When Dr. Rice left
Richmond, in the fall of 1823, to enter upon the duties of the
Professorship, he went with hopes and fears, providential warnings and
encouragements, intermingled. In the eleven and a half years of useful
and pleasant occupation in Richmond, he had seen great changes in the
constituent parts of Hanover Presbytery. Death had been busy with the
ministry. The venerated Hoge, the lovely Legrand, the noble-hearted
Lacy, the amiable Blair, and the ardent Robinson, after years of
service, had passed away; all, and Robinson peculiarly so, with some
degree of suddenness in the final call; and young Kennon, after having
given earnest of extensive usefulness, had fallen with his harness on.
Changes were taking place from age and infirmity; and Mitchel and Turner
were growing old in Bedford, time w^orn and time honored ; Logan had
paused from his labors, waiting the event of providence, whether his
impaired health should sink in death, or be refreshed for more labor.
Turner the younger, in feeble health, was occupying Hanover—and Lyle, in
full strength, was at his post in Briery and Buffalo; Read, putting
forth his energies in Cub Creek; Reid, teaching school in Lynchburg, and
extending the borders of the church; Paxton, at the College, ministering
to that part of the Cumberland Congregation south of the Appomattox;
Russell, was in Norfolk; and Petersburg was nourishing a church under
ministry of his brother Benjamin; and Lee, Armstead, and Davidson, from
the Republican Methodists, held their congregations in Lunenburg and
Charlotte. Of the Alumni of the College and Theological School, under
the teaching of his venerated predecessor, Dr. Hoge, John B. Hoge had
lately removed from Winchester Presbytery to the Church on Shokoe Hill,
the successor of Mr. Blair; Kirkpatrick had been removed from Manchester
to be pastor of Cumberland, north of the Appomattox; Kilpatrick, at
Boydton; and Caldwell, in Nelson County; and Taylor, from New England,
was gathering a church in Halifax. In addition to these were the
missionaries, John M. Fulton, in Buckingham County; Silliman, in
Leaksville; Brookes, in Fluvanna; Curtis,, in Brunswick; and Cochran at
large, under the direction of the Young Men’s Missionary Society; and
James G. Hamner, was supplying the pulpit he had himself just vacated.
The position of his Presbytery seemed to say to him — work while the day
lasts; work in hope; but remember, also, the night cometh.
When he looked at the
College, the place of his happy labor in his youth, there were changes
both to sadden and to cheer him. Mr. Jonathan P. Cushing had succeeded
his friend Hoge, in the Presidency. The trustees had wisely determined
that, in the present state of literature and science, the President
should not be encumbered with care, foreign from the College duties. For
the accommodation of students that were now flocking to the College, the
present spacious buildings had taken the place of the old wooden chapel,
endeared by a thousand recollections; and the contracted brick walls of
the old College, over which some tears were shed, were torn down ; and
preparations were making for better accommodations for the Professors in
comfortable dwellings near the College. Mr. Cushing's powers, as a
teacher and administrator of College, shone still brighter in the
President than in the admired Professor. His feeble health, contracting
somewhat his sphere of usefulness, made that sphere more resplendent^
and excited the enquiry in men’s minds, what degree of excellence he
would attain with firm health. Able associates were actively engaged—and
the College was rising in usefulness, and influence, and fame. All this
seemed to say, work in hope, but remember the night cometh.
When he turned to
contemplate his own prospects as professor, he saw much to try his
faith. He found himself houseless. Accommodations had been “voted” by
Presbytery, but not a trace of the buildings were to be seen. Where the
seminary now stands was the native forest in the possession of one not
supposed to be friendly to the cause. Nothing had been done for the
accommodation of students. There were no preparations made for his
library, or for the assemblage, for prayers and for recitation, of those
disposed to profit by his teachings and experience. Funds to some amount
had been raised, but inadequate to the object designed. The committee
appointed to superintend the erection of proper buildings had not agreed
upon any plan, and were preparing to act -upon a very small scale, and
through efforts at economy were hazarding the whole enterprise. Mr.
Cushing entered fully into the situation and views of Dr. Rice,
encouraged him to act on a large scale, and offered him every assistance
in his power.
A person well acquainted
with the sayings and doings at that time, thus relates the passing
events of the day. “No arrangements had been made for his accommodation.
The committee had supposed that the Doctor and his wife could reside at
her father’s at Willington, and the Doctor could ride up to college and
attend to his classes, as they had no children, and servants were not
thought of. They supposed the few students could find some place to
live, and a recitation room could be found about college. But Dr. Rice
was obliged to have a room for his books, and to live where they were.
And of course Mrs. Rice must live where he did; and their servants with
them. Their good friend, Mr. Cushing, who had been appointed President a
year or two before, and lived in the President’s old house, which is now
burnt down, and kept bachelor’s hall with Professor Marsh, finding the
Doctor’s situation, very kindly invited him to share with him, and acted
as if it were the Doctor’s house, and he and Mr. Marsh were boarders.
The house had one room, a large passage, and two very small rooms down
stairs; and two attics. These two in the roof were small at least the
one that had the fire-place, and the other had always been used as the
College Library, shelved for the purpose and without a fireplace. Mr.
Marsh had the small room with a fire-place up stairs; and Mr. Cushing
the large one below, and his health at the time was such that he often
had to hear his classes there; and much of the chemical apparatus was
also there. The larger of the small rooms down stairs was used for a
dining room and parlor. Harriet Minor, now Mrs. Bowman, the Doctor’s
niece and protege had the small room without a fire-place. Professor
Marsh still used his room as a study, but gave it up at bed-time to the
Doctor and his wife for a lodging room, and he slept with Mr. Cushing ;
his room was prepared for him before breakfast. The servants were fixed
in the loft of the kitchen to sleep; and their room adjoining the
kitchen was fitted up for the library, study for Dr. Rice, and
recitation room. In this room he commenced with three students, Thomas
P. Hunt, Jesse S. Armstead, and Robert Burwell.”
“It was long a favorite
plan with the committee to lay out as little as possible in building;
either rent a house, or build a very small one for a shelter, with three
rooms, one for a study, recitation room, and library, one for a chamber,
and the other a dining-room. That it would be well to have no place to
incur the expense of entertaining company, as the Doctor’s family were
thought to be too much given to hospitality. One gentleman very
strenuous for this plan, said he would take the company. Mr. Cushing so
ridiculed this scheme as to seem to fix the idea that a three-roomed
house was obliged to be a three-cornered one. He, in a very quiet,
pleasant way, helped the Doctor more than I can tell, constantly saying
he had nothing to do with it; but unless made an ornament to the college
it must be put out of sight. He called on Martin Sailors, an old
bachelor, and induced him to give the five acres where the seminary now
stands, and then with much adroitness had the building commenced very
much as Mr. Rice wished. It was first built with four rooms on a floor.
