Difficulties in the Church

DIVISION OF THE PEESBYTEEIAN CHTJECH — PEOSPEEITY OF SEMINAEY — INVI-TATION TO VIEGINIA LITEEAEY TOILS — WEITINGS OF THIS PEEIOD

DOMESTIC LIFE — COEEESPONDENCE — REVIVALS — SLAVES AND SLAVEET — PEOSPECT OF DEATH.

FKOM the year 1830, there was a period which was as anxious as any equal portion of time, to the Church and the Seminary. We are not called upon to recite those painful controversies, which in 1838 resulted in the secession of a large body of ministers and Presbyteries from the Presbyterian Church. That history has been amply recorded, by persons friendly to both sides of the great question. But it would be impossible to write the life of Dr. Alexander with truth and candour, without representing his views, and stating his position, in regard to matters which connected themselves with all that he held most dear. As has been already suggested, the agitations of the Church communicated their impulses to the Seminary, and during the years of which we are writing, naturally occupied to a great extent the minds of both professors and students. But one reason which conclusively precludes the subject from these pages, as to any discussion of its merits, is that Dr. Alexander never chose to make himself prominent, even as a champion for the opinions which he firmly maintained. To this course he was led, partly by a temper eminently moderate and pacific, which some denominated timidity; partly by views which he entertained concerning the functions of a theological professor, as to a certain degree withholding him from the field of strife; but more than all, by his inability to coincide with many respected brethren, as to the particular means by which acknowledged evils were to be remedied. His position in regard to these controversies may be thus simply stated. In doctrine he was a Calvinist of the Westminster type, and was recognised as such, by friends and opponents. No single man can be found, even during this period of excitement, who employed his pen more laboriously or frequently, in defence of the doctrines which distinguish what had begun to be called Old School Theology. This is sufficiently evinced by his articles on Original Sin, on Natural and Moral Ability, on the Atonement, and on Imputation. And the doctrines which he believed, he also diligently, fully, and successfully inculcated upon his students, who were already becoming numerous in the ministry. In regard therefore to theological tenets, and his view of their importance, he did not yield to the most impetuous of his brethren.

A second remark is equally just; he believed that a considerable number of ministers in our Church had departed from these doctrines, and in so doing had deviated from the standards of the church. Here arose a question, as to the more or less of this deviation; how great it must be, to render one unfit for the ministry; and how much must be left to the individual conscience of him who subscribed articles of faith. On this point, as we shall presently show, his comprehension of slight differences was wider than that of some. It must be added, that he lamented the disunion, embarrassment, and annual contentions, which were making our Church a proverb. He saw clearly that elements thus irreconcilable, ought to be apart, and expected that division must some day ensue; while, as his published opinions indicate, he was unwilling that orthodox men should take the initiative in such division. Of the complicated acts and measures, by which the friends of truth sought to rid themselves of the evils, there were some which he could not approve; and hence he lost the favour of many from whom he was little inclined to be separated. When at length, the division was effected, not by process for error in doctrine, but by the spontaneous secession of large numbers, including all the adherents of new doctrine, he cordially and determinately stood by the constitutional body, and never ceased to rejoice in the quiet and purity of the Church which was the result. The turbulent spirits of the time were causing dissension in respect not only to theological opinion, but the means of promoting the conviction and conversion of sinners; hence as much was said of New Measures, as of New Divinity. To justify what has just been summarily stated as to Dr. Alexander’s position, we shall make a few citations from what is extant in his own words. In the year 1832, he contributed to the Biblical Repertory an article on “The present condition and prospects of the Presbyterian Church,” It was the first essay in that work which explicitly recognised the party-troubles in our communion. It sustains what we have affirmed respecting his estimate of the theological errors then rife. “That there exists a difference of opinion in the Church,” says he, “in reference to certain doctrinal points, and as to the precise import of the act of adopting the Confession of Faith, by candidates at their licensure and ordination, cannot be denied or concealed. It is also apparent, that the numbers who choose to range themselves under one or the other of these parties, are pretty nearly balanced. Hitherto, in all questions which put the strength of the Old and New Schools, as they have been called, to the test, the majority has been found on the side of the former, until the meeting of the last General Assembly, when a decided majority appeared on the other side. It is true, indeed, that the points on which a division took place between them, on that occasion, were not doctrinal points, but certain ecclesiastical transactions, relative to missionary operations and the training of candidates for the ministry; yet it is understood that generally the respective parties were agreed in their views of theology. This difference may be considered therefore, as having its foundation in a diversity of theological opinion,” How grave this diversity was, may be gathered from another article, of which indeed he was not the author, but to which he is known to have given his assent.” We wished it to be understood, that we were the determined opponents of all those in our communion who manifested a leaning towards Arminian or Pelagian opinions in theology, or who discovered a disposition to invade the principles of Presbyterian church government, or to exchange them for those of the

Congregational system. Against these, and against all who manifested a desire to favour them, we have lifted our voice from time to time — feebly, we acknowledge, but, according to our ideas of propriety, as distinctly and decisively as we were able.” He believed that there were such errors maintained by ministers and authors as should disqualify them for exercising office in our church; but he also believed that there were some differences which did not amount to heresy, and which ought not to be made matter of discipline. And while he always defended the strict interpretation of subscription to articles, he was certainly more lenient in his judgments than some who acted with him. On this point, his views are best expressed by what he uttered in a conference of clergymen, in 1835. “Dr. Alexander expressed his belief that our church could not long be governed by a General Assembly, as constituted at present; but that the evil ought not to be precipitated. He declared his belief that the most important difference between the friends of the truth was as to the degree of theological difference which might be tolerated,”* In the same spirit he wrote to Dr. Weed; “We go on here upon our old moderate plan, teaching the old doctrines of Calvinism, but not disposed to consider every man a heretic who differs in some few points from us.”f

For a long time he had augured evil from the diffusion

* MS. Notes of a Conference, held April 15, 1835.

f Letter to the Rev. Henry R. Weed, March 8, 1834.

of new opinions. As early as 1831, he writes to a friend: “My mind is full of gloomy apprehensions respecting the affairs of our church, since the meeting of the last General Assembly. I cannot foresee whither we shall be driven. I had never suspected that the new men and new measures would so soon prevail in the supreme judicatory of our church. But I need not dwell on this subject, as I have nothing remedial to communicate. If the Lord intends good for the church, our exertions will prosper. But if we are to be handed over to the men of the new religion, bound hand and foot, then we must yield, and mourn in secret places over the departed glory. We old men shall soon leave the stage. The burden and heat of the day will soon come upon you young men, who will have great need to be strong, to preserve the ark of the Lord from falling into the hands of the Philistines. Quit yourselves like men. Stand up bravely for the religion of your fathers, which is also ours, by deliberate choice, as well as inheritance.”*

Deeply as he felt the evil of increasing error, he had from the beginning a dread of originating any measure of division. That this was his sentiment, at least in 1834, is manifest from his language in an article to which reference has already been made. “If it is now found,” says he,” that our differences are so wide, that we cannot live in peace, let us peaceably agree to separate into two distinct denominations. This should, however, be the last resort. The Church of Christ is one, and all who agree in essential matters should hold communion together, notwithstanding

* Letter to the Rev. W. S. Plumer, July 6, 1831.

minor differences. And if division on account of some diversity in sentiment commences, there is no telling where it will end; for we presume there are no two men who in all their opinions on every subject entirely agree. And as not only our presbyteries, but our congregations are in a multitude of cases composed of persons who agree partly with one and partly with the other side, a division of the Church by a line of difference on theological points, would split many churches into two parts, neither of which would be able, without the other, to support the Gospel among them. Endless controversies also respecting the church property would necessarily arise, and society would be agitated and convulsed to its very foundations. And as brethren, differing as we now do, have hitherto continued to live in peace, and in most places in great harmony, have loved each other as brethren, and have cordially co-operated in promoting the Kedeemer’s kingdom, why may not this still be the case, after the present exacerbation of feeling has subsided? Upon mature deliberation, therefore, we declare our sentiments to be opposed to all schemes which tend to the division of the Presbyterian Church. We do not know, indeed, that there are any persons who seriously wish or meditate any such thing; but sometimes hints and rumours come to our ears, which seem to have this bearing,“* Such were his avowed opinions at this time; but these were during the first acts of the drama. He very soon came to perceive the causes of separation were almost unavoidable. Thus he writes to a former pupil, in 1837:” I tremble for the ark. I see

* Bibl. Repertory, 1834, p. 39.

dark lowering clouds collecting. The new Revival Measures, connected with the New Theology, are gaining strength and popularity every day. The stream is deepening and widening, and will shortly pour forth such a torrent as will reach over the whole surface of this land. Our Church cannot proceed much further under her present organization. The General Assembly ought not to be long continued in its present form. But what can be done? Divide? How? If shades of opinion must mark out our parties, we may have a dozen as well as two. I say, No division. Let us hold together as long as the foundation can be felt under our feet. When that sinks, then c what shall the righteous do? ’ “He then proceeds to indicate a new organization of the body, retaining the General Assembly as a bond of union and council of brethren.“‘*’ Again, about the same time, to a valued pupil of his earliest class: “I hope that your Presbytery has honoured you with a seat in the next General Assembly. Men of nerve should have hold of the vessel in the time of a tempest, for doubtless the New School brethren will rage and clamour loudly. But we mean them no injury. It is necessary for our very existence, that we should be separate.” f As early as 1833, he had expressed similar fears to the same friend: “Pittsburg Synod,” so he writes,” is the purest and soundest limb of the Presbyterian body. When we fall to pieces in this quarter, and in the far West, that synod will be like a marble column which remains undisturbed in the ruins of a mighty temple. I do not know

* Letter to the Rev. W. S. Plumer, Sept. 13, 1837. f Letter to the Rev. Henry R. Weed, April 14, 1833.

but that more of us will be obliged to seek an ultimate refuge in that region from the overflowing of new divinity and new measures. As you suggest, through the ultraism of the Old and the New School, the sound and moderate part of the Church is placed in jeopardy.”’’’

From these scattered expressions of opinion, it is sufficiently manifest, that with all his desire for peace he had slowly and reluctantly arrived at the conclusion, that the two parties could not much longer remain in union. Yet he took no leading part in the immediate causes of the division, which eventually took place in 1838. It is well known that he never gave his assent to the Act and Testimony. As a member of the Assembly of 1837, he advocated the abrogation of the Plan of Union; he voted for the act disowning the Western Keserve Synod; but did not vote for the act dissolving the connection of the Synods of Utica, Geneva and Genesee. He was, moreover, with Doctors Baxter and Leland, in preparing the pastoral letter addressed to the churches by the General Assembly. There can be no doubt that all his sympathies were with the majority; that he approved of the end which they had in view; and that he was prepared to sanction and defend to a certain extent the means which they adopted to accomplish that end. After the separating acts were passed, and when the churches, presbyteries and synods which they affected, refused to submit to them, or even to regard the abrogation of the Plan of Union as a valid act; but on the contrary resolved to proceed as if the said plan was still in force, and to claim

* To the same, Feb. 21, 1833.

for all judicatories formed under it a right to sit in the General Assembly; he certainly never manifested the slightest hesitation as to which party was right. After the accomplishment of the division, and especially after the ground assumed by the minority in the Assembly of 1838, when they withdrew and claimed to constitute the Presbyterian Church, there was no man who entertained more strongly than he disapprobation of the whole course pursued by that minority, or who took a livelier interest in the success of the Old School Assembly in all its conflicts. It is believed that the articles on the division of the Church which appeared during this period, though not from his pen, may be taken as expressing his views on the general subject.

