His Last Years, from 1872 to His Death, June 19, 1878
From this time to the end, he was an old man visibly ripening for another life. Compared with most men, and considering his sedentary life and the amount of intellectual work he had accomplished, he was, with good reason, regarded as having survived his years in a condition of excellent preservation. With the exception of a few attacks of acute disease, his general health was very good. His complexion, always fair, was beautiful in its perfect clearness and soft roseate brightness. His blue eyes became more and more sweet in their expression, and together with his strong yet gentle and flexible mouth overflowed with benevolence and humor, or at times with reverence and melting devotion and love. As his old friend, ex-president Woolsey, had wished for him at his semi-centennial, he had “a sweet old age.” No phrase could express it more perfectly. The controversies were all past. The old warrior hung his arms upon the wall, as he rested under the clear skies of
universal peace. He still followed and took interest in the conflict of opinion. But his own part was done. Although delayed for a time, the complete and universal victory of the cause, for which he had so long contended, was absolutely sure. His faith was the substance of things hoped for, and for him the triumph was virtually come. All who loved Christ were heartily loved and cherished by him. He believed in the Holy Catholic Church, and in the Communion of Saints. He wrote in pencil with trembling lines on one of his “Conference Papers,” not long before his end, that he believed that the vast majority of the human race were to share the beatitudes and glories of his Lord’s redemption. He was conscious of past sins and of present imperfections, but where sin had abounded grace did much more abound. More and more habitually he looked upward instead of inward. His heart was filled with hope and joy, as his face was made to shine by Him who was “the health of his countenance, and his God.” He had no disappointments, no vain regrets; the past with all its contents he offered through Christ to God. He had no fears for the future, for there is no fear in love; perfect love had cast out all fear. He had no jealousies; he retained the uneasy sense of no old wounds nor injuries. He loved all in the sense of benevolence, and in the higher sense he loved all the brethren, admiring and rejoicing in their graces and sympathizing in their conflicts and their joys. And all parties, as far as he was known, came to love him. As he once said of his friend, Dr. John McLean, he also became the best beloved man in any circle in which he was embraced. The odimn theologicum, with which he had been credited, both as subject and occasion, met with a strange transfiguration. The storms of the day made the peace and beauty of the setting sun more rich and wonderful. Supreme devotion to truth was once again proven to be a genuine form of supreme love to God and man.
There is always something essentially pathetic even in the
^T. 74-80.] HIS LAST YEARS. 5y
brightest and balmiest late autumnal day. To the eye of faith it is the season which prepares after the interval of a short sleep in winter, for a new and more glorious spring. But to the eye of sense, it is, nevertheless, the end of the year. So was it with the autumn of this life. Though he was generally well, he was weak, and often very weary. Though he was beautiful, it was the wasting beauty of the fading leaf And this was in perfect accord with the spirit of his own mind. Though he reclined with unwavering confidence upon a supernatural hope, his spirit and life were eminently natural. Though he had no fear, yet he had no desire to die. He looked beyond the world rather than rose entirely above it. His interest in all human things was genuine and strong, and his cheerfulness was never failing, yet often tinged with a pathetic wistfulness, arising from an habitual sense of the imminence of his own departure. He delighted more and more in reminiscences of past events and persons. The friends of his early years were all gone, but their memory was very precious. The improvements which, during these last years were so extensively made in the buildings of the College and Seminary, interested him exceedingly, and he was glad that he was privileged to see them before the final closing of his eyes on all earthly scenes. But his great delight was in his grand-children. Two families of them lived in the same village with him, and made as free of his study and of the arms of his great chair as his own children had done a generation earlier. All their smart sayings were reported to him, and repeated by him with the greatest zest. He knew and maintained all of their respective points of excellence and superiority with the zeal of a partisan. He was always on the alert in providing presents for them on all their anniversaries of birth-days and Christmas, and in selecting and dispatching appropriate St. Valentines with a gleeful delight equal and like to that of the young recipients themselves. His love was faithfully returned by them all, and none, except the
534 LAST YEARS. [1872-78.
youngest, will ever forget the frequent and delightful occasions when all the resident family gathered with loving reverence around grandfather’s chair.
Before he died he was for some years the oldest survivor of his entire family clan. Children and grand-children, nephews, grand-nephews and cousins in various degrees looked up to him with affection and pride, and constantly cheered his last days by their visits, and testimonials of sympathy and reverence.
This singular love and reverence was not confined to the circles of his kindred or of his private friends. It extended to his colleagues in the faculty, to the younger ministry, to all his old students, and beyond his own denomination to all Christian people to whom either his person or his reputation was known.
An old pupil under the pseudonym of ‘^ Augustin,” wrote in ile Presbyterian May 6th, 1876: “The late meeting of the Princeton Theological Seminary was a time of refreshing to all who participated in it. The face of our dear old Professor Hodge, broke out constantly into smiles of holy joy, as he sat like a father in the midst of his sons. And when his voice faltered and the tears came into his eyes, as he gave his reminiscences of his classmate and life-long friend, Bishop Johns (recently dead) or undertook to express his love for us, and his interest in the Seminary with which his life had been identified, what he called his weakness was stronger than his words, even as the showers of heaven fall no less potently on the flowers in the earth than the clear shining of the sun. It is a precious and glorious sight to behold an old age so green and graceful, to see one so eminent in intellect, so abundant in labors, so honored in the world, as simple and tender and affectionate as a little child prepared for our Father’s house in heaven. If this should meet his eye and offend him, he will forgive it, when he knows the pen that writes it is dipped in a heart that is melted in his love.”
JETT. 75.] DEATH OF HIS BROTHER. 535
From about 1868 to the year of his death, each graduating class at the very last took a special, personal farewell of Dr. Hodge. After receiving their diplomas, and the valedictory charge, and benediction of the representative of the Board of Directors, the class formed a circle with Dr. Hodge at the centre, in the middle of the front campus. “They sang (at least in April, 1869) several verses of the hymn,” All hail the power of Jesus’ name,” and the verse of the missionary hymn beginning, “Shall we whose souls are lighted, &c.” Then making a close ring, each one crossing his arms, they held hand by hand, and sang “Blest be the tie that binds,” and then the Long Metre Doxology. After that. Dr. Hodge pronounced the Benediction. He then shook hands with each student, and each student shook hands with all the others, and they separated.”
THE DEATH OF HIS BROTHER, DR. HUGH L. HODGE, OF
PHILADELPHIA.
The winter of 1872-73 was characterized by numerous waves of intense cold, recurring after intervals of about ten days or two weeks. On Monday, the twenty-fourth of February, one of these periods occurred. Dr. H. L. Hodge, then in his ordinary health, and vigorous beyond most men of his age, was exposed to the cold while visiting patients up to ten o’clock that night. Upon his return to his home a letter was read to him from a widow of a physician in Virginia, whose husband had been a pupil of his in the long-past, in her poverty appealing to him for aid. Late as the hour was he called for his checkbook, and signed a check for her relief This was the last time he ever used his pen. Fit ending to a life of unceasing charity. After conversing pleasantly with his son and daughter for a while, and sitting alone in his office as his custom was, he retired to bed about midnight. He was immediately seized with angina pectoris, and was found by
536 ^£A TH OF HIS BR 0 THER. [1873,
his son, also a physician, in an unconscious condition. He was revived, and kept aHve for twenty-six hours, until all his children had been gathered to his bedside, by frequent resort to artificial respiration. When awake he was perfectly conscious, full of humility, and love, faith, and peace. “Let there be no eulogy” was the only injunction he lay upon his pastor. But innumerable patients, and pupils, witnesses and beneficiaries of his bounty in all parts of the land, and the Second Presbyterian Church, of which he was the preserver and second founder, bear witness alike to his wisdom and his goodness, to his selfdenial and his munificence. When the despatch arrived in Princeton, on Tuesday, announcing his probably fatal illness, his brother Charles was forced to go to his own bed instead of to the bedside of his brother. And soon after his return, on the 3d of March, from the funeral, he was attacked in his nervously prostrated condition, with a severe congestion of the chest, which came near being fatal, and which confined him to the house until the first week of April.
DR. HODGE TO BISHOP JOHNS.
Princeton, March 4th, 1872. Dear yohn: — We are left like two old trees standing almost alone. The fewer the dearer. My brother’s death was entirely unexpected. He was perfectly well, and far stronger than I am. He was out attending his patients all Monday morning, and what of late was unusual with him, went out again in the afternoon, and remained out until it was so dark some one had to bring him home. That day was one of the severest of the season. It was that exposure in the opinion of his physicians, killed him, although its effects were not immediately manifest. He went to bed apparently in his usual health, but at midnight was heard to fall. His son, on reaching the room, found him lying on the floor unconscious. It was not apoplexy, but angina pectoris. His heart had ceased to act, and breathing was entirely suspended. By artificial respiration he was gradually restored, and was entirely himself; his mind was clear as ever, and so continued until the end. But through the day at irregular intervals his heart would cease to act and his breathing ceased. By a renewal of artifi-MT. 75.] LIF£ AND CHARACTER OF DR. //. Z. HODGE. 537
cial inflation of the lungs he would revive again. This occurred thirty or forty times, he gradually getting weaker, and at last, twenty-six hours after the attack, he finally expired.
The dear man was greatly blessed. No one touched his body after his death but his sons.* They prepared him for his coffin, laid him in it; carried him down stairs, carried him in the church, and carried him to his grave and lowered his body to its last resting-place. So that a lovely glory surrounded him to the last.
Dear John, let us pray for each other.
Yours as ever,
Charles Hodge.