The Doctor moved into it when only the lower story, above the basement,
could be occupied, and that unfinished, not plastered. So it was built
over his head. He' took possession, the fall of 1825, getting eight new
students from the senior class of college that year, besides a few
others. White, Hart, Royal, Bartlett, and Barksdale were among them;
Henry Smith came the year before. Mr. Cushing had a house added for
himself and Mr. Marsh, as soon as it could be done after the Doctor
came. The college was then filled with students; the new
college-building was finished before the Doctor came.”
The house commenced for
the accommodation of Dr. Rice, and the students, forms a part of the
east wing of the seminary. It was constructed in anticipation of the
main building and the west wing, which now offer accommodations for a
hundred students. The committee commenced a brick building of 40 feet by
38, two stories high, with a basement. The Presbytery, in
Charlottesville, July 17th, 1824, “Resolved, that the building committee
of the Theological Seminary be authorized to enlarge the plan of the
professors’ house, twelve feet in length and one story in height; and
that the Board of Trustees be instructed to make the necessary
appropriations of money for this purpose.” The house was finished fifty
feet by forty, three stories with the basement, architecturally arranged
to be the east wing of some future building.
The inauguration of Dr.
Rice took place on the 1st day of January, 1824. He took for his text
Paul’s words to Timothy, 2d Epistle, 3d: 16, 17 — “All Scripture is
given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for
reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man
of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” His
first position was — The sacred Scriptures are the source from which the
preacher of the gospel is to derive all that doctrine which has
authority to hind the conscience and regulate the conduct of man. Under
this head he observes : — Among us, thanks to God for it, the principles
of religious liberty, and the rights of conscience, are so well
understood, and so fully recognized, that to attempt to establish them
by argument, or by the authority of Scripture, is to undertake a quite
needless labor. "We all know that God is the only Lord of conscience. To
prevent any misunderstanding of our views and feelings, I take this
opportunity publicly and solemnly to declare, for myself, and for those
under whose direction I act, that the principles of religious liberty,
recognized by the Constitution of the United States, in the Bill of
Rights and Constitution of Virginia, and in the act establishing
religious freedom, meet the most cordial and entire approbation of all
wrho are concerned in this theological institution.
His second position was —
That the Scriptures afford the only information on which we can rely, in
answer to the all-important question — “What must we do to be saved?'
This question, he says, most manifestly involves the determination of
God on the case under inquiry. It is only God who can answer it. For how
do the wisest know what the Holy One has determined to do, in the case
of rebellion against the divine government?
His third position was —
That the Scriptures contain the most perfect system of morals that has
ever been presented to the understanding, or urged on the conscience of
man. In making this observation, he says — I mean to say, 1st, that the
precepts of the Bible reach to all the relations which man sustains, and
to all the duties which grow out of them; 2d, that the gospel
accompanies its precepts with the most urgent motives that ever made
their way to the human heart; 3d, for the accomplishment of this object,
the address made by the gospel is the most plain and direct that can be
imagined. The inference drawn from these various remarks is — that he
who receives the office of a teacher of Christianity, must go to the
Bible for all that has authority to bind the conscience. Again, we infer
that he is the best theologian who is most intimately acquainted with
the Scriptures. And from this it follows, that the great duty of a
professor of theology is to imbue the minds of his pupils as thoroughly
as possible with the knowledge of revealed truth. The Bible ought to be
the great text-book. The sentiments of this third position drew from an
eminent theological professor, Dr. Woods, great and peculiar praise,
that the Bible, as the text-book, was set forth in a bold and clear
manner, a thing aimed at by all protestants, but avowed by Dr. Rice with
a clearness and simplicity that was unequalled. The same sentiment was
expressed by President Graham, on his visit to New England. In answer to
the question — “From what, then, do the Virginia clergy obtain their
divinity?” he replied— “From the Bible.”
The Doctor then argued
the question—Is a public or private theological education to be
preferred ? Admitting the fact that many most valuable men had been
raised up under private instruction, he goes on to say — 1st. In this
country the want of such seminaries (theological institutions) has been
so felt, and their value so appreciated, that almost all denominations
of Christians have made, or are making, vigorous efforts to establish
them. 2d. No need of referring to Europe for examples. 3d. As soon as
Christianity had gained sufficient foothold in the world, miraculous
gifts ceased; and very shortly afterwards, it was thought expedient to
erect Theological Seminaries. None of these schools or academies were of
more note than that which was established at Alexandria, commonly called
the catechetical school. The library at Coesarea, about the year of our
Lord 300, contained thirty thousand volumes. 4th. Among the Jews, it is
said there were seminaries for the instruction of religious teachers,
established at an early period. After the destruction of the first
temple, we hear nothing of schools, of the prophets; but academies or
seminaries for instruction in the law of Moses were established in
various parts. It appears that from a very early age to the present
time, the judgment of great and good men has been decidedly in favor of
theological seminaries ; and that, after the experience of ages, that
judgment is unchanged. To detail the reasons by which this long standing
opinion is supported, would require too much time. It is sufficient to
say, that at such institutions, when well endowed and properly
conducted, there is an accumulation of means of excitement and
improvement which cannot be procured in any other way.
To the objection, that
there are seminaries already established, and that it would be better to
make use of the' advantages offered by them, than to attempt a new
experiment, the Doctor replies — 1st. That the institutions already
established do not afford anything like an adequate supply for the wants
of the country. 2d. It is not desirable that theological seminaries
should be frequented by great numbers of students. The history of
European institutions affords much instruction on this topic. 3d. If
this were not so, it is easy to see, that where an institution depends
for its support on the interest excited and kept up in the public mind,
it ought not to be very remote from the people. 4th. A suitable number
of seminaries, placed at convenient distances, are, on the whole,
cheaper to the church than one great central establishment. Again, there
is so wide a difference in climate, habits and manners, in different
parts of the country, that it is on every account desirable, yea,
necessary, that we should have native preachers in the Eastern, Middle
and Southern divisions of our territory. The conclusion of the whole
argument is, that theological seminaries are the best places for
theological education; and that such an institution is most urgently
needed for the Southern country.
The Doctor then proceeded
to urge the necessity of a competent number of theological instructors;
that the work was too great for any one man. And also the necessity of
cultivating piety in the theological students. He says—“The age calls
for men who, in the fervor of their devotion to the cause of the
Redeemer, and love to the souls of men, can forget self and its petty
interests, and make any sacrifice, submit to any privation, and undergo
any labor, if they may but fulfil the ministry which they receive of the
Lord; it calls for men of enlarged views and comprehensive religious
benevolence ; men who, notwithstanding, every way can rejoice that
Christ is' preached; men who are willing that God should send by whom he
will send, and whose great desire is that He may be glorified and
sinners saved; men who can delight in the usefulness and success of
others, though they themselves should be nothing. He is in truth the
best theologian who has brought his whole nature, moral and
intellectual, most completely under the influence of that Scripture,
which was given by inspiration of God.”
