|
BARCLAY, ROBERT, the
celebrated Apologist for the Quakers, was born on the 23rd of December,
1648, at Gordonstoun, in Moray. His father, Colonel David Barclay, of Ury,
was the son of David Barclay, of Mathers, the representative of an old
Scoto-Norman family, which traced itself, through fifteen intervening
generations, to Theobald de Berkeley, who acquired a settlement in
Scotland at the beginning of the twelfth century. The mother of the
Apologist was Catherine Gordon, daughter of Sir Robert Gordon, of
Gordonstoun, the premier baronet of Nova Scotia, and well-known historian
of the house of Sutherland.
The ancient family of de
Berkeley became possessed of the estate of Mathers, by marriage, in
the year 1851. Alexander de Berkeley, who flourished in the fifteenth
century, is said to have been the first laird of Mathers who changed the
name to Barclay; a change which says little for his taste, however
recommended by that principle of literal and syllabic economy which seems
to have flourished at all periods in a greater or less degree, though
chiefly at the present era. This laird, however, is reputed to have been a
scholar, and to him are attributed the excellent verses, known by the
title of the LAIRD OF MATHERS’ TESTAMENT, which, for their piety and
good sense, cannot be too widely disseminated, or too warmly recommended.
These verses are subjoined in the modified form under which they have come
down traditionally to our time:
Gif thou desire thy house
lang stand
And thy successors bruik thy land,
Abuve all things, lief God in fear,
Intromit nocht with wrangous gear;
Nor conquess [Acquire] nothing wrangously;
With thy neighbour keep charity.
See that that thou pass not thy estate;
Obey duly thy magistrate;
Oppress not but support the puire;
To help the commonweill take cuire.
Use no deceit; mell [meddle] not with treason;
And to all men do richt and reason.
Both unto word and deid be true;
All kinds of wickedness eschew.
Slay no man; nor thereto consent;
Be nocht cruel, but patient,
Ally ay in some gude place,
With noble, honest, godly, race.
Hate huredom, and all vices flee;
Be humble; haunt gude companye.
Help thy friend, and do nae wrang,
And God shall make thy house stand lang.
David, the grandfather of
the Apologist, from neglect of some part of his ancestor’s advice, was
reduced to such difficulties as to be obliged to sell the estate of
Mathers, after it had been between two and three hundred years in the
family, as also the more ancient inheritance, which had been the property
of the family from its first settlement in Scotland in the days of King
David I. His son, David, the father of the Apologist, was consequently
obliged to seek his fortune as a volunteer in the Scottish brigades in the
service of Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden. This gentleman, like many
others of his countrymen and fellow-soldiers, returned home on the
breaking out of the religious troubles in Scotland, and received the
command of a troop of horse. Having joined the army raised by the Duke of
Hamilton in 1648 for the relief of Charles I, he was subsequently deprived
of his command, at the instance of Oliver Cromwell; and he never
afterwards appeared in any military transactions. During the protectorate,
he was several times sent as a representative from Scotland to Cromwell’s
parliaments, and, in this capacity, is said to have uniformly exerted
himself to repress the ambitious designs of the Protector. After the
restoration, David Barclay was committed prisoner to Edinburgh Castle,
upon some groundless charge of hostility to the government. He was soon
after liberated, through the interest of the Earl of Middleton, with whom
he had served in the civil war. But during this imprisonment, a change of
the highest importance both to himself and his son, had come over his
mind. In the same prison was confined the celebrated Laird of Swinton,
who, after figuring under the protectorate as a lord of session, and a
zealous instrument for the support of Cromwell’s interest in Scotland,
had, during a short residence in England before the Restoration, adopted
the principles of Quakerism, then recently promulgated for the first time
by George Fox, and was now more anxious to gain proselytes to that body
than to defend his life against the prosecution meditated against him.
When this extraordinary person was placed on trial before parliament, he
might have easily eluded justice by pleading that the parliamentary
attainder upon which he was now charged, had become null by the rescissory
act. But he scorned to take advantage of any plea suggested by worldly
lawyers. He answered, in the spirit of his sect, that when he committed
the crimes laid to his charge, he was in the gall of bitterness and bond
of iniquity, but that God having since called him to the light, he saw and
acknowledged his past errors, and did not refuse to pay the forfeit of
them, even though in their judgment this should extend to his life. His
speech was, though modest, so majestic, and, though expressive of the most
perfect patience, so pathetic, that it appeared to melt the hearts of his
judges and, to the surprise of all who remembered his past deeds, he was
recommended to the royal mercy, while many others, far less obnoxious,
were treated with unrelenting severity. Such was the man who inoculated
David Barclay with those principles, of which his son was destined to be
the most distinguished advocate.