The following account of the life and character of Dr. Charles Hodge’s only brother and life-long friend and benefactor, is extracted from a Memoir of H. L. Hodge, M. D., LL. D., prepared for Philadelphia County Medical Society, by William Goodell, M.D. “In 1820, Dr. Hodge returned from India, but with means too limited to carry out the long cherished prosecution of his studies in Europe. The voyage had proved a commercial failure, but, nothing daunted, he opened an office in Walnut Street, opposite Washington Square. Soon after he was elected to the Southern Dispensary, and, a few months later, to the Philadelphia Dispensary. In these rich fields of practice he gained much experience, and acquired those habits of close observation and original research which ever after characterized him. He soon became a man of mark, for in the summer of 1 82 1, he was selected to teach the anatomical class of Prof Horner, who was then absent in Europe. So acceptably did he fill this position, that in 1823 he was appointed to the Lectureship on Surgery in Dr. Chapman’s Summer School, which, in 1837, became a chartered institution, under the name of the ‘Medical Institute.’ Of these lectures he was justly proud, for on them he was then able to spend all his time and strength. Old practitioners still refer to them in terms of high praise.
* Three Presbyterian ministers, one Presbyterian elder, and one Episcopal minister. Five beautiful and holy sons.
538 LIFE AND CHARACTER OF H. L. HODGE. [1796-1873.
“In September of the same year he gained a longcoveted position on the staff of the Philadelphia Hospital, and his practice began now steadily to increase. In 1828, at the age of thirty -two, he married Margaret E. Aspinwall, the daughter of John Aspinwall, a well-known merchant of New York city. From this union seven sons were born, of whom five are living. One is the well-known surgeon who bears his father’s name; the rest are clergymen. After a happy married life of thirty-eight years, in 1866, this good wife and good mother died.
“Thus far. Dr. Hodge had concentrated all his energy on anatomy and surgery. His tastes lay in these directions; both these branches he had taught with great acceptance; as a surgeon, he was fast winning his way to fame. But a complete and very unexpected turn now took place in all his plans. The dim oil-lamps of his college days, his habits of late study, had greatly injured his eyesight, and compelled him to wear glasses of very high power. Year by year his vision so surely failed that he was at last warned to direct his ambition into new channels. Other circumstances confirmed him in making this change. The health of Dr. Thomas C. James, the Professor of Midwifery in the University of Pennsylvania, was beginning to fail. Dr. William P. Dewees, the heir-apparent to his chair, and the most brilliant of American obstetricians, had long passed the noontide of life. For many years the brothers Joseph and Harvey Klapp had enjoyed the pick of the midwifery practice of a rapidly-growing city. But, at this juncture, the one died, and the other retired to his secluded country-seat in the wilds of West Philadelphia. These accidents and opportunities at once determined Dr. Hodge to give up, but with a bitter heart, his long-cherished specialty of surgery for that of obstetrics. Shortly after making this decision, he was enabled to exchange his lectureship of surgery for that of obstetrics, which the resignation of Dr. Dewees had left vacant. He was also the winning candi- ‘961873.] LIFE AND CHARACTER OF DR. H. L. HODGE. 539
date in an excited canvass for a position on the staff of the Lying-in Department of the Pennsylvania Hospital.
“For the possession of the empty chair, left vacant by the resignation of Dr. Wm. P. Dewees, November, 1835, a battle royal, one of giants, now took place. The struggle lay between two such men as Hugh L. Hodge and Charles D. Meigs, and was, therefore, a very hotly contested one. The strong claims of the rival candidates, and the very equally balanced influence of their respective friends, made the issue doubtful. Dr. Hodge, who was a very modest man, could not be prevailed upon to visit any of the trustees. At last his friends refused to work for him unless he did so. He, therefore, provided himself with a list of their names and residences, and nerved himself up to this imposed and distasteful mission. As luck would have it, the first gentleman on whom he called was an upright but very eccentric Friend, who, upon learning his errand, at once said, ‘Young man, I should have thought better of thee, hadst thou not come.’ In great confusion the modest candidate took his leave, tore up his list, and at once returned home. That trustee was the only one on whom he called. No persuasions, no entreaties, could thereafter move him to solicit another vote. But his friends, despite their threats, worked manfully for him. Perhaps this very modesty stood him in good stead. At any rate, he proved the successful candidate.
“From the time of his election to the chair of obstetrics until his resignation in 1863, no teacher ever gave a more thorough or a more conscientious course of lectures. The strong feature of his teaching was not to display his knowledge, but to impart it. He possessed, in an eminent degree, those essentials of a good teacher — the subtilitas explicandi, as well as the subtilitas intelligcndi. Dependent, as he was, on account of imperfect vision, exclusively upon his memory, he yet delivered new lectures with the utmost neatness and precision. There was no faltering over a demonstration, no omission of a diagram. Althouch griftcd with a fluent
540 LIFE AND CHARACTER OF DR. II. L. HODGE. [’95-1873,
delivery, he used no trope or figure, and made no effort at oratorical display. So pure-minded was he, and so far removed from making “points” — as they are technically called — that, when some madcap student distorted an accidental juxtaposition of words into a double entendre, his face flushed up with vexation. Over the young men who flocked to hear him, his influence was great and good. At the beginning and the end of each curriculum, they listened, with respectful and often tearful attention, to his happy words of greeting and tender words of parting. What graduate of those days can ever efface from his memory that gracious manner which seemed to convey a benediction, and that halo of goodness which floated about him? Men will come, and men will go, but we shall never see his like again.
“During a large portion of Dr. Hodge’s life, the pressure of his professional engagements was so great as to prevent him from writing anything besides his early lectures on surgery and those on obstetrics. But during his early professional career he was one of the editors of the NortJi American Medical and Surgical yournal, to which he contributed many reviews and original papers. Later in life imperfect vision hindered Dr. Hodge from becoming a prolific writer. Besides several articles written for various medical journals, he published a memoir of Dr. James, a eulogium on Dr. Dewees, and a number of introductory lectures. One of these on criminal abortion, after being reprinted several times, was published with some additions under the title of “Foeticide.” In 1860 he published his work on “Diseases Peculiar to Women,” and in 1863 his great work on Obstetrics. In editing the latter, few of my hearers are aware of the difficulties he had to encounter; difficulties from which most men would have shrunk. From title-page to colophon this large work was written by an amanuensis at his dictation. The beautiful and original lithographs which enrich its pages gave him a world of trou- ’96-1873.] LIFE AND CHARACTER OF DR. H. L. HODGE. 541
ble and anxiety. He knew that to a student a work on obstetrics without illustrations is practically valueless. But how were illustrations to be made whose accuracy a blind man could verify! This was a problem of difficult solution, one to which he devoted many anxious thoughts and sleepless nights. At last his son, Dr. H. Lenox Hodge, suggested the use of photography. Here, indeed, was the means presented, by which nature could be faithfully copied; here the prospect of making stepping-stones of the very obstacles which lay in his way. With a thrill of pleasure, he jumped at the idea, and fairly laughed aloud with joy. From the noble collection which he afterwards gave to the unrivalled museum of the University, a typical pelvis and foetal head were selected. The former was placed upon an appropriate stand, the latter he held in the proper position within the pelvic cavity to illustrate the various positions and presentations. In this manner they were photographed, but in the lithographic plates copied from these originals, the sustaining fingers and hand of the author were of course left out. In graceful recognition of this and other literary labors, and of his distinguished reputation, he was in 187 1 honored by his Alma Mater with the degree of LL. D.
“As an author, the writings of Dr. Hodge are characterized by clearness, by conscientious accuracy, and by great originality. He contemplated the soul of a subject, and not its mere habiliments. In proof of this, witness his remarkable papers on ‘Synclitism,’ and his careful study of the ‘Mechanism of Labor.’ Although aggressive when needful, his mind was strongly constructive, and not destructive. He pulled down to build up, but never for the mere sake of pulling down. Of too rugged an individuality to fashion himself to the modes and opinions of others, he thought out for himself with intense convictions of truth. These convictions he defended with rigid and drastic logic. To them he was always true; from them he never swerved. Like the builders of Jerusalem, he worked with
542 LIFE AND CHARACTER OF DR. H. L. HODGE. [’96-1 S73.
a spear in one hand and a trowel in the other. But while clinging tenaciously to what he had elaborated, he dissented from the opinions of others with a courteous hospitality of thought, with perfect fair play. Such encounters never kindled into angry controversy, for it was not his system that he defended, but the truth, the truth as he interpreted it. In this respect he satisfied Schiller’s definition of a true philosopher. By his loss a great gap is left in medical literature — a gap that is felt in other lands as well.
“Thus far I have spoken of Dr. Hodge as a physician, but great injustice would be done to his memory were this memoir to take note simply of the services he rendered to our common profession. In the sacred relations of kindred and of friendship, his love never chilled. By his kindness he won the affection of all who knew him; by his inflexible integrity he gained the respect of those who came in contact with him. In 1 830 he became a member of the Second Presbyterian Church, a Church born of the fervor of his ancestors. His after life proved the sincerity of this step. He ever after walked as if he felt that ’ the Christian was the world’s Bible.’ The calamity of his blindness, and that more grievous one of the death of his beloved wife, took sunlight from his eyes and sunshine from his heart, but he bore each with Christian fortitude. As a church member no one showed a greater consistency, a broader philanthropy, a more unstinted liberality, or set a brighter example of loyal Christian faith. Never once did this faith waver before the rude assaults and aggressive ventures of human thought. Two years before his death, when the congregation of his church decided to move further up town, he was unanimously chosen the Chairman of the Building Committee. On this new work he now bent all his strength. To it he subscribed munificently, and was active in raising contributions. Since he could not see, the various plans of the new church were carefully explained ’96-1873.] LTFE AND CHARACTER OF DR. H. L. HODGE. to him by the architect. None of them pleased him, and yet he found himself unable to make his criticisms in technical and therefore in intelligible language. With characteristic ingenuity, he took the books lying on the desk, and with them built up a structure which conveyed the idea of the plan ultimately adopted.