Rev. Matthew Lyle, the
old friend and ministerial neighbor of Dr. Rice, then administered the
oath of office. The Rev. Clement Read delivered a characteristic charge.
He has long since passed to his reward. He usually committed but little
of the process of his thoughts and their results to paper, and of that
little a very small portion was given to the public through the press.
This charge will remain a fine specimen of his manner of thought and his
spirit. Frank, open, fair, kind, evangelical, always Calvinistic in
creed, for a time a Whitfield Methodist, but at last a sincere
Presbyterian, tender in his feelings, and decided in his creed, his
influence extended as far as his acquaintance — the influence of love.
He charges the professor to remember his office — “ that the professor
is accountable for the improper ministerial acts of every preacher whose
theological education was committed to his care, and which arose either
from his negligent or defective instruction.” He says, a ministry to be
useful — 1st, it is important that it be learned; 2d, it should be plain
and simple; 3d, should be orthodox as well as learned; 4th, pious as
well as orthodox. He encourages the professor to stand out against that
greatest of discouragements, “ the lukewarm7iess of friends.”
Under the head of
orthodoxy, he says — “It is only by the influence of truth that the
church can be sustained. This is the rock on which it is built. The
opinion that it is immaterial, as it relates to his moral or religions
character, what a man believes, is contrary to reason and Scripture. As
every action of a man’s life is under the influence of his faith, his
religious creed becomes a matter of great importance. What that system
of doctrine is, which is taught in the Holy Scriptures, is indeed a
subject of controversy. This controversy has divided the church into
various and distinct parties, and each party has its own articles of
religion as a standard of faith. The Presbyterian Church has adopted the
Westminster Confession of Faith as its standard of orthodoxy. It is,
therefore, from this Confession that we Jmow what our Church receives as
true, and what it condemns as heretical. A Theological Seminary,
professedly erected under the patronage of the Presbyterian Church,
should teach no doctrines but such as are agreeable to this standard.
The consideration that the Confession contains the doctrines of the
Reformation, and that it presents the most correct, lucid and systematic
view of the doctrines of the Scriptures that can be found in any
language; and moreover, that a departure from it would endanger the
peace and purity of the Church, gives additional force to this charge.
Guard against innovations in this system, under any pretence whatever.
And in explaining the doctrines of the Confession, it will be of
importance to follow the method, and even to use the terms employed by
the standard writers of the Church. This will not only give uniformity
to the religious opinions of the Church, but will shut the door against
much wild and mischievous speculation. It will be your duty not only to
see that the main pillars in the building of that system of faith, which
has been reared by the piety and sealed by the blood of our ancestors,
be not overturned, but that not a single stone in the edifice be removed
out of its place. The least departure from truth is dangerous. Error,
like the breach in a dam, though small at first, becomes wider and
wider, until one general ruin is presented to view.”
Dr. Rice commenced his
labors as Professor on the day of his inauguration, meeting his class in
his kitchen—library—study—recitation-room. Looking at him, as he is
engaged in arraigning the studies of Hunt, Burwell, and Armstead, in his
humble seminary— one is ready to say—“Not by might, nor by power, but by
my Spirit, saith the Lord, shall Jacob arise, for he is small.”
In the April succeeding
the inauguration, Dr. Rice was authorized by the Presbytery—“to employ
Mr. Marsh as a temporary assistant teacher in the Theological Seminary:
provided that his support can be derived from individuals who contribute
expressly for that object, and not from any of the funds of the
Seminary.” This gentleman, Mr. James Marsh, was Professor of Languages
in Hampden Sidney College. To encourage the students of divinity, he
made translations from the German for their improvement. One of these,
Herder’s Introductory Dialogue on the Spirit of Hebrew Poetry, was
published in the third number of the Biblical Repository for 1826. He
assisted in the Seminary about two years, with great popularity.
Returning to Vermont, he
became President of the University of that State..
In September, of the same
year, by report to Presbytery, the funds of the Seminary were,—in Bank
Stock, $2550—in bonds, bearing interest, $7437 35—in money, yet
uninvested, $2477 99. Of this last sum, by order of Presbytery, $1000
was appropriated—“for building the Theological Seminary”—as the
professor’s house was called. The permanent fund of $11,665 29, was for
the support of the Professor. The deficiency of about $500 of his yearly
salary was to be supplied by donations.
In the month of May,
1825, Messrs. Rice, Lyle, and Paxton, were a committee of Presbytery—“
to prepare and send, in the name of this body, a circular letter to the
Presbyterians in North and South Carolina and Georgia, containing a
brief history of this Seminary, a statement of its object, a sketch of
its resources and wants, and an earnest invitation to them to unite and
cordially co-operate with us in building up this important institution.”
The board was directed to send a delegate to the Presbyteries at their
fall meeting; and to appoint a general agent to present the cause of the
Seminary where-ever there was a prospect of success. A great Southern
Seminary was now the grand idea, and professed object of Dr. Rice. To
build and endow a Seminary worthy of that name, he devoted all his
powers. The magnitude of the enterprise gave him strength; the grandeur
of the work inflamed his heart more and more; and to his earnest
contemplation the work appeared more and more grand and beautiful.
In 1820, he wrote to Dr.
Alexander—“While it is my wish that the whole Church should give
Princeton full support, I do think that a good Seminary under orthodox
men, I mean true General Assembly Presbyterians, established in the
South, would have a happy effect. My work has long been to keep up a
kind of nucleus here, around which a great Seminary might be gathered. I
am ready to do, to the utmost of my abilities, what shall be thought
best by a majority of brethren. I acknowledge, very readily, that there
are wiser heads than mine, but none have warmer hearts for the
prosperity of good old Presbyterianism. I learn there has been a meeting
of the Board of Trustees of H. S. College, and that you were unanimously
chosen to succeed Dr. Hoge. O, if you would!—but I check myself.” Dr.
Alexander would not accept; and he himself was now attempting what
required wise heads and warm hearts to assist him in performing. A
Seminary fit for the patronage and wants of all the South was the very
thing to supply the wants of any part of the South. For counsel and
advice he now turns himself to his old friend, busily and happily
employed in Princeton, but loving Virginia with all his heart—and on the
18th of March, 1825, writes to him, under that discouragement, which
magnificent schemes with small means will occasionally throw over an
ardent heart, that is restless in its poverty and confinement:—“ The
Elder brethren of Hanover Presbytery have kept themselves so isolated,
and are so far behind the progress of things in this country, and the
general state of the world, that they think of nothing beyond the old
plans and fashions, which prevailed seventy years ago. In fact, there is
nothing like united, entire exertion to build up this institution, and I
often fear the effort will fail. Had I known what I know now, I
certainly would not have accepted the office which I hold. But now I
have put my hand to the plough, and am not accustomed to look back.