There is no friendly and competent reader of this memoir, who will not admit that the writer has had a difficult and delicate task, in making the brief record above given. He durst not suppress it, from any fear or favour; and he has in no case consciously coloured it with any opinions of his own, but has simply endeavoured to record in truth the judgments of an honoured parent.

To not a few it was matter of surprise that the dissensions in the Church produced so little injury to the Theological Seminary. The truth is, it never was in a more healthful condition. Immediately after the disruption of the body, it is true, there was a sudden falling off in numbers, so that m 1839 the whole amount was only ninety-eight. But this loss was almost immediately repaired, and the average of matriculations for the decennium, 1830-1839, was fifty-three annually; rising in 1831 to seventy-eight. The whole numbei

of students was, in 1836, one hundred and thirty-six; in 1837, one hundred and forty-two; and in 1838, one hundred and thirty-five. The disputes of the time gave renewed animation to all concerned; and in particular the widely extended interest in questions arising out of revivals, infused a zeal into the young men, which sometimes demanded the cautious hand of repression and guidance. The three instructors were perfectly united in their views concerning all the points in controversy. It will probably be acknowledged by all who were in the Seminary, during these years, that the course of learning was pursued with uncommon ardour and satisfaction.

The death of the Kev. Dr. John H. Kice, in 1831, was an afflictive event to his early friend; who has left on record the following estimate of his character, which we borrow from President Maxwell’s Life of Dr. Kice.

“To give a proper view of the character of Dr. Kice, is, I feel, a very difficult task; for although it would be easy to declare, in the general, that he was a truly great and extraordinary man, yet to delineate those traits of character by which he was distinguished, is not easy.

“It was undoubtedly one prominent characteristic of him, that his views were uncommonly large and comprehensive. He felt, indeed, as became a man who believed that he stood related to the whole human race, and considered himself a citizen of the world. No narrow horizon of sect or country circumscribed his benevolent views and efforts. And in relation to this, he furnished by his own example, a proof, that our love to our own country, and to our own religious denomination, is not lessened by the exercise of a general and expansive benevolence. That Dr. Rice was a sincere patriot, and that he was ardently attached to the Presbyterian Church, none can doubt, who had the least acquaintance with him. But still his benevolent solicitude extended far beyond the limits of his own country and his own church. The interests of all mankind, and of all branches of the Christian Church, were objects of his regard. The scale on which he contemplated men and things, was as wide as the world. And not only were his views comprehensive, but discriminating and profound. Appearances which often impose on less sagacious minds did not deceive him; he often apprehended lurking dangers of an appalling kind, where a superficial observer would see nothing to create alarm. And as he extended his view to take in the interests of the whole existing race of men, so he carried them forward to unborn posterity; and calculated the good or evil which would be likely to arise to many generations from the operation of existing causes, or the influence of particular plans and institutions. Perhaps, no man in the United States had meditated more justly or profoundly on the state of civil and religious society, as exhibited in this country. As a specimen of his mode of thinking on this interesting subject, I refer with pleasure to the series of letters which he addressed to James Madison, Esq., late President of the United States, through the public press; and the continuance of which, according to a plan which he had sketched for himself, was interrupted by the invasion of that fatal disease which terminated his useful life, si

“I do not know that I can more justly designate the true character of Dr. Rice than by saying, that he was influenced at the same time by the ardent love of truth, and by an almost invincible desire to promote peace and unity among all real Christians. That his general views of evangelical doctrine were clear and sound, and conformable with the adopted formularies of our Church, will be clearly manifested by a perusal of his Theological Lectures, delivered to his students, at the Union Seminary; which, though left unfinished, contain a learned and thorough discussion of those points which have been most frequently disputed, and on which all the other parts of the system of sacred theology depend. Accordingly, no man with whom I have been acquainted, appeared to be more deeply grieved than Dr. Rice, when certain theologians, fond of innovation, and reckless of consequences, came before the public with new views in theology, which were either logomachies, or contained the germs of some exploded heresy.

“But while he was thus firmly set for the defence of the great cardinal doctrines of the Gospel, his zeal was not indiscriminate. He never was inclined to dispute about trifles and metaphysical subtleties. Controversy of this kind was the object of his sincere dislike; and he firmly believed, that in regard to many points, on which there has arisen much warm and acrimonious discussion, the only road to peace is. to relinquish our disputatious spirit, and to confine ourselves to such things as are revealed, and to such as are clearly within the limit of the human understanding. On this general principle most would agree; but respecting the real importance of many disputed points in theology, opinions are exceedingly diverse. And I need not conceal, that some of Br. Rice’s most intimate friends entertained the opinion, that he was disposed to extend this excision of controversy to more points than was consistent with a maintenance of the complete system of sound doctrine. If we should even admit that he pushed this principle to an extreme, it only shows how strongly his benevolent mind was inclined to promote peace among brethren, who agree in all fundamental points, and who are often in fact much nearer together in opinion, than on either side is supposed. When leading men, thus agreeing in all essential matters, entered into the public arena of polemics, and contended before the world, and to the disturbance of the peace of the Church, it grieved him exceedingly; and he spared no pains to prevent such controversies, or to bring them to a close where they existed. And his efforts to promote peace were not altogether ineffectual. It is somewhat remarkable, that the Presbyterian clergy of Virginia, although differing from one another in as many speculative points as is common elsewhere, yet have managed so as not to suffer these minor differences to disturb their mutual harmony, or to be agitated as matters of controversy before the churches. This has been owing very much to the governing influence of an ardent love of peace, in such men as the late Rev. Dr. Hoge, and the Rev. Dr. Rice, and others of a like spirit.

“Our friend, when quite young, brought himself into notice before the representatives of the Presbyteries, met in General Assembly, in Philadelphia, by a discourse which he delivered at the opening of that judicatory, at the request of his esteemed friend, the Kev. Drury Lacy, who had been the Moderator of the preceding year, but was prevented from performing this duty. This sermon proved to be a most seasonable one; for the two parties in the Presbyterian Church, at that time, seemed ready to come to an open rupture. The discourse itself contained nothing very striking or remarkable; but it was delivered with so much of the spirit of meek benevolence, and breathed so entirely the love of peace, that it o]3erated as oil upon the troubled waters. From this time, Dr. Rice became a favourite with the public; and the reputation which he now acquired, he never forfeited, but continued to increase, as long as he lived. No man in our Church, I believe, enjoyed, so generally, the confidence of all parties. In ecclesiastical bodies of which he was a member, his weight was felt, although he was not often upon his feet; his voice was seldom heard in the management of common business, but on subjects of importance he was sometimes eloquent.

“There was, perhaps, no one thing connected with the church militant, to which Dr. Rice uniformly manifested stronger opposition than ecclesiastical tyranny; or the attempt in clergymen to lord it over the consciences of their fellow-Christians. The love of liberty led him specially to oppose what are called high church principles. This induced him to animadvert with some severity on some discourses of Bishop Ravenscroft, in which he believed these principles to be avowed, which led to almost the only controversy in which he was ever engaged. And although he was from principle and disposition averse to controversy, yet he made it manifest on this occasion to all impartial judges, that few men have ever wielded the polemic pen with more adroitness and effect. Perhaps nothing that he has written evinces so clearly his intellectual superiority, as the review of Bishop Ravenscroft’s virulent but injudicious attack. It is not only a specimen of unusual learning and ability, but an example of as complete a triumph as has almost ever been achieved. I speak not now respecting the main points in the Episcopal controversy, which were not the points at issue between Dr. Rice and Bishop Ravenscroft, but of those high church principles which had been assumed by the Bishop, and of the ungracious assault which he had made on the character of his reviewer. I know that it was with extreme reluctance that he engaged in this contest, and not until his friends, far and near, assured him that he owed it both to himself and to the Presbyterian Church to make a reply.

“The deep and solid piety of our highly esteemed friend was not diminished by increasing years and multiplied engagements, but during his latter years every time I saw him he gave fresh evidence of a state of growing spirituality. His religion did not, as is the case with many, go and come by fits and starts; it took deep root downward, and brought forth abundant fruit upward. I never knew a man of more perfect sincerity. He was never, even by feeling, transported to assume a character or exhibit an appearance which did not correspond with his habitual principles. There was in his looks and manner, both in public and private, a peculiar expression of benignity, which will be remembered by all who knew him; but which was especially manifested to those with whom he was most intimate. Of the disinterested character of his friendships, I could furnish many convincing proofs, but this would be removing the veil from a subject not proper to be brought before the public.

“I will only add that if we judge of the character of Dr. Kice by the unerring rule of our Lord, f By their fruits, ye shall know them, our estimate of him must rise very high. He was a man of deeds rather than words. His professions were always modest and sober; but his works were numerous and highly important. Of the arduous course of study which he pursued without intermission from his earliest youth, I mean not now to speak; nor of the useful occupation in which for years he was faithfully and diligently engaged, as an instructor of youth; many of whom, now filling important stations in society, no doubt remember him with gratitude. Neither do I think it necessary to say any thing of his pastoral labours and difficulties while settled in a retired country congregation, where necessity required him to add the duties of a preceptor to a select number of youth, (boarded in his own house) to his pastoral labours. Passing all these scenes of early exertion, I will consider Dr. Rice as having fairly entered on the scene of his public labours, when he engaged in the arduous enterprise of establishing a Presbyterian Church in the city of Kichmond, where one had never before been organized. No one but the beloved companion of Iris life, and partner of all his joys and sorrows, knows fully the difficulties and discouragements which he had to encounter in his work. But success ultimately crowned his exertions; and the flourishing condition of the First Presbyterian Church in that city, is itself a monument to his pious zeal and indefatigable industry. That church, which was long feeble, and seemed to be struggling for existence, is now one of the most important in the State, and promises to be the mother of numerous spiritual children for generations to come. While labouring as a pastor, and encountering as many hardships and privations as any missionary, the labours of his pen alone were sufficient to occupy the time, and task the powers of any common man.

“The periodical which he established and conducted, exercised a most important and salutary influence over the public mind; and though he was occasionally aided by some of his brethren, the incalculable labour of providing materials every month for this publication, fell almost entirely upon himself. The volumes of c The Virginia Evangelical and Literary Magazine, continued for so many years, furnish indubitable evidence both of the vigour and versatility of his talents; and, at the same time, of the indefatigable industry and perseverance with which he prosecuted his work. But in addition to Dr. Eice’s incessant labours as a pastor and editor, he was frequently called upon to visit destitute places, and to attend sacramental and protracted meetings, to which calls he never turned a deaf ear, when it was in his power to comply with them; and on these occasions, on account of the confidence of his brethren in him, and the wishes of the people, a much more than equal share of the labour fell upon him. Sometimes, after long and fatiguing

journeys, he would not have time to rest himself at home, before he was again called upon to go abroad, to perform some important service for the Church. In this connection T need scarcely mention the time and labour necessarily demanded by the judicatories of the Church, on which he made it a matter of conscience punctually to attend; and was always ready to aid in all the business which came before them, in every way that he could, having ever the edification of the Church as his primary object.