“The last years of this strong-headed and strong-hearted man were not spent in idleness. His sight grew more and more dim, but his natural force did not abate, his brain did not grow weary, his hand lost not its cunning. Apart from giving much of his time and strength to Church matters, he continued to visit some old patients, and to keep up a lively interest in everything pertaining to his profession. All papers bearing on the branches which he had taught were read to him by some member of his family, or by some person regularly employed for this purpose. He dictated several papers for the American Journal of the Medical Sciences. Two of them on ‘Synclitism’ attracted much attention. Deeply impressed with the conviction that a lack of proper clinical instruction is the crying evil of our medical schools, he subscribed liberally towards the endowment of the noble Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, which is soon to inaugurate a new and important departure in the medical education of this country.
“My first acquaintance with Dr. Hodge was made at this time of his life. We met in the library of the College of Physicians, where he was collecting material for some essay. I shall never forget his warm grasp and hearty shake as he took my hand in both of his. His kind words of encouragement are indelibly fixed in my memory; and so is the playful manner in which he took me to task — ’ scolded ’ me, as he termed it — for some of my published writings which dici not accord with his views. His noble but sightless face lighted up with pleasure when I told him that I had twice read his work on ‘Obstetrics’ from beginning to end, and that it was the means of first awakening
544 DEATH OF FRIENDS. [1873.
in me a love for his chosen branch of medicine. Other very pleasant interviews I had with him, for like pursuits and congenial tastes drew us together. On these occasions obstetric matters were always discussed. On this favorite topic he spoke so fTuently, and was so much at home that, in order to follow him intelligently, the closest attention on my part was needed. A happier man I never saw; his face beamed with smiles; his days seemed hymns of thanksgiving. Some natures, like vitreous bodies, become iridescent with age. But why, I often asked myself, why should he be otherwise? Why should he repine? Surrounded by devoted friends and loving children; with much grain stored away in the garner of his brain; with the consciousness of never having wasted the prerogatives of life; with a noble history behind him, and a glorious immortality before him, could earthly estate be more princely?”
DEATH OF FRIENDS.
Dr Charles Hodge writes in his journal: “Came down stairs Friday, the 14th of March (1873), and heard within an hour of the death of two life-long friends, both College and Seminary fellow-students — the Rev, James V. Henry, who died at Jersey City, aged 75, and Charles P. Mcllvaine, Bishop of Ohio, whose death in Florence had just been announced. I am almost alone.”
The wife of his colleague, Rev. A. T. McGill, DD., had also died a few days previously. On that occasion he wrote to Dr. McGill : —
My afflicted friend and brother: — God has brought upon you the greatest of all bereavements, but you have the greatest of all consolations. You know that the companion of your life is now happy and glorious, forever free from all pain and sorrow, and forever blessed in the presence of the Lord. You cannot grieve, therefore, as those who have no hope. You know too that you will soon be reunited to be no more separated forever. And while you remain here still to labor and suffer in the service of the Lord, He will not leave you comfortless; he will send the Comforter, the Spirit of truth, to be
^T. 75-] THE ASSEMBLY OF 1873. 545
with you and to dwell in you, and to give you the peace that passes all understanding. You can look backward as well as forward, and feed upon the recollection of all the excellence and goodness of her who was so long your own, and who now awaits you in heaven.
You have the consolation, which is a very great one, to know she was admired and loved, and is now lamented by all who knew her. No lady in this community was the subject of higher regard or more sincere affection. You are not alone. Your sons and daughters are about you to share your grief and to alleviate it by their devotion and tenderness.
I write not that I may comfort you, but that I may share with you in your sorrow, and mingle my thanksgiving with yours for the wonders of redeeming grace, which are never felt to be so precious as when the desire of our eyes is taken from us.
Praying that God may fill your heart with the assurance of his love, and with the consolations of his Holy Spirit, I am, my dear brother. Yours in sincere affection, Charles Hodge.
THE VISIT OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF 1 873 tO
WASHINGTON,
This General Assembly contained many of his old students, and also many strangers from a distance, especially of the late New-school branch of the Church, who had heard of his fame, and yet had never seen his face. Among many of both classes a strong desire to see him gradually gathered force. This led ultimately to the adjournment of the Assembly during the day-time of Wednesday, the 28th of May, and their visit as a body to Washington, in order to meet him as their guest at Willard’s Hotel. An account of the whole matter is given in the following letter from Dr. Joseph T. Smith, of Baltimore, who was on that occasion chairman of the Assembly’s Committee of Arrangements.
REV. JOSEPH T. SMITH TO THE EDITOR.
Baltimore, April 8, 1880.
Rev. a. a. Hodge, —
Dear Doctor: — I have just returned from Washington, where I used all diligence to get the facts connected with your father’s visit to the Assembly. I was able to get very little beyond what I already knew.
546 THE ASSEMBL Y OF 1873. [1873.
During the session of the Assembly of 1873 ‘^ Baltimore there was a very general and very earnest desire expressed on the part of the members of the Assembly, and particularly those from a distance, to meet with your father. As Chairman of the Committee of Arrangements this was brought to me from in any quarters, and the committee was anxious in some way to gratify it. Your father was then on a visit to his brother-in-law, General Hunter, in Washington. The first movement was to invite him to Baltimore, but to this he replied that his health would not permit, as he was then convalescent from a severe attack of acute bronchitis.
It was then proposed that the Assembly should visit Washington, and have an interview with him there. After some correspondence a delegation came on from Washington and invited the Assembly to spend a day there, assuring them that proper arrangements would be made for an interview with Dr. Hodge. On the evening of the 27th of May the Assembly adjourned to meet at half-past 7 o’clock, p. M. on the 28th. The Moderator, Dr. Crosby, was not able to go, but the greater portion of the Assembly went, with Dr. Niccolls, the last Moderator present, acting in Dr. Crosby’s place.
They first repaired to the Capitol, and after a short address of welcome from the Washington Brethren,’ and a response from the Moderator, they united in singing the Long Metre Doxology, in the Rotunda. Hence they repaired to the White House, where in the absence of the President, they were received by Secretary Fish and the ladies present. They then moved in a body to the grand dining-room in Willard’s Hotel, where a rich collation had been provided by the Churches of Washington,
Dr. Hodge, very feeble, and showing signs of great emotion, entered on the arm of Dr. Niccolls, and took his Seat by his side at the head of the table. The room, spacious as it is, was crowded, and the greatest interest was manifested in the proceedings. After quiet was secured an Address of Welcome was made by Dr. Niccolls to the honored guest of the occasion. Dr. Hodge rose under great emotion, and replied, after which the brethre,n crowded around him with the greatest heartiness and unanimity with their congratulations. This action of the Assembly touched him very deeply. When first told of the desire thus to honor him he was almost overcome, and the cordial greeting he received on every side, he said, was among the most cherished recollections of his life.
I am sorry that I cannot give you more than the above, but these are the main facts.
Yours in Christ,
J. T. Smith.
^T. 75.] THE E VANGELICAL ALLIANCE. 547
THE EVANGELICAL ALLIANCE.
In the early days of October, 1873, the Sixth General Conference of the Evangehcal Alliance, was held in the city of New York. Taken all together, as to its object, the character of its members, the value of their discussions, the vastness and enthusiasm of the attendant audiences, and the impression made upon the entire Christian community, this Conference was one of the memorable events in the history of American Christianity.
In an article entitled “American Lights of the Evangelical Alliance, by Camera Obscura,” printed in the Stmdayschool Times for October 18th, 1873, the subject of this memoir is photographed thus: “There is the Rev. Charles Hodge, D.D., LL.D., of Princeton Theological Seminary, the most impressive personality of the Alliance. Who ever saw a face more radiant, more serene, more suggestive? Strength lying in repose, sweetness and an indescribable innocence beam from his countenance. Dressed in a dress-coat and snowy cravat of the olden pattern, carrying a gold-headed ebony cane, upon the top of which he is wont to recline, he is growing old far too fast. When he addresses the audience, only those who are half-way toward the platform can have any pleasure in the hearing. Those beyond are only conscious of their loss by seeing how such as sit hard by are being fed.”
The chief end of the Alliance is to promote and to exemplify the essential unity of evangelical Christendom, however widely distinguished by denominational differences, or separated by national or geographical barriers. The part assigned to Dr. Hodge, therefore, struck the key-note for the whole Conference and the exercises of all its divisions. His subject was “The Unity of the Church based on Personal Union with Christ.” His points were ist. “The Unity of Individual Believers,” first with Christ and then with each other, which has its ground in the r^S THE EVANGELICAL ALLIANCE. [1873.
indwelling of the Spirit and in faith. This is manifested (i) In their agreement in faith. They all essentially embrace the same system of truth. (2) In the sameness of their spiritual life or religious experience, and (3) In their mutual love, the bond of perfectness, which is founded first, on congeniality and second on relationship, and is manifested first in mutual recognition, and second, in a disposition to bear each other’s burdens and to bear each other’s wants. 2d. “The Unity of Individual Churches or Congregations.”” The idea of the Church, therefore, as presented in the Bible, is that believers scattered over the world are a band of brethren, children of the same Father, subjects of the same Lord, forming one body by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, uniting all to Christ as their living head. This indwelling of the Spirit makes all believers one in faith, one in their religious life, one in love. Hence they acknowledge each other as brethren and are ready to bear each other’s burdens. This is the communion of saints. The Church, in this view, is the mystical body of Christ.