There is, however, a sea before me, the depth of which I cannot fathom,
and the width such that I cannot see over it.” Referring to some reports
that the Seminary was hostile to Princeton, he adds — “if I thought it
was so, I, would resign to-morrow.” He further adds—“I have given you
this dismal account of Virginia, to convince you that you must come to
our State during your next vacation. All love you with unabated
affection, and regard you with peculiar reverence. Your presence would
awaken a new set of feelings. A few sermons from you would do more, at
this time, for the good of the Church here, than any human means I can
think of. And I am sure that you would hear and see little, if anything,
of the complaints and troubles that exist; for the. people would be
ashamed to let you know how they feel. I do deliberately and
conscientiously believe that it is your duty to come.” Dr. Rice’s
earnest entreaty, strongly seconded by his friend’s desire to revisit
the scenes of his former enjoyments and labors, prevailed; and Dr.
Alexander made a journey in June, 1825, to his native State, such as can
occur in the lives of few men, and but once in theirs. Welcomed to the
residence he had occupied as President of Hampden Sidney College, he
looked around with intense excitement on men and things. Some of his old
friends and admirers were gone; but others were filling up their places,
ready to give him as warm a place in their hearts. The small brick
building that had served as the college, from the days of the Smiths to
those of Cushing, had given place to a sightly building, that surpassed
Nassau Hall, and, by the celebrity of the young President whose energy
and popularity had erected it, was filled with students. Near by, on
grounds familiar, and sacred in association, he saw arising the
Theological Seminary, simple in its elegance as a single building, and
fitting the more extensive fabric of which it was destined to be a part.
And here was an old associate fully engaged in working out, as practical
problems, the dreams and visions of their former years, the erecting and
endowing a seminary for the supply of ministers for the southern
churches. He saw the difficulties in the way of his friend Rice. To any
other man he would have said, “you cannot accomplish the splendid
design.” Such was his influence over the surrounding community, and over
his friend, a discouraging word would, in all probability, have
prostrated the hopes of Rice, and crushed the Union Seminary in its
embryo. Not daring to discourage his friend, or shut out one ray of a
hope already clouded, yet far from sanguine, lie sat out on a preaching
excursion through Charlotte, Prince Edward, and Cumberland, among the
congregations to which he once ministered. Dr. Rice accompanied, deeply
sensible that the reception, and effects of that visit would in all
probability be decisive, and his hopes be realized, or the seminary fade
from his view for ever. The congregations that crowded to hear, insisted
that both should preach; and declared they had never preached so well;
and when the visit was over, and the enthusiasm of Alexander’s welcome
found expression, the people in recalling the sayings, and doings, and
preachings of that exciting time, were unable to determine which of
their old preachers they most loved and admired, Rice or Alexander. The
visit was an epoch. For a long time it was common to hear the
expression—It took place about the time of Dr. Alexander s visit. And,
what was better, the churches determined to endow the seminary.
Immediately after this
visit, the Trustees appointed Mr. Robert Roy, from New Jersey, sometime
a missionary in Nottoway, to act as agent in conjunction with Dr. Rice.
Of the success of their first visits, Dr. Rice thus writes to Dr. Woods
of Andover, August -6th, 1825: “The Directors of our institution wanted
me to go on again to the North, and solicit aid. But I said I could not
go again, unless I could say and show that our own people had taken hold
of the thing in good earnest. If they would adopt a plan for putting the
institution into full organization, send out agents, and make full trial
of the southern people, then I would go to the North, and ask the
brethren there to help us. Accordingly a promising agent has set out,
and made a very good beginning. I went with him two days, and obtained
about four thousand dollars. This, however, was among my particular
friends, and in the best part of our State. How the whole plan will
succeed I do not know. Pray for us.”
Having taken possession
of the basement and lower story of the seminary-building, he writes
under the same date, August 6th, to Dr. Alexander — “We are at length in
occupancy of a part of our new building. We find it a very pleasant,
comfortable house, thus far, and I think when all things are fixed about
us, that it will make a very desirable residence. It appears to me too,
that there has been a good stirring up of the people in behalf of our
seminary; and they are more than ever resolved to build it up, and place
it on a respectable foundation. Mr. Roy is engaged as our agent, and I
hope that he will be efficient. He has not had a fair trial yet, but I.
think he has the talent for the work.” Speaking of the visit lately
made, he says — “I do believe that if you could make such an one every
year, it would prolong your life, and extend your usefulness.” The
Doctor did not consider that while his friend might visit Virginia and
find — “the stimulus which good, hearty, old-fashioned Virginian
friendship would give, would be a better tonic and cordial than wine
could furnish” — that such a visit as had just passed could never be
made again; and Dr. Alexander, though often entreated, wisely refused
the attempt.
Rice’s friends in New
York city had not forgotten the earnest plea he had made for the
incipient Southern Seminary springing as a germ from the college, and in
June of 1825, Mr. Knowles Taylor, a merchant in that city, horn on the
banks of the Connecticut, sent hint word that a mutual friend had
determined to endow a scholarship in his seminary, and that he might
therefore take in another indigent pious student of theology. “I was,”
says Dr. Rice in reply, “ casting about for ways and means by which to
enable them to do this ” —i. e., three or four young men to enter the
seminary in the fall — “ when your favor came to hand. And now permit me
to say that I know two young men of considerable promise, whose
circumstances are such that if the $175 mentioned by you could be
divided between them, I think they both might be enabled to enter the
seminary the beginning of next term.” This news, received about the time
of Dr. Alexander’s visit, added to the growing interest in favor of the
seminary.
In August, Dr. Rice
received the papers from the donor, Jonathan P. Little, confirming the
donation, and under date of Sept. 1st, writes —"Surely, my dear sir, it
was God who put it into your heart to remember us in this way, and at
this very time, and to him we will give the glory. My friend Mr. Taylor
gave me intimation of this matter at a time when the difficulties of
establishing this seminary seemed, to be increasing, and many of its
warmest friends were desponding. I began to feel as though I were alone
in this great work. But when it was found that the Lord had put it in
the heart of a brother in a remote place to found a scholarship in the
seminary, it gave an impulse which has been generally felt; our languid
friends were aroused, and more has actually been done in six weeks than
in the previous twelve months. On the whole I can confidently say that I
have never known the giving the same sum in any instance productive of
so much good in so short a time.”
Under the same date he
wrote to Mr. Knowles Taylor, under the influence of this donation, and
of Dr. Alexander’s visit—"The truth is, while all acknowledged the
necessity of our institution to supply the wants of the Southern
country, most thought that it was an impracticable scheme. So few they
said here cared for these things, ^that it is hopeless to undertake by
them to raise so great a structure as a theological seminary; and it is
in vain to expect that Northern people will do this work while engaged
in so many others. And really I began to fear that I should have to
labor at the foundation all my life. But now I have good hope that this
temple of the -Lord will go up in my day.” He then goes on and details
Mr. Roy’s agency, the object of which was to get ultimately enough funds
to establish two professorships, and erect the seminary buildings— "I
hope our Presbytery will raise enough to establish one professorship. I
have the pleasure to add that I have just returned from a trip to North
Carolina, the object of which was to convince the brethren of that State
of the importance and necessity of building up a Southern institution.