“But his last works were the most laborious, and the most important. The founding of the Union Theological Seminary was very much the work of one man, and that man was Dr. Rice. When he was called to engage in this enterprise, the prospect of success was exceedingly gloomy; and most of his friends apprehended that in existing circumstances, the object could not be accomplished. For a considerable time the experiment was an up-hill undertaking. Not only were funds to be collected, but an interest in the scheme was to be created. The people, generally, were indifferent; and there existed no small apathy among his clerical brethren. But by the blessing of God upon his almost single efforts, an institution of respectable character, and well endowed, has risen up in a country where ministers are greatly needed. As long as this Theological Seminary endures, it will remain a monument, more honourable and we trust more lasting than marble or brass, of what may be accomplished by the untiring labours of one man. I need not mention here the frequent, long, and toilsome journeys which he performed to collect funds for this institution: these are facts well known to all; but the far more difficult part of the enterprise was, to awaken the churches and ministers from their apathy; and especially to conciliate the friendship and co-operation of such as were inimical to the plan. But even this he accomplished by patient, firm, kind and persevering exertions. When he began, only one Presbytery was concerned in this institution; but by wise counsel and well-timed exertion, two large Synods, which had never before had any mutual intercourse, were brought to unite cordially and vigorously in the prosecution of the plan. I do confess that I was long incredulous about the success of this enterprise. I thought I saw insuperable obstacles in the way of its accomplishment, although I did every thing in my power to promote it; and now when I see what has been achieved by the labours of one man, I am filled with grateful wonder, and feel ready to exclaim, c What hath God wrought? ‘For we must ascribe all the praise to Him from whom all good counsels and all successful works proceed.

“I will only adds that the true secret of Dr. Kice’s success was that his motives were always pure. He had no selfish and sinister ends, and this was apparent to all.

“And finally, he trusted in God, and from Him received strength to labour and persevere, and also that wisdom which is profitable to direct.”*

We have already noticed the strong desires which had been felt in regard to the return of Dr. Alexander to his native State. These attempts were more earnestly renewed in

* Maxwell’s Life of Dr. Rice, p. 307, ff.

the year 1831. The nature of the proposal will best appear from an authentic representation of the proceedings of the Synod of Virginia.

“Charlottesville, Ya., Sept. 10, 1831.

“Key. and Dear Sir: —

“Before this reaches you, you will have received the mournful tidings of the death of Dr. John H. Kice — your friend and our friend, and the friend and benefactor of the whole Church.

“But especially our Theological Seminary has lost its father on earth. There the loss appears irreparable. Where can a man be found, with his talents and acquirements and that self-consuming love for the institution? Dear sir, in our grief and anxiety our hearts turn to you as the heart of one man.

“Dr. Rice told one of us not long since, that his view from the first was just to get the institution fairly commenced, and then to have it put under your direction; if that be ever realized, it must be now.

“At a meeting of the Synod, called for the purpose of filling another professorship, in an interlocutory session, we were appointed to address you, unofficially and confidentially; for the bare possibility that you might be obtained, was the most animating consideration that presented itself in regard to our bereaved institution.

“We are well aware of the immense importance of the station you now fill; but the institution at Princeton has acquired a strength and maturity that seems to insure, under the Divine blessing, its ultimate success.

u Our Seminary is yet in its infancy, and needs a nursing father. You are well aware of the partialities of the southern people, and how slow they would be in giving their confidence to a northern man. You are by birth one of us, and would at once unite all parties and all hearts. We know that you are still warmly attached to your native State, and we believe that the climate, where our Seminary is fixed, would be more congenial to your constitution, and especially now in the decline of life, so that, with the blessing of God, you might be enabled to serve the Church of God longer than you could in the more rigorous climate of New Jersey.

“Our Seminary appears of immense importance to the Southern churches when viewed in one particular aspect. God has been for some months past, and is still pouring out his Spirit on our churches in a manner and to an extent never before experienced here. An unusually large proportion of young men are the fruits of these revivals; considerable numbers of these we expect will be called to preach Christ, and of course will seek their mental cultivation at our institution. The impress that shall be given to their minds will of necessity be communicated to others, and form the standard of piety and ministerial cultivation and exertion, for a period to which we can affix no limit. You will not wonder then that we feel so deeply anxious, and that we are making, what in other circumstances might be viewed as an unnatural effort — an effort to induce you to remove from one seminary, confessedly of great importance to the Church, to another, which as it strikes the eye at a distance, appears greatly inferior. But the former we think has acquired a stability, which secures its continued usefulness, while with the latter it is a most critical juncture.

“The Synod of North Carolina is to meet about a month hence, and ours about two weeks after. It is of immense importance that we be able to fix on some person before these meetings, in respect to whom we may act in concert, and with some hopes of success.

“Then, dear sir, will you allow us to use your name? Will you allow us to say that there is no insuperable bar in the way of your removal from Princeton to Prince Edward?

“You can communicate with us through our common friend, the Rev. Benjamin Rice, if you do not choose to make a direct communication.

“May the adorable Head of the Church lead your mind to that determination which shall promote his own glory, and the best interests of that cause for which he laid down his precious life!

“In behalf of our brethren of the Synod of Virginia,” Yours most affectionately,

“William Hill,
“William J. Armstrong,
” Francis Bowman,
“Francis McFarland.”

This was unquestionably the most serious inducement which was ever presented to draw him away from Princeton. The invitation of the Synod was reinforced by numerous private letters. In one of these, a brother clergyman still living thus puts the case:” In reference to the great question submitted to your consideration, I have thought much; and though I may not be able to present the subject in one single point of light in which you have not viewed it, yet the more I reflect on it, the more it seems to me that you may possibly think it your duty to accept the invitation, which I know will be given with great unanimity and warm affection, if there be any hope of its meeting a favourable reception.

“Two reasons influenced the members of the Synod, in making the effort to ascertain beforehand what would probably be the result of the appointment, should it be made. One was that they did not wish to agitate the Church, and raise hopes which might issue in disappointment. The other was that the interests of the [Union] Seminary required, nay imperatively demanded, that as little delay as possible should attend the filling of the vacancy. At the called meeting the nomination could not be made, because it was not contemplated in the call; but it will be made at the regular meeting. But while there are such pressing reasons for coming to a decision as soon as practicable, there seem to me, as before intimated, strong inducements to a favourable determination.

“The Seminary, raised at great expense, with much toil and solicitude, and with the sacrifice of one of the best lives among us, is now on an elevated poise; and I know not who is so likely to sustain it as yourself. — [Dr. Eice] in the last hour of his mortal struggle expressed a strong desire that the institution might continue to be conducted on the same principles as by himself. In you, the Synods would cordially and with great confidence unite. The institution would not be under the control of the jarring elements of the General Assembly,” It is scarcely needful to add, that none of the considerations thus proposed had sufficient force to withdraw Dr. Alexander from the post to which he had been assigned by the Church. But this adverse decision cost him a serious struggle of feeling.

This was beyond all doubt the period of his greatest literary activity. Both in pressing his researches into the works of others, and in committing his own thoughts to writing, he was indefatigable, so that he scarcely knew an idle hour. He was constantly adding to his written lectures, filling up gaps in the series, and by compilation and original research preparing himself for treatises and volumes which he afterwards made public. His voluminous manuscripts largely belong to this period. Having discovered a faculty of composition, of which he had long supposed himself destitute, he began to make amends for past inaction. At no time did he contribute so much to the Biblical Eepertory, and his choice was generally directed to the most important subjects; which, however, he saw fit to treat rather in their principles and history, and upon their intrinsic merits, than with express allusion to the controversies then agitating the American Churches. Some of these essays deserve a passing notice in any tribute to his memory.

In 1830 he communicated to the above named quarterly work an essay on the “Early History of Pelagianism.” In preparation for this and some kindred articles he read largely in the works of Augustine, as well as the Massiliensian Semipelagians and their opponents. He also made himself thoroughly acquainted with the works of Jansenius, an author in whom he took a lively interest. He communicated to those around him a lively interest in Augustine and his times, and would sometimes go largely into the story of those angry controversies, as he sat among his family, with great animation and effect. We were informed by the Kev. Dr. Symington of Glasgow, that this essay, and several analogous ones yet to be mentioned, are not only commended to students of the Reformed Presbyterian Church, but are even made subjects of examination by the professor.’-” The writer’s own conclusions are indicated by the last sentence of this essay: “It is our opinion, therefore, after looking on all sides, and contemplating the bearing and consequences of all theories on this subject, that no one is on the whole so consistent with facts, with the Scriptures, and with itself, as the old doctrine of the ancient church, which traces all the sins and evils in the world to the imputation of the first sin of Adam; and that no other theory of original sin is capable of sustaining the test of an impartial scrutiny.” The same volume contained a contribution on “the Doctrine of Original Sin as held by the Church, both before and after the Reformation.” f In the course of the next year he published” An Inquiry into that Inability under which the Sinner labours, and whether it furnishes any Excuse for his Neglect of Duty •/’ a dissertation which vindicated the Calvinistic views, and was justly regarded as one of the ablest produc-

* Biblical Repertory, 1830, pp. 7*7-113. f Biblical Repertory, 1830, pp. 481-503. tions of his pen.* We have already spoken of his article on a proposed re-organization of the Presbyterian Church. This was followed, in 1832, “by a treatise on the Synod of Dort, in which the histoiy of doctrine in that day is treated.f A far more able article was the review of the “Essays on the Formation of Opinion and the Pursuit of Truth;” works in which there was an insidious attack upon some fundamentals of ethical science. The questions which are here discussed at great length and with the utmost vigor of his mind, are two: first, the responsibility of man for his opinions, and, secondly, whether any testimony is sufficient to establish a fact which is a departure from the laws of nature. J The next year produced an essay on the Racovian Catechism, in which he details the history and tenets of the early Socinians; and a translation of Melancthon’s treatise on Sin.§ Besides an article on Transubstantiation, he wrote an extensive historical sketch of the Scotch Secession; and reviews of Wayland’s Moral Science, and Woods on Depravity. We omit a number of minor reviews, which appeared during the same period.

But his labours with the pen were by no means confined to sermons, lectures, and periodical essays. In the year 1831, he prepared a new edition of his work on the Evidences of Christianity, with additional matter which tended much to its completeness. His book on the Canon of Scrip-

* Biblical Repertory, 1831, pp. 360-383.
f Biblical Repertory. 1832, pp. 239-252.
X Biblical Repertory, 1832, pp. 394-428.
§ Biblical Repertory, 1833, pp. 180-204, and pp. 521-531.

ture was sent to him in a London reprint, in 1832. In 1833, he published a “History of the Patriarchs,” He also contributed to a religious journal, in 1839, those essays on Religious Experience, which have since appeared in a volume. It is sufficiently shown, therefore, that neither professional toils nor the agitations of church controversy had impaired his relish or capacity for the severe labours of the study.

