamed for the course which he pursued, in this controversy with the synod; especially, in the harshness, censoriousness, and bitterness which he manifested towards them; particularly, in the sermon before mentioned; and that his course can by no means be justified. He does, indeed, appear in a very unamiable light, and as exceedingly deficient in the meekness and charity of the gospel, in this whole controversy. He, doubtless, believed that he was doing God service, and that duty required him to pursue the course and manifest the spirit which he did. And after the separation had taken place, and the heat of the controversy had cooled, he seems to have been sensible that he had not done justice to the majority of the synod; for he wrote and published a large pamphlet called “The Pacificator,^^ in which he strongly pleads for peace, and a re-union of the separated parts of the Presbyterian church. This desirable event was, after a division which lasted seventeen years, and after long negotiation, accomplished; and Mr. Gilbert Tennent entered cordially into the measure. Whatever mistakes he fell into arose from error of judgment, in regard to duty. He was, doubtless, actuated by a sincere and glowing zeal for the honour of the Redeemer, and the salvation of souls. Like the sun, he was a burning and a shining light; but like that luminary, had some dark spots, which, in some measure, marred the beauty and symmetry of his otherwise estimable character. His natural disposition appears to have been severe, and uncompromising; and he gave strong evidence of being very tenacious of all his opinions; and not very tolerant of those who dissented from his views, as appears by the controversy which he had with the Rev. Mr. Cowell, of Trenton; and which he brought before the synod. But with all his faults he was an extraordinary man, raised up by Providence to accomplish a great work. We, of the Presbyterian Church, are more indebted to the men of the Log College for our evangelical views,^and for our revivals of religion, than we are aware of. By their exertions, and the blessing of God on their preaching, a new spirit was infused into the Presbyterian body; and their views and sentiments respecting experimental religion, have prevailed more and more; until at last, opposition to genuine revivals of religion, is almost unknown in our church. It is not my purpose to enter into the ecclesiastical transactions in which Mr. Tennent acted an important part, any further than is necessary to form a judgment of his Christian and ministerial character. They who desire to see a kicid view of the ecclesimstical transactions of that period, are referred to Dr. Hodge’s” Constitutional History of the Pres-BYTERiAN Church;” or they may go to the fountain head, by consulting the “Records of the Transactions of the Synod,’’ recently given to the public, by die “Board of Publication.”

We have seen that a great schism was produced in the Presbyterian body, by a difference of opinion among the ministers of the synod, respecting the great revival which pervaded many of the churches. But though this was the proximate cause of the division, by those who attentively consider the history of that time, and especially the “Records” of the synod itself, it will be seen, that this event was actually produced by the Log College. At first view, this will seem very improbable, but when all the documents are read, and all the circumstances of the church weighed and compared, it will appear exceedingly probable, that the erection of this school of the prophets was, innoceniljr, the cause of the breach which took place in 1741. Here it will be necessary to enter somewhat minutely into a consi”