Robert Barclay, the subject
of the present article, received the rudiments of learning in his native
country, and was afterwards sent to the Scots college at Paris, of which
his uncle Robert (son to the last Barclay of Mathers,) was Rector. Here he
made such rapid advances in his studies, as to gain the notice and praise
of the masters of the college; and he also became so great a favourite
with his uncle, as to receive the offer of being made his heir, if he
would remain in France. But his father, fearing that he might be induced
to embrace the catholic faith, went, in compliance with his mother’s
dying request, to Paris to bring him home, when he was not much more than
sixteen years of age. The uncle still endeavoured to prevent his return,
and proposed to purchase for him, and present to him immediately, an
estate greater than his paternal one. Robert replied, "He is my
father, and must be obeyed." Thus, even at a very early age, he
showed how far he could prefer a sacred principle to any view of private
interest, however dazzling. His uncle is said to have felt much chagrin at
his refusal, and to have consequently left his property to the college,
and to other religious houses in France.
The return of Robert
Barclay to his native country took place in 1664, about two years before
his father made open profession of the principles of the Society of
Friends. He was now, even at the early age of sixteen, perfectly
skilled in the French and Latin languages, the latter of which he could
write and speak with wonderful fluency and correctness; he had also a
competent knowledge of the sciences. With regard to the state of his
feelings on the subject of religion at this early period of life, he says,
in his Treatise on Universal Love: "My first education, from my
infancy fell amongst the strictest sort of Calvinists; those of our
country being generally acknowledged to be the severest of that sect; in
the heat of zeal surpassing not only Geneva, from whence they derive their
pedigree, but all other the reformed churches abroad, so called. I had
scarce got out of my childhood, when I was, by the permission of Divine
Providence, cast among the company of papists; and my tender years and
immature capacity not being able to withstand and resist the insinuations
that were used to proselyte me to that way, I became quickly defiled with
the pollutions thereof, and continued therein for a time, until it pleased
God, through his rich love and mercy, to deliver me out of those snares,
and to give me a clear understanding of the evil of that way. In both
these sects I had abundant occasion to receive impressions contrary to
this principle of love: seeing the straitness of several of their
doctrines, as well as their practice of persecution, do abundantly declare
how opposite they are to universal love. The time that intervened betwixt
my forsaking the church of Rome, and joining those with whom I now stand
engaged, I kept myself free from joining with any sort of people, though I
took liberty to hear several; and my converse was most with those that
inveigh much against judging, and such kind of severity; which
latitude may perhaps be esteemed the other extreme, opposite to the
preciseness of these other sects; whereby I also received an opportunity
to know what usually is pretended on that side likewise. As for
those I am now joined to, I justly esteem them to be the true followers
and servants of Jesus Christ."
In his Apology, he
communicates the following account of his conversion to the principles
previously embraced by his father. "It was not," he says,
"by strength of argument, or by a particular disquisition of each
doctrine, and convincement of my understanding thereby, that I came to
receive and bear witness of the truth, but by being secretly reached by
this Life. For when I came into the silent assemblies of God’s people, I
felt a secret power amongst them which touched my heart; and as I gave way
unto it, I found the evil weakening in me, and the good raised up; and so
I became thus knit and united unto them, hungering more and more after the
increase of this power and life, whereby I might find myself perfectly
redeemed." According to his friend William Penn, it was in the year
1667, when only nineteen years of age, that he fully became
"convinced, and publicly owned the testimony of the true light,
enlightening every man." "This writer," says he, "came
early forth a zealous and fervent witness for it (the true light),
enduring the cross and despising the shame that attended his discipleship,
and received the gift of the ministry as his greatest honour, in which he
laboured to bring others to God, and his labour was not in vain in the
Lord." The testimony of another of his brethren, Andrew Jaffrey, is
to the same effect: "Having occasion, through his worthy father, to
be in the meetings of God’s chosen people, who worship him in his own
name, spirit, and power, and not in the words of man’s wisdom and
preparation, he was, by the virtue and efficacious life of this blessed
power, shortly after reached, and that in a time of silence, a mystery to
the world, and came so fast to grow therein, through his great love and
watchfulness to the inward appearance thereof, that, not long after, he
was called out to the public ministry, and declaring abroad that his eyes
had seen and his hands had handled of the pure word of life. Yea the Lord,
who loved him, counted him worthy so early to call him to some weighty and
hard services for his truth in our nation, that, a little after his coming
out of the age of minority, as it is called, he was made willing, in the
day of God’s power, to give up his body as a sign and wonder to this
generation, and to deny himself and all in him as a man so far as to
become a fool, for his sake whom he loved, in going in sackcloth and ashes
through the chief streets of the city of Aberdeen, besides some services
at several steeple-houses and some sufferings in prison for the truth’s
sake."