“But by a law of the Spirit, believers living in the same neighborhood unite as Churches for public worship, and for mutual watch and care. These local Churches constitute one body, first, spiritually, because they are all subject to the same Lord, are animated by the same Holy Spirit, and are bound together by the bond of Christian love. Secondly, they are externally one body, because they acknowledge each other as Churches of Christ, and recognizee each other’s members, ordinances, ministers, and acts of discipline; and also because they are all subject to the same tribunal. That tribunal in the beginning was the apostles; now it is the Bible, and the mind of the Church, expressed sometimes in one way and sometimes in another.
“That this normal state of the Church has never been fully realized is to be referred partly to unavoidable circum-
/ET. 75-] THE EVANGELICAL ALLIANCE. 549
stances, and partly to the imperfections of believers. * * * In the present state of the world denominational Churches are, therefore, relatively a good. The practical question is, What is their relation to each other? What are their relative duties? How may their real unity be manifested in the midst of these diversities.
3d. “Denominational Churches.” (i) Their first duty to each other is mutual recognition. (2) Their second duty is intercommunion. They owe then (3) recognition of each other’s sacraments and orders, (4) non-interference and (5) the duty of co-operation.
“If the principles above stated be correct it is of the last importance that they should ,be practically recognized. If all Christians really believed that they constitute the mystical body of Christ on earth, they would sympathize with each other as readily as the hands sympathize with the feet, or the feet with the hands. If all churches, whether local or denominational, believed that they too are one body in Christ Jesus, then instead of conflict we should have concord; instead of mutual criminations we should have mutual respect and confidence; instead of rivalry and opposition we should have cordial co-operation. The whole visible Church would then present an undivided front against infidelity and every form of Anti-christian error, and the sacramental host of God, though divided into different corps, would constitute one army glorious and invincible.”
Dr. Hodge also took part in the extemporaneous discussion on Darwinism and the doctrine of Development in the Philosophical Section held Oct. 6.
Under the title of “Noticeable things at the Alliance,” in the Presbyterian, Oct. 18, 1873, Dr. Cuyler of Brooklyn says,” The ’ corns ’ of sectarianism have suffered occasionally, to be sure, when some hard logic set its boot heavily on them. This was the case when Dr. Hodge trod squarely on the sore spot in ’ close communionism ’ in his superb address;
5 50 THE E VANGELICAL ALLIANCE. [1873.
and some of our good Baptist brethren winced a little. This was inevitable. What does the Alliance signify but the free and open communion of all the faithful in Christ Jesus? Dr. Hodge spoke with intense emotion, and was heard with intense interest. One eminent foreign delegate said to me, ‘It paid me for crossing the ocean just to see Dr. Hodge during that glorious speech.’”
The Examiner and Chronicle (Baptist), in an editorial on Oct. 9th, 1873, affirmed that Dr. Hodge in that address had “overlooked the claims of courtesy, propriety and justice.” In the Presbyterian of Nov. i, 1873, Dr. Hodge’s answer is given. He says,” I was distinctly informed that no one was expected to speak in the name of the body which he addressed. He was to express his own views, for which no one was to be held responsible but himself I find that every other member of the Alliance acted on the same principle that I did — expressing his own sentiments without intending to commit anybody else. Some of our scientific brethren expressed views on the Mosaic account of the creation, and of the modern theory of ’ development ’ from which others dissented. No one took offence at this. Others again advocated the propriety of the Union of Church and State. We Americans were not thereby offended.
“An Evangelical Alliance conducted on the principle that every member must agree with what every other member says, it seems to me must be a failure.
“If you agree with me as to the design of the great convocation of Evangelical Christians which has been such a blessing and such an honor to the age in which we live, I am sure you will exonerate me from the charge of having violated the claims of ’ courtesy, propriety and justice.’
“Your brother in the bonds which no difference between Baptists and Pedo-baptists can sunder.
Charles Hodge.”
yET. 76.] HIS HISTORICAL SERMON. 55 I
HISTORICAL SERMON DELIVERED AT THE RE-OPENING OF
THE CHAPEL, SEPT. 2/, 1 874.
During the summer of 1874, by the generous provision of the munificent benefactor of the Seminary, Mr. John C. Green, of New York city, the Chapel was thoroughly repaired, improved and beautified. On the occasion of its being re-opened for worship, on the 27th of September, the sermon was delivered by Dr. Hodge as senior professor. This sermon is so delightful and valuable in its historical and biographical contents, that I feel it proper to insert a large portion of the text uncondensed:
“The first signal manifestation of the divine favor to this Institution was the selection of Dr. Archibald Alexander and Dr. Samuel Miller as its professors, and their being spared for nearly forty years to devote themselves to its service. It is admitted that the most important part of a man’s life is the formative period of youth. The same is true of communities and institutions. If a college be dependent on the State, its character may vary with the change of parties in the State; but if it be independent, it bids fair to retain its original character from generation to generation. If a father commit his child to incompetent and wicked tutors and governors, the fate of the child is sealed; but if it be confided to faithful guardians, as a rule, it will grow up to be an ornament and a blessing. The favor of God to this infant Seminary, was manifested in its being intrusted to the hands of men pre-eminently qualified for the sacred trust.
“They were in the first place eminently holy men. They exerted that indescribable but powerful influence which always emanates from those who live near to God. Their piety was uniform and serene; without any taint of enthusiasm or fanaticism. It was also Biblical. Christ was as prominent in their religious experience, in their preaching, and in their writings, as he is in the Bible. Christ’s person, his glory, his righteousness, his love, his presence, his power, filled the whole sphere of their religious life. When men enter a Roman Catholic Church, they see before them a wooden image of Christ extended upon a cross. To this lifeless image they bow. When students entered this Seminary, when its first professors were alive, they had held up before them the image of Christ, not graven by art or man’s device, but as portrayed by the Spirit on the pages of God’s word; and it is by beholding that image that men are transformed into its likeness from glory to glory. It is, in large measure, to this constant holding up of Christ, in the glory of his person and the all-sufificiency of his work, that the hallowed influence of the fathers of this Seminary is to be attributed.
“It often happens, however, that men are very pious without being very good. Their religion expends itself in devotional feelings and services, while the evil passions of their nature remain unsubdued. It was not so with our fathers. They were as good as they were pious. I was intimately associated with them, as pupil and colleague, between thirty and forty years. In all that time I never saw in either of them any indication of vanity, of pride, of envy, of jealousy, of insincerity, of uncharitableness, or of disingenuousness. I know that what I say is incredible. Nevertheless it is true. And it is my right and my duty to scatter these withered flowers upon their graves. Most men have reason to rejoice that their bosoms are opaque, but these holy men, as it always seemed to me, might let the sun shine through them.
“Another characteristic of the men of whom I speak was their firm and simple faith in the Scriptures, and in the system of doctrine contained in the standards of our Church. Their faith was founded on the demonstration of the Spirit, and therefore could not be shaken. No Sunday-School scholar, no mother in Israel, could be more entirely submissive to the teachings of the Scriptures than were these venerable men. There was something sublime and beautiful in the humility of old Doctor Alexander, when he found himself at the feet of Jesus. There was no questionings of the reason, no opposition of the heart. The words of Scripture were received as the revelation of what is true and right from the highest source of truth and goodness. No one can estimate the influence of this trait of the character of our first professors operating through forty years on successive generations of their pupils.
“There are theologians who exhort men to think for themselves, and to receive nothing on authority. * * And others who crave after novelty and aspire after originality. * * * And others who have a philosophical disposition.
“It pleased God that the first professors in this Seminary should belong to neither of these classes. They exhorted their students to be humble rather than high-minded. They had no fondness for new doctrines, or for new ways of presenting old ones; and they dreaded the thought of transferring the ground of faith from the rock of God’s word to metaphysical quicksands. For this reason Princeton Theological Seminary was regarded by the illuminati in every part of the land as very umbrageous, impenetrable to any ray of new light. This did not move the men of whom we speak. They had heard Christ say of certain men that the light that is in them is darkness. And knowing that man is blind as to the things of God, they thought it safer to submit to be guided by a divine hand, rather than, with darkness within and darkness without, to stumble on they knew not whither.
“As to the method of instruction adopted by our first professors little need be said. They both used text-books where they could be had. Dr. Alexander’s text-book in theology was Turrettin’s Theologia Elenchtica, one of the most perspicuous books .ever written. In the discussion of every subject it begins with the Status Qucestionis, stating that the question is not this or that; neither this nor that, until every foreign element is eliminated, and then the precise point in hand is laid down with unmistakable precision. Then follow in distinct paragraphs, numbered one, two, three, and so on, the arguments in its support. Then come the Pontes Solutiomun, or answers to objections. The first objection is stated with the answer; then the second, and so on to the end. Dr. Alexander was accustomed to give us from twenty to forty quarto pages, in Latin, to read for a recitation. And we did read them. When we came to recite, the professor would place the book before him and ask. What is the State of the Question? What is the first argument? What is the second, &c.? Then what is the first objection and its answer? What the second, &c.? There were some of my classmates. Dr. Johns, the present bishop of the Episcopal Church in Virginia, for example, who would day after day be able to give the State of the Question, all the arguments in its support in their order, all the objections and the answers to them, through the whole thirty or forty pages, without the professor saying a word to him. This is what in the College of New Jersey used to be called rowling. Whatever may be thought of this method of instruction, it was certainly effective. A man who had passed through that drill never got over it. Some years ago I heard the late Bishop Mcllvaine preach a very orthodox sermon in the Episcopal Church in this place. When we got home, it being a very warm day, he threw himself on the bed to rest. In the course of conversation he happened to remark that a certain professor failed to make any marks on the minds of his students. I said to him, “Old Turrettin, it seems, has left his mark on your mind.” He sprang from the bed, exclaiming, “That indeed he has, and I would give anything to see his theology translated and made the text-book in all our Seminaries.” The Jesuits are wise in their generation, and they have adopted this method of instruction in their institutions.