deration of the condition of the church, prior to the commencement of the revival. A hberal education was from the beginning, considered an indispensable qualification for the gospel ministry in the Presbyterian church. The usual evidence of having received such an education was, a diploma from some college or university, in Europe or America. The Presbyterian ministers, before the erection of the Log College, had, nearly all, received such an education. We know of but one exception, and that was Mr. Evans, whose case has already been mentioned. There existed no college in any of the middle states, where young men seeking the ministry, could obtain the requisite learning. Until this school was instituted, no young man could enter the Presbyterian ministry, without going to Scotland or New England for his education; and this amounted pretty nearly to closing the door against all candidates who were brought up in the Presbyterian church; for very few, in those days could bear the expense of acquiring a liberal education, by going to any college or university, on this or the other side of the Atlantic. The church, therefore, had to depend for a supply of ministers on immigration from Scotland, Ireland, or New England. Most of those who came to settle in the Presbyterian church, came from Ireland; except that those presbyteries which bordered on New England, received a supply of ministers from that region. It must be evident, at once, that this condition of the church was very unfavourable to her prosperity; for often, those who came across the ocean, were not men of the best character. They were often mere adventurers, and sometimes had crossed the Atlantic to escape from the censure incurred by their misconduct; and it was exceedingly difficult, in those days, to ascertain the true character of a foreigner, coming here as a minister of the gospel; for though such men commonly exhibited ample testimonials from abroad, too often these were forged. Several instances of this very thing have occurred. And as the ministers who came in from New England were all brought up Congregationalists, and had habits and customs, not congenial with those of Scottish Presbyterians, their accession to the body had a tendency to produce confusion and strife. The sons of the pilgrims and the descendants of Scottish Presbyterians, though holding substantially the same creed, have never readily amalgamated into one uniform mass: but the habits and prejudices of each have been preserved, and kept the people distinct for several generations, though living contiguously to each other. There seemed, therefore, to be an urgent necessity for some seminary to be erected within the limits of the Presbyterian church, where young men might be educated for the ministry. It is indeed wonderful, that the synod had not paid earlier attention to this subject, as being essential to the prosperity of the church. But as far as appears, no classical school had been erected in any part of the synod, until the Rev. William Tennent connected himself with the Presbyterian church, and set up a school at his own door, in Neshaminy. It is probable, that Mr. Gilbert Tennent was the first candidate licensed in the Presbyterian church, who was educated within its limits. And as he was thirteen or fourteen years of age, when his father arrived, it is probable, that his classical education was commenced before he left Ireland; though the principal part of his education must have been acquired here; and no doubt, under the paternal roof. And although we have connected Mr. G. Tennent with the Log College, it must be in the character of a teacher, rather than a student; for in the very year in which his father removed to Neshaminy, he was licensed to preach. This was the year 1726.

Though Gilbert Tennent had received no diploma from any college; yet he passed his trials before the mother presbytery of Philadelphia, with great credit to himself, and much to the satisfaction of the presbytery. It was now seen, that young men could be well prepared for the ministry at home, without going to distant colleges. And as Mr. William Tennent, the father, had been, as far as is known, the sole instructor of his son, who as soon as licensed, attracted public attention, and was seen to be an able preacher, the conclusion was easily drawn, that he would be an excellent person to train up young men for the ministry. But though the thing appeared thus to many plain and pious people; others were apprehensive, that by educating young men in this way, the literary qualifications of candidates would necessarily be greatly diminished. The school, however, went on prosperously, and a number of young men, who had the ministry in view resorted to the Log College, to pursue their education; and here they were not only taught the classics; but studied divinity alsa; so that this institution was a theological seminary, as well as a college. How many years they were occupied with these studi does not appear; but a number of persons educated in this school were licensed by the presbyteries, after undergoing such trials as were usually prescribed to candidates, in Scotland and Ireland. And some of them, as we shall see, became eminent in the church, and were much distinguished as powerful and evangelical preachers. Still the impression existed, and grew stronger, that this course of instruction was not sufficient. To men educated in the universities of Europe, furnished with so many professors, and other advantages, it seemed preposterous to suppose, that a man could acquire adequate learning for the ministry, in this little, paltry log-cabin; and instructed, principally, by one teacher. They began, therefore, in the synod, to talk of establishing a synodical school, and to express dissatisfaction with the course of study in the Log College as it was contemptuously called. None doubted of old Mr. Tennent’s classical scholarship; but it was believed that his proficiency in the arts and sciences was by no means equal to his classical learning. And as young men were still entering the church from this school the synod adopted a rule, that no presbytery should license any young man until he had passed an examination on his literary course, before a committee of synod. Two large committees, one for the northern part of the synod, and the ^ler for the south, were appointed, before whom gS’ung men were to appear and submit to an examination. This rule gave great dissatisfaction to the Tennents and their friends; for they perceived, at once, that this rule was intended to bear on the students of the Log College, and they believed it to be a high-handed measure, entirely inconsistent with the rights of presbyteries, who, as they had the power of ordaining ministers, ought to possess the power of judging of their qualifications. And what rendered the measure more odious to them, they had just succeeded in getting a presbytery set off, in New Jersey, which included most of the friends of the Log College. Their object in getting this presbytery erected, as they confessed to Mr. Whitefield, was, that they might license such young men as they deemed properly quaUfied for the oflice; and, in their opinion, fervent piety was the first and principal qualification; though they believed a classical education necessary; yet it seems that they lightly esteemed some parts of learning, which the other members of the synod thought requisite. And while they were blamed for being too lax in their demands of a knowledge of literature and science, they