The true grounds of Barclay’s
predilection for the meek principle of the Friends, is perhaps to be found
in his physical temperament. On arriving in Scotland, in 1664, with a
heart open to every generous impulse, his mild nature appears, from one of
the above extracts of his own writings, to have been shocked by the mutual
hostility which existed between the adherents of the established and the
dis-established churches. While these bodies judged of each other in the
severest spirit, they joined in one point alone – a sense of the
propriety of persecuting the new and strange sect called Quakers, from
whom both might rather have learned a lesson of forbearance and
toleration. Barclay, who, from his French education, was totally free of
all prejudices on either side, seems to have deliberately preferred that
sect which alone, of all others in his native country, professed to regard
every denomination of fellow-Christians with an equal feeling of kindness.
In February, 1669-70,
Robert Barclay married Christian Mollison, daughter of Gilbert Mollison,
merchant in Aberdeen; and on his marriage settled at Ury with his father.
The issue of this marriage was three sons and four daughters, all of whom
survived him, and were living fifty years after his death. In the life of
John Gratton, there is an agreeable and instructive account of this
excellent mother’s solicitude to imbue the tender minds of her children
with pious and good principles. The passage is as follows: "I
observed (1694, her husband being then dead,) that when her children were
up in the morning and dressed, she sat down with them, before breakfast,
and in a religious manner waited upon the Lord: which pious care, and
motherly instructions of her children when young, doubtless had its
desired effect upon them, for as they grew in years, they also grew in the
knowledge of the blessed truth; and since that time, some of them have
become public preachers thereof." Believing it to be her duty to
appear a preacher of righteousness, she was very solicitous that her
example might, in all respects, correspond with her station.
Robert Barclay, after his
marriage, lived about sixteen years with his father; in which time he
wrote most of those works by which his fame has been established. All his
time, however, was not passed in endeavouring to serve the cause of
religion with his pen. He both acted and suffered for it. His whole
existence, indeed, seems to have been henceforth devoted to the interests
of that profession of religion which he had adopted. In prosecution of his
purpose, he made a number of excursions into England, Holland, and
particular parts of Germany; teaching, as he went along, the universal and
saving light of Christ, sometimes vocally, but as often, we may suppose,
by what he seems to have considered the far more powerful manner,
expressive silence. In these peregrinations, the details of which, had
they been preserved, would have been deeply interesting, he was on some
occasions accompanied by the famous William Penn, and probably also by
others of the brethren.
The first of his
publications in the order of time was, "Truth cleared of Calumnies,
occasioned by a book entitled, A Dialogue between a Quaker and a Stable
Christian, written by the Rev. William Mitchell, a minister or preacher in
the neighbourhood of Aberdeen." "The Quakers," says a
defender of the Scottish church, "were, at this time, only newly
risen up; they were, like every new sect, obtrusively forward; some of
their tenets were of a startling, and some of them of an incomprehensible
kind, and to the rigid presbyterians especially, they were exceedingly
offensive. Hearing these novel opinions, not as simply stated and held by
the Quakers, who were, generally speaking, no great logicians, but in
their remote consequences, they regarded them with horror, and in the heat
of their zeal, it must be confessed, often lost sight both of charity and
truth. They thus gave their generally passive opponents great advantages
over them. Barclay, who was a man of great talents, was certainly in this
instance successful in refuting many false charges, and rectifying many
forced constructions that had been put upon parts of their practice, and,
upon the whole, setting the character of his silent brethren in a more
favourable light than formerly, though he was far from having
demonstrated, as these brethren fondly imagined, ‘the soundness and
scripture verity of their principles.’" This publication was dated
at Ury, the 19th of the second Month, 1670, and in the eleventh month of
the same year, he added to it, by way of appendix, "Some things of
weighty concernment proposed in meekness and love, by way of queries, to
the serious consideration of the inhabitants of Aberdeen, which also may
be of use to such as are of the same mind with them elsewhere in this
nation." These queries, twenty in number, were more particularly
directed to Messrs David Lyal, George Meldrum, and John Menzies, the
ministers of Aberdeen who had, not only from the pulpit, forbidden their
people to read the aforesaid treatise, but had applied to the magistrates
of Aberdeen to suppress it. Mitchell wrote a reply to "Truth cleared
of calumnies," and, on the 24th day of the tenth Month, 1671, Barclay
finished a rejoinder at Ury, under the title of "William Mitchell
unmasked, or the staggering instability of the pretended stable Christian
discovered; his omissions observed, and weakness unvailed," &c.