In this it pleased the Lord to make me successful beyond my
expectations, and that I have good hopes of seeing the Presbyterians of
that State taking hold of this great object in company with us. I bless
the Lord, and take courage. And now if I can just engage the brethren to
the North to take hold of this thing •with a strong hand, and help us,
the work will go on prosperously.”
The Presbytery on the 1st
of October, 1825, continued Mr. Roy’s agency. He had secured $14,000 in
Charlotte and Prince Edward. The committee appointed to attend the Synod
of North Carolina reported to Presbytery on the 28th of the month that
they had been kindly received by the Synod at their meeting in
Greens-borough, a<nd that a committee had been appointed by the Synod
with full powers to confer with a similar committee of this Presbytery,
and adjust the principles on which the Seminary shall be conducted. The
committee of North Carolina were Messrs. McPheeters, Witherspoon and
Graham ; that appointed by Presbytery of Hanover, Messrs. Dr. Rice,
Paxton and Taylor.
Application was made in
May, 1826, by a committee, Dr. Rice, and Messrs. W. J. Armstrong, and
Wm. Maxwell, elder, respecting the transfer of the seminary funds to the
trustees of the Assembly for safe-keeping, and also to ask that body “to
extend its patronage to our seminary,” offering “such negative control”
as may be necessary to secure the exercise of proper Presbyterian
principles. Rev. Dr. Alexander, Dr. Laurie, Dr. Janeway, Mr. Sabine and
Mr. Gildersleeve were the committee appointed by the Assembly on this
request. On May 31st, the. thirteenth day of the session, they made
report of the following resolutions, which were adopted:
“Resolved, 1st. That the
General Assembly will agree to take the Theological Seminary of the
Presbytery of Hanover under their care and control. The plan of the
seminary has been examined by the committee, who are of opinion that it
is such as merits the approbation of the General Assembly.
“2d. That the General
Assembly will receive by their trustees, and manage the permanent funds
of the Theological Seminary of the Presbytery of Hanover, which may be
put into their hands; which funds shall be kept entirely distinct from
all others belonging to the General Assembly. But the General Assembly
will not be responsible for any loss or diminution of said funds, which
may occur from the change of stocks, or from any other unavoidable
cause.
“3d. That the General
Assembly will agree to permit the Presbytery of Hanover to draw
annually, or quarter yearly, the avails of their funds, and will give
direction to their trustees to pay any warrants for the same, which may
be drawn by the President of the Board of Trustees of the Theological
Seminary of the Presbytery of Hanover, or by any other person named by
the Presbytery.
“4th. That the General
Assembly do also agree, that they will permit the Presbytery of Hanover
to draw out, in part or in whole., the funds deposited in the hands of
the Trustees of the General Assembly: Provided, however, That the
proposal to withdraw shall lie before the Presbytery at least one year
previously to its being acted upon. The General Assembly shall also be
at liberty to resign all charge and superintendence of the said
Theological Seminary, whenever they shall judge the interests of the
Presbyterian Church to require it; in which case, the General Assembly
will direct their trustees to return to the Presbytery of Hanover all
their funds which may have been deposited in the hands of said trustees,
or convey them in trust to such individuals as may be named trustees by
the' Presbytery of Hanover.
“5th. That the General
Assembly shall have the right to exercise a general control over the
Theological Seminary of the Presbytery of Hanover that is, they shall
have a negative on all appointments to the offices of professors and
trustees in said Seminary, and on all general laws or rules adopted by
the Presbytery for its government.
“6th. That therefore the
Presbytery of Hanover shall annually send up to the General Assembly a
detailed report of all their transactions, relating to said Theological
Seminary; on which report, a vote of approbation or disapprobation shall
be taken by the General Assembly; and all appointments or enactments of
said Presbytery, or of the Board of Trustees acting under their
authority, which may be rejected by the General Assembly, shall be null
and void. But the authority of the General Assembly over the seminary
shall be merely negative; they shall not originate any measure, or give
any special directions for the government of the institution.
“7th. That if it shall
appear to the General Assembly that doctrines contrary to the standards
of the Presbyterian Church are inculcated in the said seminary, or that
in any other respect it is so managed as to be injurious to the
interests of truth, piety and good order, the General Assembly may
appoint visitors to examine into the state of the said seminary, and to
make a full report to them thereon.
“8th. That if the General
Assembly shall be convinced that any professor in said seminary
inculcates doctrines repugnant to the Word of God, and to our Confession
of Faith, they shall require the Presbytery of Hanover to dismiss such
professor, and to appoint another in his place; and if said Presbytery
neglect or refuse tc comply with such requisition, the General Assembly
will withdraw their patronage and superintendence from the seminary, and
will take such other steps as may be necessary in the case.
9th. That if the
Presbytery of Hanover accede to these terms, then the Theological
Seminary at Hampden Sidney College shall be denominated the Theological
Seminary of the Presbyterian Church, under the care of the Presbytery of
Hanover, and the aforesaid articles and conditions shall go into
effect.”
These resolutions of the
Assembly were laid before the Presbytery of Hanover in October. Before
acting decisively on them, another project was laid before Presbytery by
Dr. Rice, and Messrs. Benjamin H. Rice and William S. Reid, were
appointed a committee to wait on the Synod of Virginia, at its
approaching meeting. From a paper presented by these gentlemen to the
Synod, it appears that the Hanover Presbytery “have erected a building
which cost between seven and eight thousand dollars, have procured a
library of the value of about seven thousand five hundred dollars, and a
subscription amounting to about twenty-five thousand dollars, and there
will probably be twelve or fourteen students at the institution the next
term. The Presbytery of Hanover proposes then, that the Synod of
Virginia should take the institution under her care precisely as it
stands, with its principles and its present engagements; and in case the
proposed connexion with the General Assembly and the Synod of North
Carolina be carried into effect, that thereafter the seminary shall be,
and be denominated, The Union Seminary of the General Assembly, under
the care of the Synods of Virginia and North Carolina”
“After discussion, the
Synod of Virginia, believing it to be eminently desirable that the
Theological Seminary heretofore confided to the care of the Hanover
Presbytery, should be enlarged and established on a more liberal
foundation, and placed, with the countenance and favor of the General
Assembly, under the immediate care and management of the Synods of
Virginia and North Carolina, agreeably to the arrangements that are now
in progress for the purpose, so as to make it a proper institution for
the education of pious youth, candidates for the gospel ministry, for
the supply of all the churches within the bounds of these Synods and
elsewhere, in the southern and western parts of our country, Resolved,
unanimously, That the said proposition of the Hanover Presbytery be, and
the same is, hereby accepted, and that Synod will cordially unite with
the Presbytery of Hanover and the Synod of North Carolina, in any
further measures which shall be necessary and proper to complete the
said arrangement, and to secure to the Union Seminary, as far as
possible, the entire undivided aid and patronage of all the churches
within their bounds.”