seriously charged the majority of the sjmod with neglecting to make a thorough examination into the piety of their candidates. And on several occasions, Mr. Gilbert Tennent brought this matter before the synod, and obtained from them some formal resolutions, in favour of inquiring carefully into the personal piety of the candidates. And when the order was passed, rendering it necessary for candidates to appear before a committee of the synod, Mr. Gilbert Tennent and his friends entered their protest against the regulation. But to be more exact in regard to this first measure, which divided the synod into two parties, it will be proper to observe, that the regulation adopted in the year 1738, was occasioned by an overture from the presbytery of Lewes, in which they say, <^That this part of the world, where God has ordered our lot, labours under grievous disadvantage for want of the opportunities of universities, and professors skilled in the several branches of useful learning; and that many students from Europe, are especially damped in prosecuting their studies; their parents removing to these colonies before they have an opportunity of attending the college, after

64 I’HE liEV. GILBERT TENNENT.

having spent some years at the grammar school; and that many persons, born in this country, groan tmder the same pressure, whose circumstances are not able to support them to spend a course of years in the European or New England coljeges, which discourages much, and must be a detriment to our church, for we know that natural parts, however great and promising, for want of being well improved, must be marred in their usefulness, and cannot be so extensively serviceable to the public; and that want paves the way for ignorance, and this for a formidable train of sad consequences. To prevent this evil, it is humbly proposed, as a remedy, that every student, with approbation not pursuing the usual courses, in some of the New England or European colleges approved by public authority shall,before he be encouraged by any presbytery for the sacred work of the ministry, apply himself to this synod, and that they appoint a committee of their members, yearly, whom they know to be well skilled in the several branches of philosophy, divinity, and the languages, to examine such students, n this place, and finding them well accomplished in these several parts of learning, shall allow them a public testimony from the synod, which, till better provision be made, will, in some measure, answer the design of taking a degree in college. And, for the encouragement of students, let this be done without putting them to further expenses than attendtng. And let it be an objection against none where they have studied, or what books; but let all eiv couragement be only according to merit, &c.’’ The synod, by a great majority, approved the overture and proceeded to appoint two committees, the one for the region north of Philadelphia, and the othex for the country south of that city.

It does not appear that any dissent or protest was entered on the minutes at the time, but the next year, the presbytery of New Brunswick sent up a lemonstrance. The paper containing the objections to the act of the synod of the preceeding year, is no it ’ on the records; but the synod upon hearing it, agreed to re-consider the subject, and after due deliberation, resolved to substitute the following, instead of the act complained of. ‘’ It being the first article in our excellent Directory for the examination of the candidates for the sacred ministry, that they be inquired of, what degrees they have taken in the university, &c. And it being oftentimes impracticable for us, in these remote parts of the earth, to obtain an answer to these questions, of those who propose themselves to examination, many of our candidates not having enjoyed the advantage of a university education, and it being our desire to come to the nearest conformity to the incomparable prescriptions of the Directory, that our circumstances will admit of, and after long deliberation of the most