This goes over the same ground with the former treatise, and is seasoned
with several severe strokes of sarcasm against these Aberdonians, who,
"notwithstanding they had sworn to avoid a detestable neutrality, could
now preach under the bishop, dispense with the doxology, forbear lecturing
and other parts of the Directorial discipline, at the bishop’s order,
and yet keep a reserve for presbytery in case it came again in
fashion." He also turns some of William Mitchell’s arguments
against himself with great ingenuity, though still he comes far short of
establishing his own theory. It is worthy of remark, that, in this
treatise, he has frequent recourse to Richard Baxter’s aphorisms on
justification, whose new law scheme of the gospel seems to have been very
much to the taste of the Quaker. It appears to have been on the appearance
of this publication that, "for a sign and wonder to the
generation," he walked through the chief streets of the city of
Aberdeen, clothed in sackcloth and ashes; on which occasion he published
(in 1672) a "Seasonable warning and serious exhortation to, and
expostulation with, the inhabitants of Aberdeen, concerning this present
dispensation and day of God’s living visitation towards them."
His next performance was,
"A Catechism and Confession of Faith," the answers to the
questions being all in the express words of Scripture; and the preface to
it is dated, "From Ury, the place of my being, in my native country
of Scotland, the 11th of the sixth month, 1673." This was followed by
"The Anarchy of the Ranters," &c.
We now come to his great
work, "An Apology for the true Christian Divinity, as the same is
held forth and preached by the people called in scorn, Quakers: Being a
full explanation and vindication of their principles and doctrines, by
many arguments deduced from Scripture and right reason, and the
testimonies of famous authors, both ancient and modern; with a fall answer
to the strongest objections usually made against them. Presented to the
King. Written and published in Latin for the information of strangers, by
Robert Barclay, and now put into our own language for the benefit of his
countrymen." The epistle to the King, prefixed to this elaborate
work, is dated, "From Ury, the place of my pilgrimage, in my native
country of Scotland, the 25th of the month called November, 1675."
This epistle is not a little curious, among other things, for the ardent
anticipations which the writer indulges with regard to the increase and
future prevalence of the doctrines of the Quakers, which he calls,
"the gospel now again revealed after a long and dark night of
apostacy, and commanded to be preached to all nations." After some
paragraphs, sufficiently complimentary to the peaceable habits of his
silence-loving brethren, he tells his majesty that "generations to
come will not more admire that singular step of Divine Providence, in
restoring thee to thy throne without bloodshed, than they shall admire the
increase and progress of this truth without all outward help, and against
so great opposition, which shall be none of the least things rendering thy
memory remarkable." In looking back upon the atrocities that marked
the reign of Charles II., the growth of Quakerism is scarcely ever thought
of, and the sufferings of its professors are nearly invisible, by reason
of the far greater sufferings of another branch of the Christian church.
Though led by his enthusiasm in his own cause to overrate it, Barclay
certainly had no intention of flattering the King. "God," he
goes on to tell him, "hath done great things for thee; he hath
sufficiently shown thee that it is by him princes rule, and that he can
pull down and set up at his pleasure. Thou hast tasted of prosperity and
adversity; thou knowest what it is to be banished thy native country, to
be overruled as well as to rule and sit upon the throne, and being
oppressed thou hast reason to know how hateful the oppressor is, both to
God and man. If after all these warnings and advertisements, thou dost not
turn unto the Lord with all thy heart, but forget him who remembered thee
in thy distress, and give up thyself to lust and vanity, surely great will
be thy condemnation."
The Apology is a most
elaborate work, indicating no small portion of both talent and learning.