I” Dr. Alexander, however, did not confine himself to his text-book. He lectured from time to time on those doctrines which were exciting general attention. These lectures from year to year became more numerous, until they constituted an important part of his course. He was accustomed also to give out lists of theological questions, which the students were expected to answer in writing. On the departments of mental and moral philosophy, polemic and pastoral theology, his instructions were by lectures, so that his mind was constantly brought into contact with those of his students. His lectures on Pastoral Theology were devotional exercises, which we attended as we would attend church.
“Dr. Miller also had a text-book on Ecclesiastical History which he supplemented and corrected by a running commentary at each recitation. He, too, gave out lists of questions covering the whole course of biblical and church history. His instructions on Church Government and Discipline, and on the Composition and Delivery of Sermons, were by lectures. These venerable men were remarkably punctual and faithful in attending on all their official duties.
“Their influence on the students was after all mainly religious, arising from the doctrines which they taught, the character which they exhibited, and the principles which they inculcated. To this must be added the power of calling the religious feelings into exercise, which Dr. Alexander possessed beyond any man whom I have ever known. He had the gift of searching the heart; of probing the conscience; of revealing a man to himself; of telling him his thoughts, feelings, doubts and conflicts. As with a lighted torch he would lead a man through the labyrinth of his heart, into places which his intelligent consciousness had never entered. He would thus humble him, instruct him, comfort or strengthen him. He could melt his hearers to penitence, make their hearts burn within them, inspire them with zeal, and give them a foretaste of the joy that is unspeakable. This power he exerted not only in the pulpit, but in our Sabbath afternoon conferences, and in his addresses to the students at evening prayers. There are three of his sermons which I specially remember; one on Abraham’s offering up Isaac; one on the transfiguration of Christ; and one on our Lord’s passion. The only way in which I can give an idea of the impression produced by these discourses, is by saying that his hearers felt, in a measure, as they would have done had they been present at the scenes described. We left this Chapel after his sermon on the transfiguration, feeling that we had seen the Lord in his glory, at least as through a glass darkly. His sermon on the passion of Christ was delivered in the Church on a communion Sunday. The impression which it made was profound. The students became clamorous; they would take no denial of their request for its possession. I do not think that it was printed; but the manuscript came into our hands; and when I read it, there was nothing there but what is in the Gospels. So that the mystery of its power remained unsolved.
“There was another peculiarity in Dr. Alexander’s preaching. He would sometimes pause and give utterance to a thought which had no connection with his subject, and then resume the thread of his discourse. He seemed to think that these thoughts were given to him for a purpose, and he sent them forth as arrows shot at a venture. When a boy I attended a service which he conducted in the old school-house, which stood on the ground now occupied by the First Presbyterian Church. I sat in the back part of the room, on a shelf with my feet dangling half-way to the floor. The Doctor suddenly paused in his address, and stretching out his arm to attract attention, deliberately uttered this sentence, ‘I don’t believe a praying soul ever enters hell.’ That bolt, I suspect, pierced more hearts than one. It may well be believed that more than one poor sinner in that little assembly, said to himself, ‘If
/ET. 76.] HIS HISTORICAL SERMON. 557
that be so, I will keep on praying while I keep on breathing.’
“We all know that the man who is instrumental in bringing us near to God, who enables us to see the glory of Christ, who stirs up our hearts to penitence and love, becomes sacred in our eyes, and that the place in which we have enjoyed these experiences can never be forgotten. Hence the feeling which our old alumni cherish for this Seminary, is not pride, but a tender, sacred, love, as for the place in which they passed some of the holiest, happiest, and most profitable hours of their lives.
“Owing to the peculiar power of Dr. Alexander over the feelings, the students were more demonstrative of their regard for him than for Dr. Miller. But in their heart of hearts, in the place where reverence dwells, in the inner temple of the soul, neither of these holy men stood higher than the other.
“Dr. Addison Alexander was appointed teacher of Hebrew in this Seminary in 1833. In 1836 he was elected professor of Biblical and Oriental Literature. He did not consent, however, to be inaugurated until two years later, although he discharged the duties of the chair to which he had been appointed. He continued connected with the Seminary as one of its professors until his death, February, 1860.
“I believe that I was rash enough to say on the floor of the General Assembly of 1860, that I thought Dr. Addison Alexander the greatest man whom I had ever seen. This was unwise: both because there are so many different kinds of greatness; and because I was no competent judge. I feel free to say now, however, that I never saw a man who so constantly impressed me with a sense of his mental superiority — with his power to acquire knowledge and his power to communicate it. He seemed able to learn anything and to teach anything he pleased. And whatever he did, was done with such apparent ease as to make the impression that there was in him a reserve of strength, which was never called into exercise. The rapidity with which he accomplished his work was marvellous. The second volume of his Commentary on Isaiah, a closely printed octavo volume of five hundred pages, with all its erudition, was written, as I understand, during one summer vacation, which he passed in the city of New York. Few literary achievements can be compared to that.
“He had two marked peculiarities. One was that although he had apparently the power to master any subject, he could not do what he did not like. Being in his youth very precocious and very much devoted to intellectual pursuits, he needed neither excitement nor guidance. He was, therefore, allowed to pass from one subject to another at pleasure. A habit of mind was thus induced which rendered it almost impossible for him to fix his attention on subjects which were disagreeable to him. There were consequently some departments of knowledge of which he was purposely ignorant. This was true of psychology, or mental philosophy. I never knew him to read a book on that subject. He never would converse about it. If when reading a book, he came across any philosophical discussion, he would turn over the leaves until he found more congenial matter. When Dr. Schaff’s work on The Apostolic Age came out, he was greatly delighted with it. The theory of historical development which it broached, he took no notice of. He did not even know it was there. When, therefore, he reviewed the book, he never adverted to one of its most marked characteristics. The same thing was true, in good measure, of natural science, to which he devoted very little attention. It was specially true of physiology and hygiene. It would be hard to find an educated man more profoundly ignorant of the structure of the human body or of the functions of its organs. Hence he was constantly violating the laws of health. He was a whole year seriously ill without knowing it: and only two or three days before his death, he said to me, ‘Don’t look so sad, I’m as well as you are.’
“The other peculiarity referred to was his impatience of routine. He could not bear to go over the same ground, or to attend long to any one subject. Hence he was constantly changing his subjects of study and methods of instruction. He would begin to write a book, get it half done, and then throw it aside. Or, he would begin to write on one plan, and then change it for another. He occupied three different chairs in this Seminary. He first had the Old Testament department; then the Language and Literature of the New Testament. The friends of the Seminary cared little what he did, for whatever he undertook, he was sure to do so grandly that every one would be more than satisfied. As he advanced in life these peculiarities became less apparent. He was constantly getting his powers more under his own control. At the time of his death we flattered ourselves that he had before him twenty or thirty years for steady work. Then suddenly our great treasure ship went down — disappearing under the waves — a dead loss — leaving us, as we then felt, utterly bankrupt.
“The departments in which he took the most interest were languages, literature, history, and above all, the Bible. His earliest reputation was as a linguist. It was known that he had without any instruction made himself so familiar with the Arabic that he had read the Koran through before he was fourteen. In the same way he learned Persic, and while but a lad delighted in reading the Persian poets. He then learned Hebrew, Chaldee and Syriac. He kept up his familiarity with the Greek and Latin classics through life. He read all the modern languages of Europe, unless the Sclavonic dialects be excepted. His object in these studies was not simply the vocabulary and grammar of these languages, but their mutual relations, and specially the literary treasures which they contained. He was specially master of his own tongue. He had read all the leading English authors of every age. His style was a model of precision, perspicuity, felicity of expression, purity and force. His command of language did not seem to have any limit. He could speak in correct and polished English as easily as he could breathe. Extemporary speaking is an every-day matter. But I have known Dr. Addison to come into this chapel, without having committed or written his sermon, and read it off from blank paper from beginning to end without hesitation or correction. He was constantly doing such things, which made those around him think he could do whatever he pleased.
“As to his qualifications as a theological professor, the first in importance was his sincere and humble piety. Religion, however, even when genuine, assumes different forms in different persons. Some men it impels to live before the public as well as for the public. In others it leads rather to self-culture and intercourse with God. Dr. Addison’s life was in a great measure hidden. He never appeared in church-courts or in religious conventions. But although he lived very much by himself, he did not live for himself All his powers were devoted to the service of Christ, as writer, teacher, and minister of the gospel. His temper was naturally irritable; but if it ever got the better of him in the class-room, the next prayer he offered in the oratory was sure to manifest how sincerely he repented. The students, on leaving the prayer-room, would sometimes ask each other, ‘What has Dr. Addison been doing for which he is so sorry?’
“The second great qualification for his office was his firm faith in the Bible and his reverence for it as the word of God. He believed in it just as he believed in the solar system. He could not help believing. He saw so clearly its grandeur as a whole, and the harmonious relation of its several parts, that he could no more believe the Bible to be a human production than he could believe that man made the planets. He never seemed to have any doubts or diffi-
^.T. 76.] HIS HISTORICAL SERMOiY. 56 1
culty on the subject. Although perfectly familiar with the writings of the German rationalists and sceptics from Ernesti to Baur and Strauss, they affected him no more than the eagle is affected by the dew on his plumage as he soars near the sun. The man who studies the Bible as he studied it, in the organic relation of its several parts, comes to see that it can no more be a collection of the independent writings of uninspired men, than the human body is a hap-hazard combination of limbs and organs. It was in this light that he presented it to his students, who were accustomed to say that he glorified the Bible to them, that is — he enabled them to see its glory, and thus confirmed their faith and increased their reverence.