proper expedients to comply with the intentions of

E2 the Directory where we cannot exactly fulfil the letter of it: the synod agree and determine, that every person who proposes himself to trial, as a candidate for the ministry, and who has not a diploma, or the usual certificates from an Emopean or New England university, shall be examined by the whole synod, or its commission, as to these preparatory studies, which we generallr pass through at the college; and if they find him qualified, they shall give him a certificate, which shall be received by our respective presbyteries, as equivalent to a diploma, or certificate from the college, &c/^ But, this form of the act was no more acceptable to the New Brunswick presbytery than the former; the next day, therefore, they entered a protest against the said act. This protest was signed by the four Tennents Samuel Blair, and Eleazer Wales, ministers, and by four elders. The synod, it appears, were determined to bring the pupils of the Log College, under their own examination, before they would suffer any more of them to be received as members of the synod, or to preach as candidates in the churches. And the friends of this institution were exceedingly averse to having their young men examined by the synod; either, because they were conscious that they would be found defective in some of the branches usually pursued in the college course, or, because they were of opinion that the major part of the synod were prejudiced against this humble institution, and against all who were connected with it. Probably? both these considerations had their weight, in leading them to oppose so strenuously a measure, which to us seems reasonable and necessary, to guard the ministry against the intrusion of unqualijS.ed candidates. For, it appears, that this examination, by the synod, was not intended to interfere with the right of presbyteries to examine their candidates; but to be a substitute for a diploma, which the Directory seemed to require. For when a young man presented his certificate to a presbytery, if, upon examination, they were not satisfied, they could reject him notwithstanding his certificate.

But the fact was, that the New Brunswick presbytery had already committed themselves. At their very first meeting, in August 1738, they took on trial a certain Mr. Rowland, one of the scholars of the Log College, in direct violation of the act of the synod. And after the synod had re-considered the matter, and re-enacted the same thing, in difi*erent words, this presbytery proceeded with the trials of Mr. Rowland, and licensed him to preach the gospel. And, not long afterwards, ordained him. The synod refused to recognise Mr. Rowland as a member of their body; for, though they did not deny that by the act of the presbytery he was a real minister; yet, they alleged, that they had a right to

determine who should and who should not become

E3 members of their own body. Henceforth, the parties became much exasperated against each other. The friends of the Log College saw, that the act of the synod was directed against that institution, for there was no other school at that time, in the bounds of the synod, where young men were trained for the ministry. And this was not all. The act impKed a reflection on all those who had before entered the ministry from this school. And the majority of synod were grievously offended that one of their presbyteries, and one too just created, should so disregard the authority of the supreme judicatory of the church, as to act in open defiance of an act formed after much discussion and deliberation, in the synod,

One thing necessary to be known, in order to form an impartial judgment respecting the dispute which arose in the synod, but which cannot at this distance of time be accurately ascertained, is, what sort of education was actually received at this famous institution. Was it as solid and thorough as could be obtained within the limits of the Presbyterian church? If so, even if compared with that which was given in the universities of Europe, it was in some parts defective, this was no good reason why the institution should be frowned upon, by the synod. Instead of this, they ought to have recognised and cherished it, and should have endeavoured to raise it higher, and to enlarge its advantages. As far as we have observed, this school, although already it had produced a number of distinguished preachers, is never once mentioned in the minutes of the synod; except in their letter to President Clapp, of which further notice will be taken. It is true, that most of the members of synod had enjoyed the advantages of an university education, in Europe or New England; and it cannot be supposed that equal advantages could be had in the little Log Cabin at Neshaminy. But it is a well known fact, that men’s eminence in learning, does not always correspond with the privileges enjoyed. If we compare Gilbert Tennent, Samuel Blair, Samuel Finley, William Tennent, jr., and John Blair, with an equal number of their opposers, they certainly will not suffer in public opinion, by the comparison. And one advantage they possessed who were educated in the Log College, that the spirit of piety seems to have been nourished in that institution. All, as far as we can learn, who proceeded from this school, were men of sound orthodoxy, evangelical spirit, glowing zeal, and in labours very abundant. They had, we have reason to believe, the teaching of the Holy Spirit; and without the advantages which others enjoyed, they became “burning and shining lights. ‘’ They were the friends and promoters of revivals of religion, which their censurers bitterly opposed. Still, we do not justify their irregular and insubordinate acts. Gilbert Tennent and Samuel Blair were men of invincible firmness — a firmness, bordering on obstinacy. They were the leaders in this warfare. They saw a great harvest before them, and the Lord seemed to attend their labours every where with a blessing, and they were led to think, that mere forms of order, and regulations of ecclesiastical bodies were of trivial importance, compared with the advancement of the Redemer’s kingdom, and the salvation of souls. They felt, as did the apostles, and first reformers, that they were called to go every where preaching the gospel, without regard to prescribed limits of presbyteries or congregations; especially, as they observed, that many pastors neglected to inculcate on their hearers, the necessity of a change of heart, and that the people were as really perishing for lack of knowledge, as they were under Jewish or Popish instructors. They felt themselves bound, therefore, to preach far and wide, wherever the people would hear them; and although there was irregularity in this, judging by human and ecclesiastical rules; yet I doubt not, that in the main, their zealous and exhausting labours have met with a large reward. Weak enthusiasts, or fierce fanatics may abuse the principle on which they acted; but the same thing occurred at the time of the blessed reformation from popery. We must not neglect to do all the good we can because some may pervert our example, to sanction their own lawless proceedings.