On the 3d of November,
1826, Dr. Rice and Rev. Jesse II. Turner met the Synod of North
Carolina, in Fayetteville, and laid before that venerable body the
articles of agreement prepared by the joint committee, with the reasons
therefor at length, and the proceedings of the Synod of Virginia, in
agreeing to take the place of the Presbytery of Hanover, in relation to
the seminary, and urged upon the Synod the final adoption of the plan of
union. The subject was under discussion two days, and was argued with
great^ ability. The leader of the opposition was Dr. Joseph Caldwell,
President ol the University of North Carolina, whose history is
interwoven with the rise and fame of that institution. He had projected
a theological seminary to be located in North Carolina, and was moving
on in the matter as fast as the duties of his office permitted. Dr. Rice
had gotten the advantage, by being wholly devoted to the subject, and
having put his machinery in successful operation in a place much beloved
by many Carolinians. Dr. Caldwell had much experience and influence with
men; able in debate, and sustained by the 26 local attachments of his
brethren, he entered into the discussion manfully, and contended for a
seminary in the old North State, as the Virginians had one in Prince
Edward, and as the South Carolina brethren had projected one in their
mountains; that North Carolina had men and money for the enterprise,
were the Synod aroused to the importance of the work, and he called on
them to awake to their responsibilities.
Dr. Rice argued that the
work of founding and cherishing a Seminary was too great for one Synod,
in the present position of Christian effort and self-denial: that the
Presbytery of Hanover had, in her own bounds and elsewhere, raised funds
to build a house, to procure a library, and had subscriptions for the
support of* Professors, in all, to more than fifty thousand dollars; and
that, while little more could be raised in Virginia now, this sum was
not more than half enough to complete the proper arrangement of
buildings, fill the library, and support competent Professors: that all
that could be raised immediately in North Carolina would not make up
this deficiency—and that instead of two Seminaries, the two Synods would
find a difficulty in founding and sustaining one. In the second place,
he argued—that one Synod, in the present state of things, did not
embrace a sufficiently large Presbyterian population, to afford a
sufficient number of students. The great expense of a Seminary is
justified only by a goodly number of students, except when only a small
number can possibly be obtained; and in the South a great area must be
traversed to gather these students. And as Carolina had, hitherto, been
united with Virginia in the expenses and benefits of the theological
school in Prince Edward, he besought the Synod to continue that union,
and make it closer by becoming a constituent part of its government and
support.
The discussion closed on
Saturday evening, under great excitement. The Synod had never heard such
a debate. The whole subject of Theological Seminaries lay before the
brethren in all its extent; and the Synod was called on to decide upon
its course, for an indefinite length of time, and for incalculable
interests. In the midst of their beloved Carolina, the brethren
contemplated the whole church, and compared the advantages of one well
endowed Seminary with those of two or more with limited endowments and
opportunities of instruction. The records of Synod say, that—“ after a
very full discussion, and a prayer for divine direction, the following
resolution, with but two dissenting voices, was adopted, viz.: Resolved
—That the Synod will agree to support the Theological Seminary in Prince
Edward County, Virginia; and that the articles reported by the committee
on that subject, be, and they hereby are adopted.” All private local
feelings were merged in the general cause. Dr. Rice, on his return to
Virginia, writes to Dr. Alexander — “Dr. Caldwell, who has more
influence than any other man in the State, had set his heart very much
on having a Seminary in North Carolina. He is a very able opponent. The
subject was debated for days, at length the Doctor yielded. Mr. Roy can
tell you all about it: but I mention the subject for the sake of
observing that when Dr. Caldwell found that the majority was against
him, and felt that he was totally defeated, instead of showing offended
pride, he yielded with all the grace of a gentleman and a Christian. He
certainly raised himself very much in my estimation and affection.”
The Assembly of the
Presbyterian Church, at their next meeting, May, 1827, approved and
ratified the arrangements made by the Presbytery and the Synods, and
recommended that the permanent funds be continued, in whole, or in part,
in the State in which they had been raised, in such manner as may be
safe and proper.
Before the consummation
of the union by the Assembly, one of the co-laborers in building up the
Seminary was removed by death, Matthew Lyle, who had been more than
thirty-two years pastor of Briery and Buffalo, expired March 22d, 1827;
son of James Lyle and Hannah Alexander, an aunt of Dr. A. Alexander, and
born in the year 1767, he was reared in the Congregation of Timber
Ridge, Rockbridge County. The circumstances of his early youth and
education were similar to those of his cousin Alexander, first at the
fireside, then the old field-school, and then the College under Graham.
He was one of the theological class or school organized by Mr. Graham,
after the great revival in his charge in 1789. Though five years older
than his cousin, he was not so far advanced in his studies preparatory
to the ministry. At Hall’s Meeting House, now New Monmouth, April 29th,
1791, he, together with Thomas Poage of Augusta, a youth eminent for
piety, but of short continuance on earth, and Benjamin Grigsby, that
gathered the church in Norfolk, were proposed to Presbytery, as
candidates for the ministry, of good moral character, in full communion
with the church, and of a liberal education. “ Presbytery having
received of them a detail of their evidences of faith in the Lord Jesus
Christ, and repentance toward God, and their call and motives to the
gospel ministry, together with a specimen of their ability to solve
cases of conscience, maturely considered the same, and agreed to receive
them as candidates.” Parts of trial were then assigned to all. At
Augusta Church, Sept., 1791, Mr. Lyle read a homily on the subject—Can
they who have attained to a living faith and evangelical repentance,
finally fall from a state of grace; and also an Exegesis on the
question—An originale peccatum detur ? With his companions he was
examined in the languages by Messrs. W. Wilson and Montgomery. Messrs.
Scott, Crawford, and Erwin examined them on the sciences. April, 1792,
in Lexington, Mr. Lyle delivered a popular sermon, 1st John 3 : 8,
latter clause; and read a lecture on John 2d: 1st to 12th verse
inclusive. Together with Messrs. Poage and Grigsby, he was examined on
divinity, criticism, moral philosophy, and geography. On Saturday
morning, the 28th, the three candidates were licensed to preach the
gospel. This was a joyful time to the church in Lexington; four young
men, fruits of the revival, were now licensed to preach the gospel, and
two more were at this time received on trial.
Mr. Alexander, licensed
in the preceding fall, had passed the winter in Jefferson and Berkeley
Counties. At this meeting of Presbytery, he and Messrs. Lyle and Grigsby
were recommended to the Commission as missionaries. In the fall
succeeding, a call from Providence, in Abingdon Presbytery, was sent in
for Mr. Lyle; but owing to some informality, it was not approved by
Presbytery. At the Cove, in Albemarle, October, 1794, Mr. Lyle presented
his credentials, and was received under the care of Hanover Presbytery.