“Another of his distinguishing gifts as a professor was his ability as a teacher. The clearness, rapidity, and force with which he communicated his ideas aroused and sustained attention; and the precision and variety of his questions, in the subsequent catechetical exercise on the subject of the lecture, drew out from the student every thing he knew, and made him understand himself and the matter in hand. Students from all the classes, often crowded his lecture-room, which they left drawing a long breath as a relief from overstrained attention, but with their minds expanded and invigorated.
“As a preacher his sermons were always instructive and often magnificent. He would draw from a passage of Scripture more than you ever imagined it contained; show how many rays concentrated at that point; and how the truth there presented was related to the other great truths of the Bible. This was not so much an exhibition of the philosophical or logical relation of the doctrine in hand with other doctrines, as showing the place which the truth or fact in hand held in the great scheme of Scripture revelation. Thus in his sermon on the words of Paul to the Jews at Rome, Be it known to you, that the Gospel of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and they will hear it;’ he showed that every thing Moses and the Prophets had taught, culminated in the proclamation of the religion of the Bible as the religion of the world. At times he gave his imagination full play; and then he would rise in spiral curves, higher and higher, till lost to sight; leaving his hearers gazing up into heaven, of which they felt they then saw more than they had ever seen before. These three men, Dr. Archibald Alexander, Dr. Samuel Miller, and Dr. Addison Alexander are our galaxy. They are like the three stars in the belt of Orion, still shining upon us from on high. Their lustre can now never be dimmed by the exhalations of the earth.
“I have not forgotten two others of our professors, now we doubt not in heaven, Dr. John Breckinridge and Dr. James W. Alexander. These men, however, were never given to the Seminary; they were only lent to it for a short time. Dr. Breckinridge was elected in 1836 and resigned in 1838; Dr. James Alexander was elected in 1849 and resigned in 185 i. God had fitted and designed them for other fields of action. They were both eminent, each in his own way; but we cannot claim them specially as our own. Dr. Breckinridge was one of the leaders of the Church in its conflicts. Dr. Alexander was a man of varied scholarship and accomplishments. The former was proud of calling himself a Kentuckian. His State, however, had as much reason to be proud of him, as he had of his State. He was tall, handsome, spirited and courteous. He made a friend of almost every man he met. Being a natural orator, his appropriate place was the pulpit and platform. Dr. James Alexander, as you all know, was one of the most eminent and useful preachers of his day.
“The second signal manifestation of God’s favor to this institution is to be seen in the munificent patrons which he has raised up for its support. Mr. James Lenox, to whom we are indebted for our library building and the extensive grounds on which it is erected; for one of our professor’s houses, and for liberal contributions to our general funds.
MT. 76.] II/S HISTORICAL SERMON, 563
Messrs. Robert L. and Alexander Stuart, who have contributed sixty thousand dollars to our scholarship, library and miscellaneous funds, a professor’s house, and who have recently purchased land for the erection of a handsome building for our recitation-rooms. Mrs. George Brown, of Baltimore, to whom we are indebted for Brown Hall; Mr. Levi P. Stone, who founded the Stone Lectureship; Mr. John C. Green, who endowed the Helena Professorship of Ecclesiastical History, purchased a house for a professor, contributing generously to our permanent funds, and at whose expense this Chapel has been transformed from what it was to what it is; so that we can never enter this room without being reminded of his kindness. *
“There is another class of benefactors, who not having gold or silver to bestow, gave their prayers, their counsels, and their disinterested labors. Dr. Ashbel Green, Dr. John McDowell, Dr. William Philips, head a long list of friends who should always be held in grateful remembrance, f
“A mother’s pride, however, is in her children. Much as she may love and reverence her parents, she turns her fondest gaze on those whom she has nurtured at her bosom and fondled on her knees. So our Alma Mater, while she cherishes with reverence the memory of her fathers, turns her streaming eyes with gratitude to heaven, and says, ‘Here, Lord, am I and the children whom thou hast given me.’ More than three thousand ministers of the gospel have been trained within these walls. With rare exceptions they have been faithful men. They have labored in every part of our own land and in almost every missionary field. This
* Since the date of this sermon these munificent benefactions have been greatly increased. Mr. Lenox has added another and most admirable Library building, and two professor’s houses. The Messrs. Stuart have erected the finest hall for recitations possessed by any educational institution in the land, and, as also the representatives of Mr. Green’s estate, have added large sums to the endowment of the Seminary.
t To these should now be added the beloved name of Rev. H. A. Boardman, D.D., recently deceased.
564 LAST INTERVIEWS WITH BISHOP JOHNS. [1866-’75.
goodly company of ministers, confessors, and even martyrs, is God’s best gift and our crown.”
The preaching of this sermon was the occasion of the following pleasing letter from Rev. Samuel Miller, D. D., of Mt. Holly, N. J., the son and biographer of the second professor in this Seminary.
DR. S. MILLER, JR. TO DR. HODGE.
Mount Holly, 30th Oct., 1874.
My Dear Doctor Hodge: — I received last evening a copy of your discourse at the re-opening of the Seminary Chapel, for which I most heartily thank you, and which I cannot acknowledge without taking the opportunity of going a little beyond mere formal thanks. However partial and unreliable a judge 1 may be of the fitness of what you have so kindly said of my dear Father, I can make no mistake in assuring you, that it is all very grateful to my own feelings, and so must be to the feelings of every one of his children. Pardon me for adding that I never heard him mention your name, which of course was a most familiar household word with us, excepting in terms of respect and affection. From his example alone I imbibed sentiments of sincere regard to you, which all our intercourse has constantly strengthened and which must, I believe, continue to increase as the years — many yet I trust to you on earth — roll by. What I owe to you as a preceptor and a friend, I shall never forget.
My sincere compliments to Mrs. Hodge and all the members of your household. I am
Truly and affectionately yours,
S. Miller.
LATEST CORRESPONDENCE AND INTERVIEWS WITH HIS
FRIEND, BISHOP JOHNS.
Dr. Hodge was necessarily separated from his friend, the Bishop of Virginia, during all the years of the civil war between the States. They did not meet until the latter part of May, 1866. Dr. Hodge was then staying with his brother-in-law. General Hunter, when Bishop Johns came over to meet him from his own residence at Malvern, near Alexandria, Virginia. The scene of reunion is thus de- 5cribed by Dr. A. A. E. Taylor, now President of Wooster
^T. 76.] CHARLES HODGE AND JOHN JOHNS. 565
University, Ohio. “As we talked, suddenly without any announcement the parlor door was opened, and there entered a man of slight build and medium stature, whose hair was long and grey, and who was clad from head to foot in what seemed to be Virginia homespun. He modestly paused inside the threshold, for the moment not being observed by Dr. Hodge, who was walking towards the front window. I rose to my feet, when Dr. Hodge, whose attention was thus attracted, turned, quickly glanced up through his glasses at the visitor, and took a few hasty steps towards him, as if but half recognizing the face in the shadow of the room. Then as he advanced with outstretched arms, the two venerable men were clasped in a long and affectionate embrace, the only exclamation heard being ‘My brother, my dear brother!’” Bishop Johns did say, with that humorous vivacity so characteristic of him, “Charley, you have been a bad boy, but I’ll forgive you.”
“The embrace ended, they clasped hands, silently looking each other in the eye, for a few moments, and then interchanged words of tender joy at being permitted once more to meet. Then Dr. Hodge, with one arm round his friend, and still clasping his hand, turned towards me and cordially introduced Bishop Johns, of Virginia. I saw that these men were deeply moved, and that their eyes were full of tears, and immediately withdrew.”
DR. HODGE TO BISHOP JOHNS.
Princeton, October 30th, 1872. Dear John: — Hail Columbia! Tell me what train you are coming in that I may meet you. I can’t afiford to lose a minute.
Yours of 181 2, Charles Hodge.
What on earth has a Bishop to do at a Bible House?
DR. HODGE TO BISHOP JOHNS.
Princeton, November 13th, 1874. Dear, blessed, old yohn: — I did not know you were 79; though I might have known it, as, if I live to December 27th, I shall be “]”] o that you have not much to brag of.
I lived in hopes, during the meeting of your Convention, that you would stop in Princeton on your way home. I can sympathize with you in your lameness. On the first day of September, walking in the dark, I stepped into a newly made trench, nearly two feet deep, which caused such a concussion in the hip-joint of my weak limb, that I have not since been able to walk further than into the Seminary. I am gradually improving, but I fear I shall not get over it for months to come.
I am glad you sympathize with what I say * of our dear old Professors, for you must think it sober-minded; which I fear those who did not know them as we did might be inclined to doubt.
I am not inclined to be a laudator ternporis acti, for I really believe that the world, on the whole, is getting better, and that the cause of Christ is on the advance. Yet at times I am somewhat startled at the decay of faith, or the prevalence of broad-churchism among all denominations, and of skepticism among men of the world. Among the masses speculative faith seemed, a few years ago, to be the rule. I fear the reverse is true now. Evangelical truth appears to be confined very much to true believers, of whom, I hope, the number is now greater than during any former period of the history of the world. As long as piety lasts, the truth will last, and not much longer.
Ravaud Rodgers, you and I, so far as I know, are all who remain of the class of 181 5. God has been very good to us, and one of his great blessings has been sparing us so long to love and pray for each other. God bless you, dear brother.