A few words may be allowed us, in regard to the Introductory Lectures of this period. That which opened the year 1832 was a strenuous argument for absolute devotion to God, in the work of the ministry. Its contents may be gathered from these leading thoughts. 1. “The strongest inducement to be entire and unreserved in devoting your hearts and lives to the service of God, is the love of Christ to you.” 2. “If your hearts are filled and warmed with this love of Christ, you will never be satisfied with any thing short of a complete surrender of every thing to him.” 3. “The terms of discipleship as laid down by Christ require you to be unreserved in the consecration of yourselves to the service of God.” 4. “The spirit and conduct of the apostles and early Christians was in accordance with the principle which I am advocating.” 5. “You cannot in any other way so effectually promote your own happiness.” 6. “This absolute devotedness of spirit is the quality which will prepare you to be eminently useful.” But a few sentences will give a better notion of the train of thought, than our bare skeleton.” Shortly before the late Dr. Robert Finley engaged in the plan for colonizing the free people of colour, I met with 498 MINISTERIAL DEVOTION.

him in this town, and well remember that his soul appeared to be in a glow of holy zeal. He said he was indignant at himself for having made so few and so feeble efforts for Christ, in comparison with what had been done by others, and expressed his strong resolution to enterprise something which might be to the honour of God and the benefit of men. You have seen the result. There are at the present time many who feel that their lives are rapidly passing away, while yet they are doing little; and who are resolved to attempt a more vigorous exertion. For the aged, however, little is left but unavailing regrets. They may wish now that they could begin life anew. But all such thoughts are vain, in their case. To you, who are just entering life, how precious may these considerations be! It is an interesting fact, concerning the late Dr. John H. Kice, that after his decease, there was found about the person of that eminent man and sincere servant of God, a paper containing solemn resolutions, in which he engaged to consecrate all his powers and all his property to the one object of doing good. You are coming forward, my young friends, at an eventful period of the world. Read then the signs of the times. Let every man be found at his post, and standing in his lot. Let no one now entering the ministry dream of a quiet or easy life, or of literary leisure.”

We close our notice of these exercises by indicating three more Introductory Lectures; one on the “Limits within which Unlicensed Students of Theology ought to confine themselves in conducting Keligious Societies, and in attempting to give Public Instruction;” another on the “Importance of Eminent Piety, to the right and successful discharge of the Duties of the Pastoral Office f and the third on a “Spirit of Christian Enterprise in the Ministry.”

If now we take a glance at matters more personal and domestic, we must remember that he was no longer in his physical prime, as during this ten years’ period he passed his grand climacteric. It was certainly something remarkable, for a man turned of sixty to apply himself with such enterprise and earnestness to new and different pursuits; the rather, when as we afterwards learn this was only the beginning of labours which were to endure for nearly twenty years. During the time of which we write his health was interrupted, not only by his never absent nervous disorders, but by acute sciatica, and in 1833 by a slight haemoptysis. Sometimes he looked upon the probabilities of extended life as very faint. Thus he writes to his eldest sister, in 1831:

“Although I wrote to you by mail not long since, I will not permit so favourable an opportunity as that which now offers to pass without dropping you a line. The time of our earthly correspondence is drawing to a close. I am now in my sixtieth year, and you are a little older. This is an age to which I never expected to come; but Providence has preserved me, and brought me along; and upon a review of my life I have reason to be thankful for the manifold blessings which I have received. But I have nothing to say respecting my own fidelity and diligence, except what is of the most humbling kind. I must cast myself entirely on the free mercy of God and the rich merits of Jesus Christ. This is all my hope and all my salvation. I find, as I suppose you do, that the arrival of old age does not bring death any nearer to the feelings. I have indeed a rational conviction that I am nearer to my end, but as to realizing apprehensions of death, I am not conscious that this acknowledged nearness has any effect on my views of the importance of that awful event. In regard to the state of the soul immediately after death, I find my mind rilled with darkness when I attempt to form particular conceptions of it. My only relief is in relying on the general promises of the Gospel, and dismissing all solicitude about the mode of existence or the special nature of the feelings in that untried state. I have always wished and hoped to arrive at a degree of faith in the things of the invisible world, to which I have not yet attained. In my ideas of divine things there is too much of imagination — of mere notion — too little of the feeling of reality. When, for a moment, I can conceive of eternity, as a real, approaching state, I am startled — and feel astonished at my habitual apathy. Sometimes, when I awake suddenly in the night, the thought of eternity and of the judgment is overwhelming. But these impressions soon pass away, I am occupied with visible scenes and earthly cares, and for a great part of the time futurity is out of view.

“I am much concerned about the state of our Church. Every thing in the signs of the times is ominous; for while revivals are multiplied, errors appear to be coming in like a flood. Divisions threaten to rend the body, and thus peace — one of the richest blessings of the Gospel — will be lost. But the Lord reigneth, let the earth rejoice! I do not look forward to any time when I shall have it in my power to visit Virginia again. It is, however, a matter of little consequence. Let us all be engaged in preparing to meet in a happier world,” ft

This was the very time at which efforts were making in Virginia, as related above, to bring him again to his native State. In writing to his son, he speaks of a letter, “the object of which,” says he, “was to learn whether there existed any insuperable objection in the way of my consenting to take Dr. Kice’s place in the Union Seminary. They seem to think that the existence of the institution will depend upon the success of this project. I have not had time to give it much consideration. If I were younger and more capable of answering their expectations, I would think seriously of it; for in the distractions of the church in this region I fear that our Seminary will become a bone of contention. And as Mr. Hodge is well prepared to take my place, and nothing would be requisite but to put some young man in his place, I do not see that this institution would suffer much loss by my departure.” f These negotiations we have already said resulted in nothing. He made a visit to Virginia in the Autumn of 1835, but no case occurred during the whole remainder of his life, in which he seems to have thought of leaving New Jersey.

To give a recital of his pulpit labours, would be to repeat what has been said in the previous chapters. Scarcely a Lord’s Day passed in which he was not preaching, at home or abroad, and he was frequently called to such exercises

* Letter to Mrs. Graham, July 27, 1831.
f Letter to J. W. A., Sept. 15, 1881.

during the week. These labours were made much more abundant by the great prevalence of religious awakenings in the land; and it is remarkable, that while he was reputed by some an enemy of revivals, or at least one ignorant of their nature, there was no preacher whose services were sought with greater avidity, during such seasons of religious warmth. The controversy ran high about New Measures, or the system of means employed in revivals. On this subject, as we need scarcely say, his judgment was with that of the sober party, a judgment which has since become that of the Church at large. When, in 1832, Dr. Sprague published his valuable and timely work on Revivals, it contained a letter of Dr. Alexander, which we regard as worthy of insertion.

“Princeton, March 9, 1832.

“Keverend and Dear Sir : —

“In compliance with your request, I send you a few thoughts on revivals. I am gratirledt to learn that you are about to publish some Lectures on this interesting subject. I hope they will be extensively useful; and if you should judge that any thing which I may write would subserve a valuable purpose, you are at liberty to make use of this letter as you may think best.

“1. A revival or religious excitement may exist and be very powerful, and affect many minds, when the producing cause is not the Spirit of God; and when the truth of God is not the means of the awakening. This we must believe, unless we adopt the opinion that the Holy Spirit accompanies error by his operations as well as truth, which would be blasphemous. Keligious excitement has been common among Pagans, Mohammedans, heretics and Papists. And in our own time there have been great religious excitements among those who reject the fundamental doctrines of the Gospel, as for example, among the Ohrist-ians, who are Unitarians, and the NewligJits or Schismatics of the West, and the Campbellites, who deny the proper divinity of our Lord, and the scriptural doctrine of atonement. The whole religion of the Shakers also consists in enthusiastic excitement. Hence it is evident, that revivals ought to be distinguished into such as are genuine, and such as are spurious. And the distinction should depend on the doctrines inculcated, on the measures adopted, and the fruits produced. c Beloved, says the Apostle John, 6 believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God/

“2. Again, a revival or religious excitement may take place when a few persons only are under the saving operations of the Holy Spirit; but when many are affected by sympathy, and by the application of extraordinary means of awakening the feelings. I have seen a powerful religious impression pervade a large congregation at once, so that very few remained unaffected; and most expressed their feelings by the strongest signs; and yet, as it afterwards appeared, very few of them became permanently serious. Besides, when the Spirit operates savingly on some, there is reason to think that his common operations are experienced by many. The minds of the people generally become more serious and tender; and many are deeply convinced of the necessity of religion, and engage earnestly in prayer, and in attendance on other means of grace. Now while so many are affected, but few may be truly converted; and no human wisdom is adequate to discern between those who are savingly wrought upon, and those who are only the subjects of the common operations of the Holy Spirit. The tree which is covered with blossoms often produces little fruit. The wind which agitates the whole forest may tear up but few trees by the roots. Thus there may be great and promising appearances, and yet very little fruit. Temporary believers may use the same language, and exhibit to others precisely the same appearance as true converts. This consideration should be sufficient to prevent the practice lately introduced, of admitting persons to the communion of the Church at the very meeting at which they are first awakened. There may be cases in which well instructed persons, of good character, may be received to the Lord’s table as soon as they profess a hope of acceptance with God, but these should be considered exceptions to the general rule. Often the impressions produced at a public meeting, when strong excitements are applied to awaken the feelings, are as evanescent as the morning cloud or early dew. Many who eventually become truly pious, entertain for a while hopes, which they afterwards are convinced to be unfounded; and to pronounce such persons converted at once, and hurry their admission to the Lord’s table, would be the most effectual method of preventing their saving conversion. There may be an error on the other side, of too long a delay, and of discouraging real believers from approaching the table of their Lord; but the error is on the safe side. As to Apostolical precedent, it is just as strong for a community of goods; and after all, there is no undoubted case of any convert being immediately received to the Lord’s Supper. They were baptized immediately on their profession, but this in our view is a different thing; for we admit infants to baptism, but not to the other sacrament. And the fact is, that in every part of the world, the plan of placing young converts in the class of catechumens, to be instructed even prior to their baptism, was adopted. Gj-od often leaves his servants to find out by experience what is most expedient, and does not teach every thing by inspiration; as in the case of Moses in judging the people of Israel. And if experience has uttered her monitory voice clearly on any point, I think she has in regard to this; and I have no doubt that future experience will fully corroborate the lessons of the past.

“3. A real work of the Spirit may be mingled with much enthusiasm and disorder; but its beauty will be marred,, and its progress retarded by every such spurious mixture. Thus also individuals who are the subjects of special grace, may for a while be carried away with erroneous notions and extravagant feelings. We must not, therefore, condemn all as deluded souls, who manifest some signs of enthusiasm. But under the same revival or general excitement, while some are renewed and engrafted into Christ, others may be entirely under the influence of error, spiritual pride and delusion. When the Son of Man sows good seed in his field, will not the enemy be busy in sowing tares? And doubtless it often happens, that by the rashness, fanaticism, and extravagance of a few persons, especially if they be leaders, an ill report may be brought up against a work, in which the Spirit of God has been powerfully operating. The opinion that it is dangerous to oppose fanaticism, lest we hinder the work of God, is most unfounded. We cannot more effectually promote genuine revivals, than by detecting and suppressing fanaticism; which is their counterfeit, and injures their reputation among intelligent men, more than all other causes.