A call was at the same time presented by the united congregations of
Briery and Buffalo, among whom he had been preaching as a missionary of
Synod, asking for his labors as pastor. On the 2d Friday of February,
(13th day) 1795, the Presbytery met at Buffalo — Messrs. Alexander,
M’Robert, Mahon and Lacy, with Elders John Morton and William Womac —
and having heard Mr. Lyle preach from 2d Cor. 4: 13th, proceeded to his
ordination and installation. Mr. Alexander preached from Titus 2d: 13,
and Mr. Lacy presided and gave the charge. To these two congregations
Mr. Lyle continued to preach till his Master called him away. For a time
Mr. Alexander was united with him, and Dr. Hoge also for a number of
years.
Mr. Lyle taught a school
part of the time for the education and maintenance of his family. He was
a firm friend of the College; and took an active part in establishing a
Theological School, and building up the Seminary, the prosperity of
which cheered him in his last days. His. life was fully occupied in the
duties of his station. He was happy in his domestic relations, happy in
his pastoral office, happy in his Presbytery, and blessed in his
communion with his God. The troubles that came upon him God gave him
grace so to bear that few knew them to be troubles. Without any
startling events in his life, which was too even and happy to have any,
his history was interwoven with that of the Seminary and his Presbytery.
In all the good that was doing he had a part. Without seeking
prominence, he rejoiced in the work of his master in any form. Firm in
principle and in friendship, he had many friends. Orthodox in his
preaching, classic in his style, and earnest in the ministry, he left in
his congregations evidences of his labors that Remain. Dr. Rice was with
him in his last hours, and thus writes to Dr. Alexander — “Mr. Lyle’s,
March 22d, 1827. — I am here in a scene of affliction. You will be
afflicted, too, when you learn that this is a fatherless family, and
that Mrs. Lyle is a widow. It pleased an all-wise Providence this day to
remove our excellent friend and brother .from this world, as we
assuredly believe, to a better. He died this evening a little after
sunset. His disease was a disorder of the stomach and liver. During a
considerable part of the last summer he appeared to be in rather infirm
health, and I persuaded him most earnestly to cease preaching, and go to
the springs, but could not succeed. As the winter came on, his health
declined still more; but nothing could persuade him to quit his work, or
disuse his favorite beverage, coffee. But it is useless to pursue the
detail of causes which conspired to produce the event which we now
deplore. Mr. Lyle’s last hours were not such as to permit him to
communicate anything of his feelings or views. His voice failed him, so
that it was with great difficulty that he could say anything. And
although never delirious, yet he was for some time in a comatose state;
and generally the brain seemed to perform its functions very
laboriously. This was so much the case, that his afflicted wife and
children have to refer to his life for evidence of his being prepared
for death. We are all thankful that here we have evidence enough. You
know there never was a man of more absolute sincerity, never one who was
more what he professed to be. And though he gave no dying testimony, his
living one was sufficient for the purpose.
"Mrs. Lyle affords the
greatest pattern of calm, firm, steady resignation, that I have ever
seen. She says that more than a thousand times she has prayed that God
might order her lot for her; and as he has done this, she has no right
to murmur or repine, and does hope that he will not leave her
comfortless. Her fortitude seems to sustain the whole family; and there
really seems to be something of the presence of God about the house. She
is no common woman. Mr. Lyle’s children, that are grown, are all very
respectable. I fully expect that God will make the children great
blessings to their mother. I do not know any particulars of the worldly
circumstances of the family. But there are, you know, ten children, of
whom seven yet live with their mother, and several are yet to be
educated. I wish to make arrangements to have Mr. Lyle’s pulpit supplied
during the year; so as to continue his salary from the congregation
until Christmas; or at any rate as long as the people will rest
satisfied without a pastor. 1 hope this can be done; and I have no doubt
it will be a convenience to the family. The people in general were
greatly attached to Mr. Lyle, and they appear sincerely to deplore his
loss. It will be felt through this whole. section of the church, for his
influence was great. This has turned my thoughts and feelings very
strongly to you. May it please the head of the church to spare you for
many years to come, and to give you health to labor in building up his
kingdom of righteousness.”
To return to Dr. Rice. He
commenced an article in the Evangelical and Literary Magazine for
November, 1824, thus—“In the whole conduct of our work from the
beginning to the present time, we have endeavored to study the things
that make for peace. It has been our wish and effort to keep out of
sight the divisions of Christians, to put down the spirit of jealousy,
and promote fraternal love. We know 'well what is the standing reproach
of Christianity, and it has long been our prayer that it may be wiped
away. We know that men in many respects truly excellent, have been
prevented from entering the Church of Christ by the stumbling-blocks
cast in their way by Christians, and it has long been our earnest wish
that they might be removed. In a country, too, where the best efforts of
all sincere Christians will not furnish a competent supply of religious
instruction, we do desire that all who agree in fundamental doctrines
may unite, as far as possible, in diffusing the influences of the
gospel. We have no taste for angry polemics. Controversies which gender
wrath and strife are our utter aversion. Every man, and of course every
Christian minister, has a right to state his honest convictions to all
who may choose to hear him, and none ought to complain. But if in doing
this, he makes severe reflections on others, he thereby throws the
fire-brand of discord into society, awakens angry feelings, and kindles
a spirit of contention which does mol*e harm than even error respecting
mere matters of form and outward observance can easily do. We are,
verily, persuaded that a few more such sermons as these two, would do
greater injury to the cause of Christianity in the Southern country,
than twenty of the ablest preachers can do of good in their whole
ministerial life. We say this not in anger, but in sorrow.”
He then proceeds to
review two discourses lately issued from the press, from the pen of John
S. Ravenscroft, Episcopal Bishop of North Carolina. These sermons
contained much that is cordially received by all Christians; but they
also claimed for Diocesan Episcopacy the sole agency of God’s covenanted
mercy, thus denying the right and name of Church members to all
professors of religion not within the pale of the Episcopal Church.
These principles more or less openly avowed in the pulpit, for some
preceding years in Virginia, now first appeared from the press. In the
year 1814, in a letter to Dr. Alexander, Mr. Rice says — “I am, indeed,
apprehensive that we shall have a controversy in this State between
Episcopalians and Presbyterians; but I hope, if this should be the case,
that we shall act entirely on the defensive.” The next year he says to
Mr. Maxwell, speaking of a meeting of Episcopal ministers in Richmond —
“ My congregation pretty generally attended. They were pleased too with
most things in the ministers; but disapproved the keen spirit of
proselytism manifested by them. This is active and ardent enough beyond
all doubt, and you will very probably see a sample of it before long.
This spirit will produce irritation and offence, which, I fear, will
ripen into controversy.” Mr. Rice had declined making any attack on
Episcopacy in his Magazine, or to do anything by which he could be
considered the aggressor. At length, to satisfy the public desire, he
published his Irenicum in a pamphlet form, in which, in an exegetical
manner, the passages of Scripture relating to Church Government and
forms, were considered with much ability and a kind temper. In the
review of the Bishop’s sermon, with the same kindness and ability, he
contests the High Church notions openly avowed, and shows succinctly
that they were founded on error.