Mrs. Hodge joins me in love to you and yours. All you feel for me I feel toward you, only a little more so.
As ever and forever yours in the bonds that cannot be broken.
Charles Hodge.
In 1873 Dr. Hodge sent to the Bishop a copy of the little volume containing the “Proceedings of the Semi-Centennial Commemoration,” etc., with a photographic likeness of himself attached. He inscribed it thus: — “Charles Hodge to John Johns, friends from November, 1 8 1 2, to 1 872.” When they met on the next occasion Johns opened the book, and pointing to the inscription, said, “Charles, I’ll not take it so.” Dr. Hodge took up a pen instantly and added the words, “xoj. e:c ^-ov aiopva” (and forever),
*In the sermon, above given, on the “Re-opening of the Chapel.”’
>ET. 77.] CHARLES HODGE AND yOHV JOHNS. 56/
Then came the last interview — “An occasion,” said Bishop Johns, “probably never to be repeated, but certainly never to be forgotten.” Dr. Hodge records it as “a lingering and solemn farewell of each other, feeling that it was probably the last for this world.” Dr. Hodge sought the interview by the following note.
Washington, May 22, 1875. Dear, Dearest John: — It is mighty hard for a man as old as I am to shoot flying. I do not know where you are. The newspaper said you were in Richmond on the 20th inst. But where are you now? If I could know what day next week you would be at home, I would (D. V.) come to see you. I am lame, and use a crutch out of doors, so that I want to know beforehand whether at the depot I can get a cab to take me out to your mountain residence. On the ist of September last, walking in the dark, I stepped into a newly made trench, two feet deep, which so jarred my weak limb that I have not been able to walk more than a square since. I am improving, and as there is no injury except to the nerve, I hope during the warm weather to get over the trouble.
Yours as ever, Charles Hodge.
P. S. — My wife says that if it is hot I shall not go a step.
The next week Bishop Johns called for him in Washington, and insisted upon the visit to Malvern. The Bishop had already had a slight attack of paralysis, and was shaken in his physical system; but his mind was as clear and his heart as fresh and tender as ever. They took dinner together, no one being present but their wives. At the table Johns suddenly turned to his friend, and regarding him very seriously, said, “Charley, you have had more influence on my life than any other person I have ever known.” After dinner the two walked out together to a seat under a maple tree in front of the house, commanding a lovely view over the Potomac and surrounding country, and there they talked for the last time over the past and the future. When he left, the Bishop threw his arms over his neck and said, “It is the last time. Let me have a good look at your face, Charley, fof we shall never see each other again until we meet in heaven.”
On his return to Washington Dr. Hodge sent his friend a print he happened to pick up, of two old soldiers sitting together on a bench, entitled the “Last Muster,” to which he appended the interrogative clause, “In the future?” To this the bishop alludes in his next note.
BISHOP JOHNS TO DR. HODGE.
Malvern, June 30, 1875. Dear Charles: — Since we parted I have been over the hills and far away, returning to a week of examinations, ordinations, etc.; hot and exhausting almost beyond endurance.
But I steal time daily to go from the step where we parted to the rustic bench where we sat together, and keep the covenant for refreshment and comfort.
Thank you for the “Muster.” No! not the last; that will be everlasting.
Love to your wife and children and children’s children. Mrs. J. and my daughter say so too. Bless you every way and always.
Truly your brother, J. Johns.
The venerated and beloved Bishop went to heaven on the opening of the next spring. My father kept hanging within sight on the wall of his study, neatly framed, the last note he ever received from the Bishop — a postal card, on which the Bishop had written in pencil, with a strong, clear hand:
January ist, 1876.
To dear Charles and his family, greeting —
From all at Malvern, with a specialty from his loving friend and brother of 181 2, and since with increase, and so forever. J.
To which my father appended in ink: — “The last communication received from my friend, Bishop Johns, of Virginia. He died April 5th, 1876.”
DR. HODGE TO THE REV. PROF. JOSEPH PACKARD, D. D.
In the great day of penitential sorrow predicted by the prophet, it is said, “Every family shall mourn apart.” So when such a man as Bishop Johns is taken away, the whole land mourneth, his own household, his church, the community, each apart. So I mourn alone. He was an honor and blessing to his church; but he was to me what he was to no one else. With the single exception of my own and only brother, I never had such a friend. For nearly sixty-four years we were as intimate and confidential as though we had been born at one birth. In all this time, to the best of my recollection, there was never an angry word passed between us. I feel like the last tree of a forest. Two of our college vacations of six weeks I spent with him in his home at Newcastle. We prayed together and, in each social religious meeting, told the people the little we knew of Christ, helping each other out. He was only eighteen months my senior, and yet his feeling towards me was somewhat paternal. Alas! alas! he has gone, I cannot speak of him except as to what he was to me — so good, so kind, so loving, without a shadow of change for sixty-four years! My last visit to him, in May last, was the most loving of our whole lives. The recollections and love of sixty years were gathered into those few hours. Our parting was solemn, tender and lingering. We looked steadily at each other with tearful eyes, knowing that possibly, and even probably, it was for the last time, but in the calm hope that in any event the separation could not be for long. I have no such friend on earth. I mourn apart.
THE APPOINTMENT OF HIS ASSISTANT AND SUCCESSOR.
About the time of his semi-centennial some of the friends of the Seminary began to consider what steps should be taken to provide him with assistance during his declining years, and to secure for the Seminary a successor in his chair after his departure. In 1873 a committee, consisting of four or five of the oldest and most experienced Directors, were appointed by the Board to consider this matter, and to ascertain by correspondence the wishes of Dr. Hodge. Their first proposition was to appoint his eldest son, who had been for some time Professor of Systematic Theology in the Western Theological Seminary, Allegheny City, Pennsylvania, temporarily to the chair of The History of Doctrine, in Princeton, with the intention that he should render his father any desired assistance in the labor of teaching while he lived, and succeed him afterward. Having received from the committee, in the summer of 1874, some intimation of their design, Dr. Hodge wrote to Dr. H, A. Boardman as follows:
Narragansett Pier, July 13, 1874.
Dear Doctor: — I do not know what other people think, but so far as / know I need an assistant no more now than I did twenty years ago. Bringing Alexander to Princeton was not designed, as I understood the matter, to relieve me, but as a rather cumbrous device to secure the fidelity of the Seminary to the type of doctrine taught in it from the beginning. It was never the intention, so far as I was informed, of those who started this plan, that there were to be two permanent professorships of theology, one Didactic, and the other Polemic or Historical Theology. This would be out of proportion. The students would not have time to attend two such courses and do justice to the other departments. The permanent professorship should be for the relief of Dr. Green. He is invaluable to the institution, and he has been overworked ever since he was connected with it, until the appointment of Mr. McCurdy.
The fidelity of the Seminary to our Standards is the great object which the Directors, I doubt not, feel conscience-bound to secure. If that end can be obtained as well without Alexander as with him, I have always thought it would be better to let him remain where he is. According to all accounts he is doing good there. We do not know that he would be equally successful in Princeton.
I see no harm in allowing things for the present to remain as they are. At my age, life or fitness for service hangs by a thread. Providence may soon make the path of duty plain.
Yours truly, Charles Hodge.
This letter naturally brought the committee to a full stop, and nothing more was done in the matter until it was again opened by the Professor himself.
DR. HODGE TO DR. H. A. BOARDMAN.
Princeton, Feb. 3d, 1877. My Dear Doctor: — Last winter, to the best of my recollection, I did not miss a single exercise, whether of lecture-room or conference, during the whole term of eight months. This term I caught cold the latter part of October, was confined to the house about a fortnight, and although I have attended my classes regularly since that first fortnight, I have not attended the chapel or conference.
JET. 79.] APPOINTMENT OF HIS ASSISTANT. 571
There is, I believe, nothing wrong about any of my organs, but my chest and vocal organs are very weak. There is every reason to hope that when the warm weather returns I shall be as well as usual. I had a similar attack of bronchitis in the spring of 1873. The old alumni, who heard me attempt to speak at the alumni meeting, said they never expected to hear my voice again. Nevertheless, some of them were astonished when, at the Evangelical Alliance, a few months after, they heard me speak like the old Homeric Stentor. I had a similar attack last spring which prevented our going to Washington as we usually do during the month of May. I did not get over that attack till I went to the sea-shore in July.
Under these circumstances I think the time has come when I should give up, either in whole or in part, my duties in the Seminary. I honestly believe that, in my usual health, I am as well able to discharge those duties as I ever was. But I am liable to be disqualified in the middle of a session, and this winter have been constrained to meet my class when my physician thought I ought to remain at home.
Some two or three years ago the Directors kindly appointed a committee, of which Dr. Musgrave and yourself were members, to consider the best means for making provision for aiding me, or for supplying my place in the Seminary. I do not know whether that committee is regarded as still in existence. I wish this note ta be considered as a formal intimation to you, either as a member of that committee or as a Director, that it is my purpose to apply to the Board of Directors to be relieved in whole or in part from my duties in the Seminary.
You can understand the feelings with which I look forward to severing, or loosening my connection with this sacred Institution which has been uninterrupted for fifty-five years. You affectionate and grateful friend,
Charles Hodge.
DR. HODGE TO DRS. MUSGRAVE AND PAXTON.
Princeton, Feb. 8, 1877.
Rev. Drs. Musgrave and Paxton,
Dear Brethren: — I understand that you are members of a Committee appointed by the Directors of the Theological Seminary, in reference to the instruction in the Theological Department.
The facts in the case are:
I. That last winter (1875 and ’76) I did not, to the best of my recollection, miss a single exercise the whole term, whether in the class-room, chapel or conference.