I- cannot express how much the Presbyterian church, in these United States, is indebted to the labours of this very corps, who studied successfully the sacred oracles in the Log College; or more probably, under the beautiful groves which shaded the banks of the Neshaminy. There they studied, and there they prayed.

But I do not mean to justify all that was done by these zealous men. As was admitted before, they did not act towards their brethren in the ministry, with brotherly affection, and Christian meekness. Gilbert Tennent indulged himself in very unwarrantable language in speaking of men clothed with the same office as himself, and members of the same synod. Nothing could have justified his treatment of them, unless he had been inspired to know that they were a set of hypocrites, or, unless their lives had been wicked, or their faith heretical; none of which things were alleged against them.

But while it is admitted, that Mr. Gilbert Tennent was a principal instrum.ent in provoking a majority of the synod to exscind the New Brunswick presbytery, it does not appear, that either he, or his friends wished to bring about a separation in the church. Their object was to produce a reformation, if possible, among the ministers, and in the churches under the care of the synod; though it must be acknowledged, that their zeal led them to make use of unjustifiable means to accomplish the desired end.

It need not, therefore, be a matter of surprize, that Gilbert Tennent was among the first to seek a reconciliation and re-union of the parties. To promote this object, he wrote and published a pamphlet, entitled, “The Pacificator,’^ in which he reasons strongly in favour of peace and union. Between the contending parties, there existed, really, no difference on doctrinal points; except that the New Side were blamed for dwelling too much on the terrors of the law, and insisting too strongly on the necessity of legal conviction for sin. And on church government there was scarcely a shade of difference. The members of the New Brunswick presbytery were disposed to consider presbyteries, as the origin of ecclesiasticcal power; while the majority of the synod probably thought, that all the power of the church was concentrated in the synod, then the supreme judicatory. And the same difference of opinion still exists in the Presbyterian Church, for while some are of opinion, that synods and General Assemblies possess limited powers, defined by the constitution of the church, and that all ecclesiastical power emanates from the presbyteries, which they consider the essential body in our church government; there are others, who consider the synod in no other light than a larger presbytery; and the General Assembly, as it were, a universal presbytery, possessing all the powers of the inferior judicatories. Whichever of these be the more correct theory of ou

Presbyterian church government, the presbytery of New Brunswick has always been firm in maintaining the rights of presbyteries against the encroachments of the higher j udicatories. And, certainly, our higher judicatories were constituted by the junction of presbyteries. In Scotland, the General Assembly existed before there were either presbyteries or synods, and all church power descended from that body; but not so with us, where presbyteries first existed, of which the higher judicatories were formed.