“4. Often also there may be much error mingled with the evangelical truth, which is preached in times of revival; and while God blesses his own truth to the conversion of men, the baleful effects of the error which accompanies it will be sure to be manifest. It may be compared to the case, where some poisonous ingredient is mingled with wholesome food. I might here, perhaps, refer to some sections of our own Church, where the truth is not clearly inculcated; and it might be shown that there is danger of error on both extremes. But I choose rather to refer to those churches, which we all think to be erroneous in certain points. No denomination among us has had more frequent or extensive revivals than the Methodists, and we have no doubt that multitudes have been truly converted under their ministry; but the effect of their errors is manifest to an impartial observer. The same remark holds good, respecting the Cumberland Presbyterians, who greatly resemble the Methodists in their doctrines and mode of promoting and conducting revivals. And as an example from the opposite extreme, I would mention that portion of the Baptist Church, which is tinctured with Antinomianism. They have revivals also, but their mode of treating the subjects is widely different from that of the sects last mentioned.

“5. But I come now to speak of genuine revivals, where the Gospel is preached in its purity, and where the people have been well instructed in the doctrines of Christianity. In a revival, it makes the greatest difference in the world whether the people have been carefully taught by catechizing, or are ignorant of the truths of the Bible. In some cases revivals are so remarkably pure, that nothing occurs with which any pious man can find fault. There is not only no wildness or extravagance, but very little strong commotion of the animal feelings. The Word of God distils upon the mind like the gentle rain, and the Holy Spirit comes down like the dew, diffusing a blessed influence on all around. Such a revival affords the most beautiful sight ever seen upon earth. Its aspect gives us a lively idea of what will be the general state of things in the latter-day glory, and some faint image of the heavenly state. The impression on the minds of the people in such a work is the exact counterpart of the truth; just as the impression on the wax corresponds to the seal. In such revivals there are great solemnity and silence. The convictions of sin are deep and humbling; the justice of God in the condemnation of the sinner is felt and acknowledged; every other refuge but Christ is abandoned; the heart at first is made to feel its impenetrable hardness; but when least expected, it dissolves under a grateful sense of God’s goodness and Christ’s love; light breaks in upon the soul, either by a gradual dawning or by a sudden flash; Christ is revealed through the Gospel, and a firm and often joyful confidence of salvation through Him is produced; a benevolent, forgiving, meek, humble, contrite t spirit predominates; the love of God is shed abroad; and with some, joy unspeakable and full of glory fills the soul. A spirit of devotion is enkindled. The Word of God becomes exceedingly precious. Prayer is the exercise in which the soul seems to be in its proper element, because by it God is approached, his presence felt, and his beauty seen; and the new-born soul lives by breathing after the knowledge of God, after communion with God, and after conformity to his will. Now also springs up in the soul an inextinguishable desire to promote the glory of God, and to bring all men to a knowledge of the truth, and by that means to the possession of eternal life. The sincere language of the heart is, Lord, what wouldst thou have me to do? ‘That God may send upon his Church many such revivals, is my daily prayer; and many such have been experienced in our country, and I trust are still going forward in our churches.

“6. But it has often occurred to me — and I have heard the same sentiment from some of the most judicious and pious men that I have known — that there must be a state of the Church preferable to these temporary excitements, which are too often followed by a deplorable state of declension, and disgraceful apathy and inactivity. Why not aim at having a continuous lively state of piety, and an unceasing progress in the conversion of the impenitent, without these dreadful seasons of deadness and indifference? Why may we not hope for such a state of increasing prosperity in the Church, that revivals shall be no longer needed; or if you prefer the expression, when there shall be a perpetual revival I Richard Baxter’s congregation seems for many years to have approximated to what is here supposed; and perhaps that of John Brown of Haddington, and Mr. Komaine, of London. And in this country, I have known a very few congregations in which a lively state of piety was kept up from year to year.

“7. We cannot, however, limit the Holy One. nor prescribe modes of operation for the Spirit of God. His dispensations are inscrutable, and it is our duty to submit to his wisdom and his will; and to go on steadily in the performance of our own duty. If He, the Sovereign, chooses to water his Church by occasional showers, rather than with the perpetual dew of his grace, and this more at one period, and in one continent, than at other times and places, we should rejoice and be grateful for the rich effusions of his Spirit in any form and manner; and should endeavour to avail ourselves of these precious seasons, for the conversion of sinners, and the edification of the body of Christ. In the natural world, the cold and barren winter regularly succeeds the genial and growing seasons of spring and summer; and there may be an analogy to this vicissitude in the spiritual world. One thing we are taught, that believers stand in need of seasons of severe trial, that they may be purified, as the precious metals are purged from their dross in the heated furnace. Paul says, c For there must be heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest/

“8. As genuine revivals are favourable to truth and orthodoxy, so spurious excitements furnish one of the most effectual vehicles for error and heresy. The Church is not always benefited by what are termed revivals; but sometimes the effects of such commotions are followed by a desolation which resembles the track of the tornado. I have never seen so great insensibility in any people, as in those who have been the subjects of violent religious excitement; and I have never seen any sinners so bold and reckless in their impiety as those who had once been loud professors, and foremost in the time of revival. If I had time I might illustrate this remark by a reference to the great revival of the West, which commenced about the close of the year 1800, in the south part of Kentucky; and by which the Presbyterian Church in that region was for so many years broken and distracted and prostrated — but I must forbear. When people are much excited, their caution and sober judgment are diminished; and when preachers are ardently zealous in revivals, serious people do not suspect them of holding errors, or of entertaining the design of subverting the truth. It is also a fact, that the teachers of false doctrine do sometimes artfully associate their errors with revivals, and by continually insinuating or openly declaring that revivals take place only in connection with their new theology, they succeed in persuading those who have more zeal than knowledge, that all who oppose their errors are the enemies of revivals. This artifice has often been played off with much effect; and they have sometimes gone so far as to deny the genuineness of great revivals which occurred under the ministry of those holding opinions different from their own; or who neglected to bring into operation all the newly invented apparatus of revivals.

“You may perhaps expect me to say something respecting what are called new measures; but as I am out of the way of witnessing the actual operation of these means, I will not venture on a discussion, which is both delicate and difficult, further than to mention some general results, which, from a retrospect of many facts, I have adopted, in regard to revivals of religion. On each of these I might largely expatiate, hut my prescribed limits forbid it.

“All means and measures which produce a high degree of excitement, or a great commotion of the passions, should be avoided; because religion does not consist in these violent emotions, nor is it promoted by them; and when they subside, a wretched state of deadness is sure to succeed.

“The subjects of religious impressions ought not to be brought much into public notice. It ought not to be forgotten that the heart is deceitful above all things, and that strong excitement does not prevent the risings of pride and vainglory. Many become hypocrites when they find themselves the objects of much attention, and affect feelings which are not real; and where there is humility and sincerity, such measures turn away the attention from the distinct contemplation of those subjects which ought to occupy the mind.

“On this account, I prefer having the anxious addressed and instructed as they sit undistinguished in their seats, rather than calling them out to particular pews, denominated anxious seats; and if the pastor can visit the awakened at their houses, it would be better than to appoint meetings expressly for them. But as this cannot be done, when the number is great, these meetings may be necessary; but instead of attempting to converse with each individual, let the preacher address suitable instruction and advice to all at

once; and if any are in great trouble and difficulty, let them come to the minister’s house, or send for him to visit them.

“All measures which have a tendency to diminish the solemnity of divine worship, or to lessen our reverence for God and divine things are evidently wrong; and this is uniformly the effect of excessive excitement. Fanaticism often blazes with a glaring flame, and agitates assemblies as with a hurricane or earthquake; but God is not in the fire, or the wind, or the earthquake. His presence is more commonly with the still, small voice. There is no sounder characteristic of genuine devotion than reverence. When this is banished, the fire may burn fiercely, but it is unhallowed fire. Fanaticism, however much it may assume the garb and language of piety,, is its opposite; for while the latter is mild and sweet, and disinterested, and respectful, and affectionate, the former is proud, arrogant, censorious, selfish, carnal, and when opposed, malignant.

“The premature and injudicious publication of revivals is now a great evil. There is often in these accounts a cant which greatly disgusts sensible men; there is an exaggeration which confounds those who know the facts; and it cannot but injure the people concerning whom the narrative treats. But I must desist.

“I am respectfully and affectionately yours.

“A. A.”

Once more we allude to the Introductory Lectures, as a means employed by the professor for conveying spiritual as well as intellectual improvement to his pupils. Some of these were described at their proper times; there are others of which the date can be only conjectured. One is a discourse founded on the words of Paul, “Study to show thyself approved unto God,” &c.; 2 Tim. ii. 15. A second treats of the magnitude of the ministerial work — the importance of acquiring the right character and qualification — a right spirit of religion — good manners — devotion — correct and benevolent intercourse with men — honour and justice, and humility. A third is on the ‘* Duties of Theological Students.” 1. Growth in Grace, or improvement in personal piety. 2. More particularly a just estimate of every virtue of the Christian life. 3. The acquisition of sound theological knowledge. 4. Efforts towards mutual benefit. 5. Labours among the people of the neighbourhood. A fourth depicts the character of “The Minister suited to the times in which we live.” In this the apostle Paul is held forth as an example, in regard, 1, to his ardent love of Christ and zeal for his glory; 2, his tender compassion for perishing men; 3, his fervent affection for the children of God; 4, his deadness to the world; 5, his diligence; 6, his eminent prudence; 7, his spending his leisure in writing for the benefit of the Church, in all ages to come. A fifth is on the “Present Aspect of the World,” as indicating the qualifications and duties of ministers; under which the Foreign Mission enterprise is warmly and largely urged. A sixth is on “The Wise Employment of Time.” 1. “A firm resolution and prompt decision are requisite for the wise use of time.” 2. “Self-denial is of the utmost importance.” 3.” The voice of Conscience must be 514 INFLUENCE ON THE YOUNG.

regarded, in respect to time.” 4. “There must be a definite object of pursuit.” 5. “Mental discipline is necessary, in order to employ our time aright.” 6. “Diligence.” 7. “Versatility, or a readiness to adapt the mind to any object which may be presented.” 8. “Method.” 9. “A thirst for knowledge.” 10. “Do not aim at doing too much in a given time.” 11. “Commence no pursuit without a probability of being able to reach the end.” 12. “The careful preservation of attainments already made.” 13. “Time is not turned to the best account, by keeping the mind on a continual stretch.” 14. “All our other improvements, however considerable, will be of little value, if genuine piety be not cultivated assiduously and successfully.”