2. This term I caught cold the last week in October, and for ten days or a fortnight I was unable to attend any classes. Since then I have regularly met the classes, but have not attended chapel or conference, since the end of October. My general health is good, and I am free, as far as I know, from any organic complaints, but I am very soon exhausted; I have great weakness and a good deal of dull pain in the chest. My voice fails me if I attempt to read aloud a chapter from the Bible. My physician thinks there is every reason to expect that I shall be as well as usual when the warm weather comes.
3. Under these circumstances I do not think it wise that the whole responsibility of the Department of Didactic Theology should continue to rest on me. There are two plans for meeting the emergency, which I would respectfully submit to the decisipn of the Committee and of the Board.
First. That I should resign my professorship. In this case I should be entirely disconnected with the Seminary, and have neither the responsibility nor the right to take any part in its instruction or government.
Second. That provision should be made to carry on the instruction in the department, in case of entire or partial failure on my part. This would leave me still a member of the Faculty and give me the right to do what I could, and yet relieve me from the obligation of working when I did not feel fit for it.
I would, of course, cheerfully acquiesce in either of these plans the Board may prefer. So far as my personal feelings are concerned it is natural I should prefer to have the right to work while I can work. I might give up to a colleague Dogmatic Theology and retain what is called Exegetical Theology; or the division of duties might be left to be privately determined. All which is respectfully submitted. Charles Hodge.
DR. HODGE TO DR. BOARDMAN,
Sunday Evening, Feb, 18, 1877. My Dear Doctor: — I understood Dr. Musgrave to say that the Committee of the Directors were to meet in Philadelphia on Tuesday next. From the few words which passed between us at the meeting of the Trustees of the College, I gathered that he had the impression that I was adverse to my son Alexander being chosen for a professor in this Seminary. I have neither the right nor the wish to be consulted on the subject, but to prevent any embarrassment arising from any kind regard to my views or wishes, I think it well to let you know exactly how I feel about the matter. I cannot do this better than by sending a copy of the letter which I wrote Alexander a few days ago.
Praying that God may over-rule all things for the good of the Seminary and the Church, I am very sincerely yours as ever,
Charles Hodge.
DR. HODGE TO HIS SON.
Princeton, Feb. 16, 1877.
My Dear Alexander: — You say I told you to go to Allegheny; your memory may be better than mine, but I have no recollection of having been so unwise. At any rate, in the event of your being called to Princeton, I shall not assume the responsibility of deciding whether you ought to come. You ought to decide the question before the election is made by the Board, if the Committee determine to recommend your appointment.
The view I take of the matter is simply this:
1. Our Board is bound to take that course which it thinks will best promote the interests of this Seminary and the general interests of this ChurcTi.
2. If our Directors think there is any other man available, as well qualified to fill the pwDsition as you, they ought to leave you where you are.
3. But if they are -satisfied that you are the best man to keep up the character of this Institution for fidelity to our doctrinal standards. I, if a Director, although your Father, would vote for your election.
4. I would do this, because 1 think that this Seminary, not because of any superiority of its faculty, but simply because of providential circumstances, is at present at least, of special importance. It, therefore, should be specially considered.
5. All such considerations, as delicacy, your personal wishes, cheapness of living here or there, are not of any serious weight.
6. The question whether you are the best available man to fill the place here, is for our Directors to decide. Their decision, however, is subject to a veto from your “inner consciousness,” if your conscience constrains you to exercise it. “Commit your way unjo the Lord, and He will direct your steps.”
Your Father,
The result was that his son was elected Associate Professor of Didactic Theology, with the understanding that he should undertake whatever work his father desired to
574 HIS EIGHTIETH BIRTHDAY. [1877.
be relieved of. During the session of 1877-78 Dr. Hodge taught the senior class Didactic Theology, and lectured to the junior class as usual on the Exegesis of the Epistles, while his son simply taught the middle class theology. At the end of that year Dr. Hodge handed over to his son the entire department of Didactic Theology, intending to retain to the end of his life the exegesis of the doctrinal epistles. His death immediately after necessitated the transference of that department to his other son, Professor C W. Hodge. When his eldest son was inaugurated in the old First Presbyterian Church of Princeton, November 8, 1877, the Presbyterian says, “During all the services we noticed that many eyes were turned to a corner of the church in which a venerable man sat apart communing with himself, with his heart doubtless filled with varying emotions.” His mind must have gone back to August 12th, 1812, when he, a .stripling, lying on the rail of the gallery of the same church, looked down on the inauguration of Dr. A. Alexander to the same office. For from August 12, 18 1 2, to November 8, 1877, for more than sixty-five years there had been only two professors of Systematic Theology in Princeton, and Dr. Hodge received the office from a man he delighted to call father, and now transmitted it to his son.
HIS EIGHTIETH BIRTHDAY.
On the occasion of his eightieth birthday a number of his dear friends united in making him a present as a testimonial of affection. This was transmitted to him by Dr. H. A. Boardman, who also published a graceful notice of the anniversary of the beloved patriarch in the Presbyterian. Hence arose the occasion of the following letters.
DR. HODGE TO DR. BOARDMAN.
Princeton, December 27, 1877. My Dear Friend: — I need not say that your letter and its inclosures were a surprise. Much less is it necessary to assure you that I
^T. 80. ] HIS EIGHTIE TH BIR THDA V. 575
am very grateful to all the friends named in your letter for their kindness and kind feeling. Least of all need I say that you, as the alpha and omega of the whole, claim my warmest thanks. You are not yet old enough to know how friends increase in value as they decrease in number. So large a proportion of those to whom I was most attached, and on whom I most depended, has gone before, that I cling like a tottering man to those who are left. Out of mere selfishness I pray that they may be spared, and be allowed to diffuse happiness around them to the end.
I must beg you to express my thanks to the friends who have joined you in placing this chaplet on my hoary head.
Your landlady (Mrs. Hodge) returns her acknowledgments for your New Year’s card; it occupies a conspicuous place in the study. With entire confidence and warm affection, your friend,
Charles Hodgf.
THE SAME TO THE SAME.
Princeton, January 15, 1878.
My Dear Doctor: — If you were in one room and Angelina Patti singing in another, the doors being opened, you would not need ask who it was. So when I read the article in the last Presbyterian, I was at no loss as to its author. I knew only one man who has the goodness, the skill, the delicacy and refinement which it manifests. I should be a churl if I were not grateful for such a tribute. Nevertheless I cannot absorb it. It is a delusion. It is not what I am, but what God’s providence has done with me, that you have in the eye of your imagination. Had I been settled in a retired parish, no body would have ever heard my name. Besides, I believe that every man, unless partially demented, whatever men may say of him, knows in his own heart that he is “a poor shote.”
I don’t believe that the rod with which Moses smote the rock in the wilderness, was any great thing of a stick after all.
Nevertheless, although I see through your delusion, I am not less grateful for your goodness and love.
We are looking forward to the pleasure of seeing you before the close of the week.
Your affectionate friend,
Charles Hodge.
HIS WRITING DURING THESE LAST YEARS. He published in the Repertory, January 1871, “Preaching the Gospel to the Poor,” and April 1876, “Christianity
576 HIS LAST WRITING. [1878.
without Christ.” These are his last articles in that Review, so long connected with his name, and worthily close his long and consistent warfare for the truth, as it is in Jesus, and for the interests of his people. In 1872 he wrote the latter part of his “Systematic Theology.” In 1874 he published a small book entitled “Darwinism,” in opposition to the prevailing doctrine of Atheistic Evolutionism. In December, 1877, he wrote at the request of a member of the Free Church Presbytery of Glasgow, a letter defining and maintaining the old doctrine of the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures. And the Independent of May 9th, 1878, published his very last contribution to the press.
The Independent and its correspondent had insisted that the “first question” (in regard to the eternity of sin and misery) “is not the exegetical but the ethical one. We want to know what God says; but it is impossible to believe that God says anything which our moral sense tells us he ought not to say.” In a long and, as was on all hands admitted, a clear and forcible argument, worthy of his prime, Dr. Hodge argued that this is no new question, and the dangers of the present moment are not beyond precedent; that the difficulty grows out of the decline of piety, and that a clearing of the horizon was more to be expected through a revival of religion than from the speculations of those who had rendered such a confused account of the matter in hand. He shows that the word “intuition” is taken in two senses, ist. In the proper sense, it signifies those immediate judgments of the mind, whether intellectual or moral, which are necessary and universal in all times. “Such primary truths are part of the primary law written by the finger of God on the hearts of men. They are the barrier against utter skepticism. The man who breaks through them plunges into the abyss of outer darkness.” 2. In the popular sense of the word, it means “the immediate judgment, whether a thing is true or false, right or wrong. They are as variable as the wind, and as
^T. 8o.] HIS LAST WRITING. 577
unstable as water. To make them the rule by which to interpret the Word of God is simply to annihilate it as a rule of faith and practice. It is to substitute our reason for God’s reason, our moral judgments for his moral judgments. Whatever eupheuistic phraseology may be adopted, this is the soul and essence of infidelity.” He shows, then, that the Independent and its correspondent had used the phrase in the popular sense, and hence that their argument was built upon false premises and led to dangerous consequences.
It was claimed that we must interpret the Bible by what our moral sense teaches. “By moral sense here must be meant the moral sense of the individual reader. It cannot by possibility mean those moral judgments which are necessary and universal. It is a contradiction to say that the Christian Church has for ages believed what no man can by possibility believe. * * * * What the Bible teaches is a matter of fact. It is a philosophical axiom that what all men believe, in virtue of the constitution of their nature, must be true. It is scarcely less certain that what all Christians believe that the Bible teaches, in point of fact it does teach.” 37