It contains, indeed, the sum of the author’s thoughts in those treatises
we have already mentioned, as well as in those which he afterwards
published, digested into fifteen propositions, in which are included all
the peculiar notions of the sect:—Immediate Revelation; the Universal
Spiritual light; Silent worship; Perfection; the Rejection of the Sabbath
and the Sacraments, &c., &c. This is done with great apparent
simplicity, and many plausible reasons, a number of excellent thoughts
being struck out by the way; yet they are far from being satisfactory, and
never will be so to any who are not already strongly possessed with an
idea of the internal light in man, to which the author holds even the
Scriptures themselves to be subordinate. There are, indeed, in the book,
many sophisms, many flat contradictions, and many assertions that are
incapable of any proof. The appeals which he makes to his own experience
for the proof of his doctrines are often not a little curious, and
strongly illustrative of his character, as well as of the principles he
had esponsed.
The same year in which he
published the Apology, he published an account of a dispute with the
students of Aberdeen, which touches little besides the folly of such
attempts to establish truth or confute error. The following year, in
conjunction with George Keith, he put forth a kind of second part to the
foregoing article, which they entitled, "Quakerism Confirmed, being
an answer to a pamphlet by the Aberdeen students, entitled, Quakerism
Canvassed." This treats only of matters to be found in a better form
in the Apology. In the first month of the year 1677, from Aberdeen prison,
he wrote his treatise of "Universal Love," and in the end of the
same year, he wrote, from his house at Ury, "An Epistle of Love and
Friendly Advice to the Ambassadors of the several princes of Europe, met
at Nimeguen, to consult the peace of Christendom so far as they are
concerned; wherein the true cause of the present war is discovered, and
the right remedy and means for a firm and settled peace is proposed."
This last was written in Latin, but published also in English for the
benefit of his countrymen. Both of the above tracts deserve serious
perusal. In 1679, he published a vindication of his Apology, and in 1686,
his last work, "The possibility and necessity of the inward and
immediate revelation of the Spirit of God towards the foundation and
ground of true faith; in a letter to a person of quality in Holland,"
published both in Latin and English. In neither of these, in our opinion,
has he added anything to his Apology, which, as we have already said,
contains the sum of all that he has written or published.
In the latter part of his
life, Barclay obtained, by the influence of his talents and the sincerity
and simplicity of his character and professions, an exemption from that
persecution which marked his early years. He had also contributed in no
small degree, by the eloquence of his writings in defence of the Friends,
to procure for them a considerable share of public respect. He is even
found, strangely enough, to have latterly possessed some influence at the
dissolute court of Charles II. In 1679, he obtained a charter from this
monarch, under the great seal, erecting his lands of Ury, [His father had
died in 1676, leaving him in possession of this estate.] into a free
barony, with civil and criminal jurisdiction to him and his heirs. This
charter was afterwards ratified by an act of Parliament, the preamble of
which states it to be "for the many services done by Colonel David
Barclay, and his son, the said Robert Barclay, to the King and his most
royal progenitors in times past." Another and more distinguished mark
of court favour was conferred upon him in 1682, when he received the
nominal appointment of governor of East Jersey, in North America, from the
proprietors of that province, of whom his friend the Earl of Perth was
one. He was also himself made a proprietor, and had allotted to him five
thousand acres of land above his proprietary share, as inducements for his
acceptance of the dignity, which, at the same time, he was permitted to
depute. The royal commission confirming this grant states, that such are
his known fidelity and capacity, that he has the government during life,
but that no other governor after him shall have it for more than three
years. One of his brothers settled in the province, but he never visited
it himself. In this year we find him assisting the Laird of Swinton with
his interest and purse at Edinburgh; thus answering practically and freely
the apostolic expostulation (1 Cor. ix. 11.), by permitting Swinton to
reap carnal things, who had sown spiritual things to his family.
The remainder of his life
is not marked with many instances of public action. Much of it appears to
have been passed in tranquillity, and in the bosom of his family; yet he
occasionally undertook journeys to promote his private concerns, to serve
his relations and neighbours, or to maintain the cause of his brethren in
religious profession. He was in London in 1685, and had frequent access to
King James II., who had all along evinced a warm friendship towards him.