As the number of students was now very large, he had abundant opportunity to exercise that influence which has already been mentioned, by means of private counsel. It is in connection with this that hundreds remember him, with even more warmth than in his character of public instructor. And as many of his former pupils were now established in their posts of usefulness, he kept up a paternal regard for them, and often gave them letters of counsel. An eminent clergyman, whose name would add force to the statement, if we were sure of his permission to publish it, after referring to his own early authorship, speaks thus of Dr. Alexander- “I have said these things because I feel indebted to him for the kindness with which he treated me and my maiden production. I am under many other obligations to him; yes, more than I can express. His sweet simplicity, his perfect naturalness, his saintly purity; how deeply have they inscribed themselves on my memory!” The portraiture would be incomplete without some specimens of these. “If you cannot live at * * *,” so he writes to a young minister, “on the salary which they give you, you will be under a necessity of removing; and you ought to consider whether this is not an opening in Providence for your relief. In my opinion, no situation is so desirable for a preacher as a pastoral charge; and no man called to the ministry ought to relinquish it for any other business, unless there be an evident prospect of greater usefulness; or some physical disqualification for the work. When a man alleges that he cannot visit, or perform other parochial duties for which he has bodily strength, it is just as if a servant should pretend that he cannot do the work for which he is employed. A minister of Jesus Christ must divest himself of fastidiousness, and exercise self-denial in the performance of his duties. In regard however to what is duty (in the matter of pastoral visits) every man must judge independently for himself, and not be governed by the whims of well-disposed but weak women. In a large city, preparation for the pulpit is the main thing, and except in case of illness, comparatively little good is accomplished by running from house to house. The preacher who ably fills the pulpit will, on the whole, get along very well. The course in such a place as Baltimore would be for the minister first to prepare for his pulpit exercises on the Sabbath; next he should be attentive to Bible Classes, Sunday Schools, and catechizing; and should visit the sick. And as to visiting, he should appropriate certain portions of time, and conscientiously perform what appertains to that time. His calls ought to be very short, except in special cases. It is poor economy for a man to exhaust his strength in talking to one at a time, when he has an opportunity of saying the same thing to hundreds or thousands.”

DR. ALEXANDER TO THE REV. JAMES J. GRAFF.

“Princeton, Dec. 28, 1833.

“Dear Sir : —

“Until I received your letter, I was not aware that you had entered on the missionary field. The country in which your lot is cast, as I learn from your letter, is very destitute of instructive preaching; especially it is a barren region, as it relates to Presbyterian preachers. I hope that you will be enabled to build up a Presbyterian Church in that country where none have existed before. You must, however, exercise much faith and patience, and be much in prayer to God. You must preach by an humble and holy life, as well as with your voice from the pulpit. The people will form their ideas of Presbyterianism by what they see and hear from you. See then that you walk circumspectly. Be wise as a serpent, and harmless as a dove. Be very guarded in your conversation, especially with females. Maintain the gravity and dignity of a minister, but beware of pride and haughtiness; beware also of the extremes of levity and austerity. Let your conversation be in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God. Take heed that you lay no stumbling-blocks in the way of sinners. Offences must needs come; but wo to that man by whom they come! Be- diligent, be zealous, be enterprising, be persevering. Try to win souls to Christ, and to build up the waste places of Zion. Enter as little as possible into controversy. Be kind and courteous to ministers of other denominations, but connect yourself little with them. If you can lay the foundation of a small church, you may be doing incalculable good; the means of grace may thus be perpetuated in a dark place. The Lord is calling home from the vineyard some of his most faithful servants. Dr. Fisk and Dr. Hyde are great losses to the Church. Dr. Livingston, of Philadelphia, is pronounced to be in an incurable state. Work then while it is called to-day. Kemember the dark night cometh on apace, when no man can work,”

Sometimes his letters were addressed to foreign missionaries, and then he felt called upon to say more concerning the state of the country, as in that which follows:

DR. ALEXANDER TO THE REV. SAMUEL HUTCHINGS, MISSION-ARY IN CEYLON.

“Princeton, June 30, 1836.

“Rev. and Dear Sir: —

“It is now more than a year since I received your letter, which, agreeably to your request, I sent on to Mr. Osborne in North Carolina; but I am uncertain whether he ever received it. As you see the New- York papers, there is no occasion for me to say any thing of the public concerns of church or state. I may observe, however, that we are in a very unsettled condition. The prosperity of the United States has been unprecedented now for half a century, and there is nothing to hinder its continuance and increase but

the folly and wickedness of the people; but there are many indications in the manifest signs of the times that we, as a nation, are rapidly approaching a crisis. The subject of slavery has been so imprudently managed, that a spirit of hostility between the northern and southern States has been excited, which in my opinion will not cease until a rupture shall take place, which will mark the end of our national prosperity. But the advance of our Church to a crisis has been more rapid and alarming than that of the nation. The subject of slavery agitates the Church as well as the body politic; but differences in our theological opinions and ecclesiastical polity have gone on to produce, as you have seen, a sad state of our church affairs. The proceedings of the late General Assembly, in refusing to pass any censure on Mr. Barnes’s Notes on the Komans, has made a very deep impression on the minds of all who are sincerely attached to the standards of our Church, and I understand that they are determined on a separation. Much disputation has occurred in the General Assembly, relative to the Missionary Societies, with which our Church is connected for carrying on Foreign Missions. The Assembly of that year had agreed to take the Western Board under their care and direction, and had appointed a committee with powers to consummate. the transfer by a formal contract with the Synod of Pittsburg. This agreement was completed, but the late General Assembly refused to ratify it, or rather to carry it into effect. A very unpleasant state of things may therefore be anticipated, in regard to Foreign Missions, a subject which should be, and has heretofore been conducted without any collision. In my opinion, before another year the Presbyterian Church will be divided into two, and perhaps more sections. And if it could be effected amicably, I believe it would in present circumstances be a public blessing. The body is at present too large, too widely extended, and too heterogeneous to be under one ecclesiastical regimen. Much of the strength of the two parties is now expended in disputation and mutual conflict. Separated, each would form a body sufficiently large, and might proceed in the works of piety and benevolence without collision or mutual interference. But there are many obstacles in the way of a peaceable separation. The General Assembly has two corporate bodies under its control, which hold large funds, subject to the appropriation of this body. To whom should these belong, or how could they be divided? Our Seminary, with its professorships and scholarships, is the property of the General Assembly; what would be done with this institution? In many cases the people are divided, so that a division would weaken or break up congregations; new churches must be built where those existing are sufficient for the people. And perhaps the greatest difficulty will be, that between the two contending parties there is a large neutral body which will be at a loss which way to go. Pray for us — but your exhortations will avail nothing!

“The Theological Seminary, in which I suppose you still feel some interest, continues, by the blessing of the Great Head of the Church, to prosper. Our last catalogue contains the names of one hundred and thirty students. — We have had little division or contention, and it has been our object to discourage the agitation of subjects among the students which have a tendency to enkindle animosities. Two new professors were elected by the General Assembly of last year. The Kev. John Breckinridge, D. D., Professor of Pastoral Theology, and J. Addison Alexander, Professor of Oriental Literature. The former has been inaugurated; the latter has not accepted his appointment, though he performs the duties. — The Presbyterian Church in this place was burned one year ago. The congregation have worshipped in our chapel, a beautiful new building, but too small [for such a purpose.] — I hope that God prospers your missionary labour. Much of the usefulness of a missionary depends on the constancy and fervour of his piety; and I suppose it is found as difficult to keep alive the flame of genuine devotion in a foreign mission as at home. The effects of coldness, declension, and a secular spirit, are more deplorable in a foreign missionary than at home. It may not be amiss therefore for one who has nearly run his race on earth to exhort and beseech you and your beloved companion to live lives of faith in the Son of God; to do the work of the Lord as faithful stewards; to exert every faculty and employ every talent in advancing the kingdom of the Kedeemer. Work while the day lasts. The night cometh apace. Kemember that the life of a missionary is short. Keep the judgment daily in view, and labour to win many of the heathen to Jesus Christ. May God bless

you and keep you from evil!

“A. A.”

The following extract may be cheering to such as are engaged in the work of education. The persons mentioned, whose names are suppressed, have since risen to places of great honour in the Church.

DR. ALEXANDER TO JAMES W. ALEXANDER.

“Princeton, May 6th, 1833.

“My Dear Son : —

“The hearer of this, whose name is .... is rather an extraordinary youth. He is purely orthodox, and has a clearness and defmiteness of conception in theological matters, which is very rare. We have one other in the same class, who is perhaps superior to him as a theologian. I think he is the most accurate theologian, of a young man, that I have ever seen. And these two young men are the most modest and respectful in the house. I have thought that it was worth while to educate a hundred, in order to obtain two such men.”

The next letter is upon a subject which always lay near his heart, and in regard to which he had some special facilities for forming a judgment.

DR. ALEXANDER TO THE REV. WILLIAM S. PLUMER.

“Princeton, June 10, 1830.

“Rev. and Dear Sir: —

“Your letter came to hand just as our examination had commenced, which prevented an immediate answer, and ever since I have been in Philadelphia, or away from home in some other place. The subject on which you ask advice is both delicate and difficult; and for one so far off, it is

impossible to judge correctly on the course most proper to be pursued by a person situated as you are. It seems to me? however, that when Providence has cast the lot of one of his servants in the country of slavery, he ought not to abandon it on account of prospective evils, the existence of which is only conjectural; or, if certain, which would not be greater than evils of another kind, which must be encountered, let a man go where he will. It is now becoming more and more a subject of consideration with our zealous young men here whether duty does not call some of them to make every sacrifice of personal comfort, and to devote themselves to the instruction of the slaves. Surely they ought not to be abandoned to ignorance and vice, without an effort to rescue them from ruin; but if ministers will flee from their work in the southern States, simply because of the existence of slavery, how can it be hoped that others, knowing such facts, will venture into such regions? My opinion, therefore, is, that as you have formed a permanent connection in that country, and have become a slaveholder, you ought to* remain, and endeavour by all lawful means to extend the blessing of salvation to that degraded people. And if you wish for my opinion as to how you may best promote the welfare of those whom Providence has committed to your care, and for whom you must give account, I would say, that you can best promote their happiness by keeping them in your possession, and instructing them in the Christian religion. No one can prevent your instructing them in the great truths of religion; and even if the laws should become so rigid as to forbid their being taught to read, this will render the use of oral instruction far more important. And all experience teaches me, that the living voice is the proper medium of instructing the ignorant. Those persons who learn to read imperfectly derive very little benefit from the art; a few sentences, pronounced viva voce, sink more deeply into their hearts than many pages spelled over *vith great difficulty.

“As to bringing the unhappy creatures to the northern States, it has been demonstrated by experience that it is, in general, ruinous. — My advice then is, that you remain at B., if the people wish it, and lay yourself out to do all the good you can to black and white; and if you cannot operate in one way, you will be able to do good in another. Kemember, however, that ‘the husbandman hath long patience, after he has sowed the seed. Do not expect to effect much by storm, but understand that moral improvement is always gradual, and very commonly imperceptible from day to day. Labour assiduously, and trust in Grod for the fruit, although every body around should be lamenting that nothing is done. It is too much the error of the day, and especially of the South, to aim at unnecessary excitement; to push things to an extreme from which they must speedily return; and then, like an elastic cord, will spring nearly as far beyond the mark on the opposite side. Observe, I do not say it is unlawful to leave the South, in any circumstances. I only mean to say that the reasons which you mention are not the ones which should induce you to take that step. If Providence needs you more elsewhere the door will be set wide open, and your call clear. As to

524 INSTRUCTION 0*F SLAVES.

place, when duty calls you will find the right one. Beware of discouragement. It cuts the nerves of effort — of steady persevering effort — completely. The news from the General Assembly you will receive from others; and I have nothing interesting to communicate from this place. It is now vacation, and we are for a while in solitude.

“Yours affectionately,

“A. A.”

DR. ALEXANDER TO THE SAME.

“Princeton, July 1, 1834.

“Dear Sir: —

“I have received your two letters, which came to hand the same day, one dated May 27, the other June 10. In regard to historical facts I will keep the subject in mind, and set down such fragments of knowledge as I have. Dates will be defective; but facts may be of use without precise dates.

“As to the instruction of the coloured people, as the blacks are called in this country, I know nothing of importance. The Kev. John Mines, some years since, prepared a catechism for their instruction, which I revised in manuscript. It was printed, but never came into use. It was intended to be used by the catechist in the instruction of such as were unable to read. Dr. Palmer, of Charleston, published one somewhat similar, accompanied with prayers, a copy of which I have. Some years ago, I delivered a hastily written discourse to the Society for promoting religion among the Coloured Population. That discourse is somewhere among my papers; what it contains I know not; but if you wish to have it, I will look it up and send it to you.

“The early Presbyterian ministers in Old Virginia were far more attentive to the instruction of the blacks than their immediate successors. I have had under my pastoral care a number of Mr. Davies’ s converts, particularly Will and Ned, brothers, who belonged to Col. Thomas Bead of Charlotte, and were eminent for piety. Both were natives of Africa. They were brought over when boys, and were taught to read by Mr. Davies, or some one under his direction. Will adhered to the Presbyterian Church while I remained in Virginia, but Ned went over to the Baptists and became a preacher. They were both very aged when I last saw them. Old Harry, who belonged to Ben Allen, in Cumberland, was one of the most fervently devout men I ever met with. He also could read, and had a Bible which had been given him by Mr. Davies; but having come to the country after he was grown to be a man, he spoke our language in so broken a manner that I could not understand much of what he said; but his soul appeared to be all on fire with love to Jesus Christ. One of the most fervent spirits I ever knew was old Molly, who once belonged to Dr. John Blair Smith. At public worship she could not restrain the expression of her feelings. As her noise disturbed the congregation, he expostulated much with her, but all in vain. When I lived at Hampden Sidney, she belonged, I think, to Martin Sadler.

“The Presbyterian preacher who laboured more than any other among the blacks, and with more success, was the Bev. Bobert Henry, of Charlotte. He was the pastor of

Cub Creek and Briery, and was a very singular man. Though a graduate of Nassau Hall, he was a rough, uncultivated Scotchman, who so blundered in preaching that he often placed himself in a very awkward attitude. Old Father Patillo, upon being asked in my presence about Robert Henry, said, ‘He had as much grace as would serve two men, but not half enough for himself, He delighted in preaching to the negroes, and as the fruit of his labours, had nearly a hundred communicants at Cub Creek alone. When I commenced my ministry there, the number was above seventy. Twenty-five communicants, and several of them distinguished for piety, belonged to Mrs. Coles, on Staunton Kiver; and this lady, the mother of Mrs. [Paul] Carrington, of Sylvan Hill, though not a member of the Presbyterian Church, testified to the good effects of religion upon her servants. Almost all her house-servants were members of the Church, and one man was constituted by the session an overseer of the coloured communicants. It was a lovely sight to see these seventy blacks surrounding the table of the Lord. I see the pious and humble labours of this servant of God are now likely to be overlooked and forgotten. The trumpets for sounding the praises of men were not used in his day. The existence of this body of black communicants, and the great number of other blacks who attended at Cub Creek, induced Dr. [John H.] Kice, when a pastor of this church, to apply for a commission to labour for a part of his time among them.

“Old Mr. Mitchell, if his memory is not gone, can furnish you with facts which no living man beside can. He can tell you of the labours of his father-in-law, the Kev. David Rice, and of his colleague the Rev. James Turner, both of whom, I think, preached often to the blacks. — [In later times] I know it to be a fact that multitudes would walk ten miles to hear a black man who could not read a word, [in preference] to going to hear the best sermons within a few miles. And when we made appointments to preach to them alone, which was often done, their habit of indulging their feelings, by shouting, and their desire to have such feelings roused, presented an effectual bar to regular instruction. This they thought was religion, and the way to glorify God. Still much more might have been done [by later ministers.] When I left the State, upon a retrospect of my ministry, I deeply regretted that I had not laboured more for the instruction of these people; and I wrote to my friend, the Rev. Matthew Lyle, an earnest exhortation to attempt more in this way. — We had no difficulty from the government, when I resided in Virginia; but events occurred soon after, which induced the legislature to enact stricter laws, and which caused the people to be more jealous. In the Valley, when I was a boy, the number of blacks was very small. A few wealthy families only possessed slaves. Ministers there had therefore little to do with this subject.

“I remain, respectfully and affectionately, yours, &c,

“A. A.”

The scheme of Foreign Missions under the care of the Presbyterian Church originated in the West, and became a fruitful cause of contention in the General Assembly. The

work which is now performed by our Board of Foreign Missions was begun by the Western Missionary Society. While many continued to harbour doubts, Dr. Alexander fully believed that such enlarged operations as we have since seen realized, were justly to be expected. He therefore wrote to a confidential friend, concerning the Church enterprise: “The reason for encouraging its institution, in most concerned, was to bring out resources from parts of the Church which were perfectly dormant. Thus far, it has succeeded beyond expectation. The Philadelphia Synod will be the principal dependence on this side of the mountains. — New- York city furnishes the richest field for all pecuniary operations,”* He was always a zealous advocate for the work of Foreign Missions, and was accustomed to indulge liberal and sanguine expectations at times when many good men were ready to be appalled. His interest in the work was augmented and enlightened by “that minute and unapproachable topographical knowledge” (we use the words of the Kev. Dr. Davidson), “which no other man possessed, and of which nothing in print, or to be put in print, can give an adequate idea.” He followed with anxious inquiry those students who became foreign missionaries, and maintained a lively intercourse with some of them. His correspondence with Mr. Whiting of the Syrian Mission, and Dr. Armstrong of the Sandwich Islands, would add to the value of our work, if it could be recovered. At the monthly prayer-meetings held in the Seminary for the spread of the Gospel, he often poured out his stores of information on these subjects; and

* Letter to the Rev. Henry R. Weed, March 9, 1835.

for a time he delivered a series of weekly lectures, in the evening, in the chapel of the Institution.

We shall next make copious extracts from a communication on a subject of great delicacy and importance; it is that of supposed early conversions:

“I was not aware,” he writes to a friend,” until your letter put me on the inquiry, how barren my memory is of facts concerning early piety; I mean such as have fallen under my own observation. In books, you can find many cases, but — strange as it may seem, and it is as discouraging as strange — I cannot remember one solitary instance of decided piety in childhood, where the child lived to adult age to prove the genuineness of the change. And I do not here confine myself to the earliest stages of childhood, but include the whole period under twelve years of age. I will correct what I have said, by mentioning a case which just now occurs to my memory. The Rev. Mr. Robinson, pastor of the Cove, Albemarle, Va., had a little son, who at the age of six or seven years gave evidence of experimental religion. I never conversed with the child, but heard of him from many, and was well acquainted with his father, who on one occasion took the child over the mountain to the Synod, with the view of conversing with the ministers, that he might receive advice about admitting him to the Lord’s table. On some account, I was not at that meeting, but heard of the fact from those who were there. Whether he was then admitted, I cannot be sure; but if not, it was soon afterwards. This young man you must have known when you lived in Lexington. I think he was graduated at Washington College. 34

He died of a fever, at the Union Seminary, soon after he was licensed, and I have understood always gave good evidence of piety, living and dying.

“I have, however, seen many beautiful and hopeful blossoms, which were never followed by mature fruit. A. B. was the daughter of an excellent man in Berkeley (now Jefferson) County, and the granddaughter of one still more eminent for piety — one of the fruits of the ministry of ‘One-eyed Eobinson, the first apostle of Virginia, though now remembered there no longer. This little girl, in 1791, was about eight years of age. She was intelligent, grave, modest, very conscientious, loved to hear sermons, was ready to converse on religion, and seemed to have a warm affection towards Christian people. I was much at the house, as I made it one of my homes, the first winter after being licensed. I never saw any thing in this child but what was indicative of pure and elevated piety. She was almost entirely exempt even from childish levity, and, as her mother told me, was consistent in private devotion. I did not entertain a doubt of her being a regenerated person. But, as I have been informed, for I saw her no more, as she grew up all her religious feelings wore off, and she became as gay and careless as other young ladies of her own age. Whether she is now living, or what was the course of her after life, I know not.

“C. D., a boy of thirteen or fourteen, attracted universal notice by the apparent fervency of his pious feelings. His prayers in public have melted large congregations into tears, and none doubted the genuineness of his piety. But when exposed to the company of irreligious companions at college, lie became entirely careless; and if not skeptical, has lived afar from God until this day, though a man of talents and character, and high standing in the world. He was of my own age, and when I was careless, he faithfully and tenderly addressed me on the subject of religion, and not without some present effect. He said to me then, however, ‘The pious are deceived about me; I have never experienced a saving change, and I have withdrawn from the Lord’s table, Some years afterwards, I met him, in company with some of the profanest young men I ever saw; though out of his mouth I never heard a profane expression. I felt that I owed him a debt, and having then more zeal than now, I waited for an opportunity to speak with him. He candidly confessed, that all his religious impressions were gone; that his views of religion were greatly changed, and that when he was the subject of these, he was misled by a set of enthusiastic preachers, in whose opinions he now had no confidence.

“E. F. was another, who about the same age gave pleasing evidence of having received a new heart. Old Christians would smile and weep when they heard him converse or pray. It was a revival season, and he was much noticed and caressed, and after a while evidently became vain. He fell in love also with a lady much older than himself, and appeared like one almost distracted. He turned from religion somewhat suddenly,, and became one of the most profane men in the land. His after history is unknown to me.

“Gr. H. was an obscure apprentice to a tanner. He was

seen attending prayer-meetings, and one wet evening, when the good simple old man who conducted the meeting found none to aid him in the prayers, he asked this hoy if he would not pray. The youth consented, and the people who were present reported that no minister could make a better prayer. He was thenceforward called out, upon all occasions. Even in church, the minister after sermon would call on G. H. to pray, and all wondered how this boy, who had nothing but the most common education in the world, could excel the most learned and eloquent ministers in prayer; and some good people would rather hear G. H. pray, than listen to the best sermon. After some time, however, there was a manifest change. The style of his prayers became more artificial and elaborate, and there was an observable straining after striking expressions. But it was resolved that he should be a preacher. — God had determined otherwise; for though he was sent to school and afterwards to college, the Presbytery would not receive him when he offered himself as a candidate; his vanity and arrogance had become so manifest and insupportable. He was mortified and grievously offended, and immediately engaged in the study of the law. His course was downward, and his end hopeless. Man looketh on the outward appearance, but God judgeth the heart. Gifts are no sign of grace.