Barclay, on the other hand, thinking James sincere in his faith, and
perhaps influenced a little by the flattery of a prince’s favour,
appears to have conceived a real regard for this misguided and imprudent
monarch. Liberty of conscience having been conceded to the Friends on the
accession of James II, Barclay exerted his influence to procure some
parliamentary arrangement, by which they might be exempted from the harsh
and ruinous prosecutions to which they were exposed, in consequence of
their peculiar notions as to the exercise of the law. He was again in
London, on this business, in 1686, on which occasion he visited the seven
bishops, then confined in the Tower, for having refused to distribute in
their respective dioceses the king’s declaration for liberty of
conscience, and for having represented to the King the grounds of their
objection to the measure. The popular opinion was in favour of the
bishops; yet the former severities of some of the episcopal order against
dissenters, particularly against the Friends, occasioned some reflections
on them. This having come to the knowledge of the imprisoned bishops, they
declared that, "the Quakers had belied them, by reporting that they
had been the death of some." Robert Barclay, being informed of this
declaration, went to the Tower, and gave their lordships a
well-substantiated account of some persons having been detained in prison
till death, by order of bishops, though they had been apprised of the
danger by physicians who were not Quakers. He, however, observed to the
bishops, that it was by no means the intention of the Friends to publish
such events, and thereby give the king, and their other adversaries, any
advantage against them. Barclay was in London, for the last time, in the
memorable year 1688. He visited James II., and being with him near a
window, the king looked out, and observed that, "the wind was then
fair for the prince of Orange to come over." Robert Barclay replied,
"it was hard that no expedient could be found to satisfy the
people." The king declared, "he would do any thing becoming a
gentleman, except parting with liberty of conscience, which he never would
whilst he lived." At that time Barclay took a final leave of the
unfortunate king, for whose disasters he was much concerned, and with whom
he had been several times engaged in serious discourse at that time.
Robert Barclay "laid
down the body," says Andrew Jaffray, "in the holy and honourable
truth, wherein he had served it about three and twenty years, upon the 3rd
day of the eighth month, 1690, near the forty and second year of his age,
at his own house of Urie, in Scotland, and it was laid in his own burial
ground there, upon the 6th day of the same month, before many friends and
other people." His character has been thus drawn by another of the
amicable fraternity to which he belonged:— [A short account of the Life
and Writings of Robert Barclay, London, 1802.]
"He was distinguished
by strong mental powers, particularly by great penetration, and a sound
and accurate judgment. His talents were much improved by a regular and
classical education. It does not, however, appear that his superior
qualifications produced that elation of mind, which is too often their
attendant: he was meek, humble, and ready to allow to others the merit
they possessed. All his passions were under the most excellent government.
Two of his intimate friends, in their character of him, declare that they
never knew him to be angry. He had the happiness of early perceiving the
infinite superiority of religion to every other attainment; and the Divine
grace enabled him to dedicate his life, and all that he possessed, to
promote the cause of piety and virtue. For the welfare of his friends he
was sincerely and warmly concerned: and he travelled and wrote much, as
well as suffered cheerfully, in support of the society and the principles
to which he had conscientiously attached himself. But this was not a blind
and bigoted attachment. His zeal was tempered with charity; and he loved
and respected goodness wherever he found it. His uncorrupted integrity and
liberality of sentiment, his great abilities and suavity of disposition,
gave him much interest with persons of rank and influence, and he employed
it in a manner that marked the benevolence of his heart. He loved peace,
and was often instrumental in settling disputes, and in producing
reconciliations between contending parties.
"In support and
pursuit of what he believed to be right, he possessed great firmness of
mind; which was early evinced in the pious and dutiful sentiment he
expressed to his uncle, who tempted him with great offers to remain in
France, against the desire of his father: ‘He is my father,’ said he,
‘and he must be obeyed.’ All the virtues harmonize, and are connected
with one another: this firm and resolute spirit in the prosecution of
duty, was united with great sympathy and compassion towards persons in
affliction and distress. They were consoled by his tenderness, assisted by
his advice, and occasionally relieved by his bounty. His spiritual
discernment and religious experience, directed by that Divine influence
which he valued above all things, eminently qualified him to instruct the
ignorant, to reprove the irreligious, to strengthen the feebleminded, and
to animate the advanced Christian to still greater degrees of virtue and
holiness.
"In private life he
was equally amiable. His conversation was cheerful, guarded, and
instructive. He was a dutiful son, an affectionate and faithful husband, a
tender and careful father, a kind and considerate master. Without
exaggeration, it may be said, that piety and virtue were recommended by
his example: and that, though the period of his life was short, he had, by
the aid of Divine grace, most wisely and happily improved it. He lived
long enough to manifest, in an eminent degree, the temper and conduct of a
Christian, and the virtues and qualifications of a true minister of the
gospel."
|