“My old teacher, the Rev. William Graham, had no confidence in any appearances of early piety. He said they were seldom permanent. But read the account of Mrs. Edwards, wife of President Edwards. Did any one ever give better evidence of religion pure and undefiled? Look at a great many other cases, in Janeway’s Token for Children, &c. I have taken up an opinion, that all religious impressions made by truth are salutary, even if conversion does not immediately follow. The fruits in a revival are commonly from seed sown long before. This in the spiritual world is precisely analogous to the harvest in the natural world. But to the query, what ought to be done. God has promised to ordain strength out of the mouths of babes and sucklings. It is unbelief to deny that the grace of God can reach children. Why so few are converted in that age, we do not know. Old Dr. Hopkins believed and taught, that God has conditionally promised the salvation of baptized children, to parents in the baptismal covenant. (See his system of Divinity.) But even if this were true, it does not follow that they shall all be brought in while children. Mr. Kichard Baxter, in his Dispute with Tombes, says that the time will probably come, when there will be but few conversions within the pale of the church by the public preaching of the Word, as children will be pious under parental culture, before they can attend with profit on the ministry of the Word. Do you ask what should be done for children? Persuade parents to do their duty; to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. But I have a favourite notion, that this is a rich uncultivated missionary field. There should be a class of preachers for children alone. If I were a young man, I would, God willing, choose that field. Twenty-five years ago, a little man by the name of Robert May, came to Philadelphia, from the London Missionary Society, on his way to Hindostan; for the European war rendered it

safest to come here and go in an American vessel. He and his wife were I think the most diminutive couple I ever saw matched, and they were childlike in their feelings of vivacity and versatility. Mr. May never entered a house without inquiring for the children; and his manners were so puerile and affectionate, that they would soon cluster around him, and clamber on his knee, or cling to his skirts. In fact he conversed very little with grown people. He was not in his element with such, while with children he was all alive, full of anecdote and pleasantry; but every story had a good end, and the winding up would make them feel serious and often weep after all their mirth. On Saturday afternoon, when the schools were not in session, he would preach or lecture to them, and sometimes a thousand would attend. A small volume of these lectures was printed. This dear little man remained several months in Philadelphia, before be met with a passage. In India, at a place called Chinsurah [in Bengal, eighteen miles north of Calcutta], he commenced his operations among heathen children; and when he was called home, which was about three years after his arrival there, he had twenty-five schools under his care. Look into the Keports of the London Missionary Society, or the Evangelical Magazine, for some account of him.

“Our common preaching does the children no manner of good. I am doubtful whether the custom of taking and confining them during the service is not injurious. But pass this; sermons suited to children can be preached. I have tried it over and over, and I never had an audience more attentive, or who better understood my meaning. I

PKEACHEFvS TO CHILDREN. 535

often go now, and deliver addresses to them at Sunday-school anniversaries; and to keep up and enliven attention I commonly stop and ask them questions, which I expect them to answer. They seldom refuse to speak, and their answers give opportunity for farther explanation. I delight in such discourses, and if I had health and leisure would have one every week. Perhaps I shall, as it is. But I am constrained to remark, that the talent of preaching to children is of all other preaching talents the most rare. A brother who has better preaching talents than myself, and more piety, when he speaks to the children reads them a discourse from a paper, so composed as to be fit for the press; but while it is in the course of delivery, almost every one is vacant or wandering. I. J. K. has a great love for children, and has devoted himself to the Sunday-School cause, and thinks he has the talent of addressing them. I went to hear him, and of all the affect ed, vulgar, quaint, ill-adapted discourses, this exceeded. The more sensible children laughed in his face. L. M., once a student here, often undertook to address children. His method was to entertain them with figurative and exaggerated stories. Sometimes he terrified the little urchins almost into fits. One of my children was present at his meeting when a thunder storm of some violence arose: to increase the terror he blew out the candles and intimated that perhaps the day of judgment was come. Another dear old brother screams at the top of an astounding voice, and they gaze in stupid wonder. Too much noise drives away thought. No man can have any variety of ideas, nor any connected train, beneath the deafening roar of a cataract.

I thought at first that the sea shore would be an excellent place for meditation; but the ocean-war drove away every thing but the one uniform sombre emotion. You perceive by my egotism and digressions that I am growing old.” *

The letters just cited illustrate a disposition of Dr. Alexander to draw largely on his own early observation, and this was still more strikingly exemplified in his ordinary discourse. The same will appear in a paragraph which we refer to this period, and which undoubtedly refers to the late Dr. Livingston, of New Brunswick, for whom he entertained an unusual veneration.

“Another divine, who belonged to a different denomination, and left the world a few years ago, seemed to me to be eminent in piety. Keligion appeared uppermost in his mind at home and abroad. I believe he was seldom in company with any one without saying something about the worth of the soul, or the excellencies of the Saviour. When he entered any house, he seldom sat many minutes without introducing some discourse respecting divine things, and this not in a stiff formal manner, but affectionately and earnestly. He was fond of conversing on experimental religion, and freely communicated many interesting particulars concerning the exercises of his own mind, and the various trials and conflicts which he had experienced in his religious progress. He mentioned, that when a young man he had long laboured under distress of mind, which was not removed until he heard Whitefield preach; when a single text repeated by the speaker seemed directed to him individually, and all his

* Letter to the Rev. William S. Pluraer, February 26, 1834.

darkness was removed. He had much confidence in the powerful application of particular texts or promises to the mind; believing that the Spirit directed them to the heart, for the relief of distressed souls. He mentioned a particular verse, which had been thus remarkably brought to his mind in answer to prayer for some brighter manifestation of God’s favour.

“On a particular occasion I had occasion to observe how he seized every opportunity, at public houses, to say something which might leave a good impression. The keeper of the inn himself attended at dinner, and my venerable friend began a story, addressing himself to me. The man presently went out; he paused in his narrative, and as I was surprised at his breaking off so abruptly, he said to me in a low voice, ‘I commenced this story with a view of benefiting our host; wait till he comes in; ’ and then resumed it. At another place where we stopped, when about to depart, he took the owner of the house to one side and gave him a pointed and powerful exhortation. “Wherever he was, he made all know that there was one in company who feared God, and who was neither afraid nor ashamed to acknowledge his dependence on him. On crowded steamboats, he would always publicly ask a blessing at meals. His appearance favoured this, being truly venerable. He was a man of large frame, and wore a flowing white wig. His heart seemed to be always overflowing with kind affections. Most of the middle-aged ministers of the Reformed Dutch Church studied under his direction, and revere his memory.”

Among other tokens of advancing life, Dr. Alexander

was warned by the removal of several early friends, who were called away during the years to which this chapter refers. His friend and kinsman, the Kev. Matthew Lyle, had been called away in 1827. We have already recorded the death of Dr. John H. Kice, for whom he entertained as warm a regard as for any man living. He was not only a great man, but a man of great affections. A little domestic instance will place his friendship for Dr. Alexander in a strong light. Soon after the removal of the latter to the north, Mr. Kice wrote to him thus: “And here let me make a request of you, which I have often thought of making before. I do it seriously, and in the spirit of a friendship which I am assured will last while life lasts. If it should please the All-wise Disposer of events to remove you from your family before they are educated and settled in the world, and I should be spared, it is my most earnest wish that you would leave to me that one of your children to whom you may judge that it would be most advantageous. He shall in such case be to me a child, and I to him as a father. I hope that you will excuse me for making such a request, and that it may not be forgotten,”* And after the lapse of twenty years, he resumes the subject: “I owe you more than I do any other man in existence. It is not in my power to do any thing for you personally; but should the Sovereign of the universe be pleased to order that I should survive you, it may be in my power to act the part of an efficient friend to some of your children.”f In 1836, the Rev. Conrad Speece, D. D., another companion of his youth, already named in these pages,

* July 15, 1810. f J^y 21, 1830.

was suddenly taken to his rest. These and similar events had an obvious effect upon the temper of his mind; not in the way of gloom, but as producing an elevated solemnity and habitual expectation of the time when his own change should come. Yet he urged forward all his pursuits with unabated vigour, and rejoiced to see others rising up to vindicate the truth which he loved. That some of these persons belonged to other denominations, did not seem to diminish his regard for them. When in 1839, Dr. Kettleton spent some time in Princeton, Dr. Alexander found much satisfaction in observing the coincidence of their views on the great and contested points of evangelical theology. And in the same year, when the accomplished and pious Joseph John Gurney exercised his public gifts among us, he took equal pleasure in the remarkable approaches which this good Quaker made to the doctrines of sound faith. At the age of sixty-seven, no feeling of religious warmth manifested any abatement.

We suppose that no one was ever long conversant with Dr. Alexander, without being astonished at his turn for the particulars of localities, and his topographical knowledge. In the estimate of those who knew him most closely, this was by far the most remarkable of his endowments. It was doubtless fostered by his living in boyhood in a wild country, and by the continual and often solitary journeys of his early manhood. However much he might seem to be otherwise employed, his eye was always directed to the surface of the country and its natural configuration. To have travelled a road once was to know it, with all its landmarks for the

whole of his life. Wherever he had wandered, he knew the direction of all the streams, their rise and flow, the chains of hills or mountains, the nature of soils, timber and crops, and the ridges which mark and divide the watersystems. And he had the faculty of extracting the same sort of information from travellers and others coming from regions which he had not visited. It was a standard topic of merriment with him to banter his children upon their occasional blunders in determining the species of a forest tree. As he began his eager inquiries on these subjects when our States were few in number, he was able to add to his knowledge as new countries were settled; so that we suppose there was no man living whose acquaintance with the geography and topography of America was more extensive or exact. In times when private modes of travel were common, we have known him to draw plans of journeys, extending through several hundred miles, for missionaries leaving home, with a note of distances and a specification of every night’s sojourn; without the consultation of book or map. This knowledge reached also, far beyond what is common, to foreign countries, and was perpetually increasing by his study of every thing new in the shape of voyages and travels. For the same reason he took a lively interest in all that belongs to the natural delineation of the earth, and in his later years perused with much zest the works of Mrs. Somerville and Professor Guyot on Physical Geography.

As connected with what has just been mentioned, and in some degree falling under the same faculty, we may note his acquaintance with all the churches and pastors of our Presbyterian connection. If we did not know that hundreds now living can bear witness to what we say, we should be led to modify the strength of the statement which we are about to make. The whole territory of the Church was so mapped out in his head, that it is scarcely too much to affirm that he knew who was the pastor of every Presbyterian Church in the United States. Notices in journals and elsewhere, which made little impression on others, seized his attention, and seemed to fall into the right places and fill up the proper blanks. In most cases he knew also the whole line of incumbents from the beginning. This knowledge extended quite largely to other branches of the Church. As his pupils from year to year spread themselves over the country, he followed them in their wanderings, and particularly kept his eye upon those who went to foreign lands. There was not a missionary, of either our own Church or the American Board, with whose locality he was not perfectly familiar.