In the same month,
December, 1824, in which the latter part of this review appeared in the
Magazine, Bishop Ravenscroft preached by request, before the Bible
Society of North Carolina, the annual sermon. In this he endeavored to
show that it was dangerous to the best interests of the Church and the
souls of men generally to circulate the word of God without some
accredited expounder accompanying. This sermon Dr. Rice reviewed, in his
Magazine for April and May, 1825, endeavoring to show that the Bishop’s
arguments were fallacious, and his fears of evil to be wrought by the
free circulation of the word of God without note or comment, were
groundless.
In the month of March,
1825, the Bishop preached in Raleigh a sermon on the study and
interpretation of the Scriptures. A copy of this sermon, published by
the vestry of his church, was sent to Dr. Rice, with a communication,
containing the following sentence — “I forward by this mail, a printed
copy of a sermon, preached to my congregation here, on the study and
interpretation of Scripture— in which you will see my views on that
subject — which you may refute if-you can; and by which I am willing to
test the soundness of those doctrines I have preached, and shall
continue to preach to the good people of North Carolina, until shown to
be erroneous by better and higher authority than that of the Editor or
Editors of the Evangelical Magazine.” This challenge was accepted by Dr.
Rice, and a review of thirty-one pages, in the Magazine for the July
following, gave greater evidence of the power of his pen as a polemic
than any preceding production. His view of the Bishop is thus expressed
at the outset — “He is a firm and fearless man. Doubtless he is sincere.
He is persuaded that out of what he calls the church, there is no
assurance of salvation: he does believe that it is ruinous to distribute
the Bible ‘without note or comment;’ and therefore regardless of
consequences, he is continually throwing himself on ground from which
many a bold and able combatant has been beaten in times past.”
Dr. Rice combats the
Bishop’s rule, viz. — “That interpretation of Scripture is to be
followed and relied upon as the true sense and meaning, which has
invariably been held and acted upon by the one Catholic and Apostolic
Church of Christ:” and shows that there has been no such interpretation
or explanation preserved; that of the interpretation or explanation
which the Church held for the first three hundred years only a few
passages have been preserved; and that if the Bishop u by interpretation
of every doctrine,” has reference to the ancient creeds, he shows there
is no certainty that any creed, however short, claims origin higher than
the second or third century. He brings forward Bishop Hooker in defence
of the clergy of his day against the charge of not preaching enough, as
saying — The word of life hath always been a treasure, though precious,
yet easy as well to attain as to find; lest any man desirous of life
should perish through the difficulty of the way ; and though the clergy
did not preach they read the word of God publicly, and that was enough.
After calling up the testimony of Bishop Horsley, that there is no need
to a plain man for a church to interpret Scripture: and of Bishop Hurd,
that the great principle of tlie Reformation is, that the Scripture is
the sole rule of faith — that Daille, On the right use of the Fathers,
opened the eyes of intelligent inquirers, and led Chillingworth to
establish for ever the old principle, that the Bible, and that only
interpreted by our best reason, is the religion of Protestants — he sets
in a clear light the truth that we cannot be governed by authority in
our explanation of Scripture, further than that authority is derived
from the Scripture itself.
He brings the review to a
close with such remarks as. these:'— “Bishop Ravenscroft, in two sermons
with which our readers are somewhat acquainted, set up the highest
pretensions of High Church, and denounced all preachers who have not
received Episcopal ordination, as intruders into the sacred office, and
as ministers of Satan. He also begs pardon for having in times past
yielded to the pretension, of a spurious modern charity, and promises
hereafter to discard all false tenderness from his bosom. True to his
purpose, on being requested to preach the annual sermon of the Bible
Society of North Carolina, he delivered a discourse directly against the
Institution, and all others of similar organization in the world. The
great object of that effort of the preacher was to prove the
insufficiency of the Scriptures as a guide to heaven. This is followed
by a fourth sermon, in which he fills up his system, and tries to
persuade us that we must acknowledge the Church as the authorized
interpreter of the Bible. We have been made to understand that the
Episcopal clergy of North Carolina follow their Diocesan. We know that
sentiments of a similar character are boldly advanced in New York by a
man of learning and talents; and that the wealth of the richest Church
in the United States is pledged for their support. We have satisfactory
evidence too, that influence from abroad is made to bear on the
religious character of our population. In a word exertions are made to
extend opinions among us, which we do conscientiously believe to be
injurious, both to Church and to society. We therefore felt it to be our
imperious duty to point out, plainly and frankly, the errors held by
these brethren, and show as well as we could to what they tend. We have
not for one moment, ever thought of laying any thing to their charge but
bad reasoning, and mistaken apprehension of Scripture. If we have in any
instance misapprehended the meaning of Bishop R., it has been our
misfortune, not our fault. In conclusion, we cannot help saying we have
heard that Bishop R. has been sick. We pray God to have mercy on him,
restore his health, prolong his days, and make him a blessing to the
Church over which he is called to preside. We hope yet to hear of his
taking the lead in the glorious work of charity in which Christians in
this latter day are engaged. He thus ended the review, believing with
"the ingenious Bishop Hurd” that when any branch of the Protestant
Church left the sure ground that “the Scripture is the sole rule of
Faith” and took in its place the Scriptures as interpreted by the
Fathers, the mismanagement was fatal— that the discussion would be in a
dark and remote scene, and no certain sense could be affixed to their
doctrines ; and any thing or every thing might, with some plausibility,
be proved from them.
Bishop Ravenscroft felt
himself called on to notice this review of Dr. Rice, and sent forth a
pamphlet with the following title — The Doctrine of the Church
vindicated from the misrepresentations of Dr. John Rice; and the
Integrity of Revealed Religion defended against the no-comment principle
of promiscuous Bible Societies. By the Right Reverend John S.
Ravenscroft D. D., Bishop of the Diocese of North Carolina, 8vo. pp.
166. Raleigh, printed by J. Gales $ Son, 1826. .
Dr. Rice commenced his
review in the Magazine for July, 1826, thus, — “This is probably the
most polemic title page that has been printed for the last hundred
years.” He then states succinctly the relative position of the two
churches, the Episcopal and the Presbyterian ; the beginning of the
controversy on church order; that it was at the time when “there was not
courage to avow exclusive claims and pretensions, there was a secret
agency, the object of which was to spread the opinion, that the
Presbyterian Church is not a Church of Christ. It was not difficult for
those who chose it to trace this underground work to the very
commencement;” and that was, as we learn from a letter to Dr. Alexander,
soon after his removal to Richmond. In carrying on the review he says —
“But we wish it to be distinctly understood, that we design to pursue
the uniform policy of that Church, of which we have the honor to be
members. We make no attack on Episcopalians — under the full conviction
that the Episcopal Church may be fairly separated from High Church
pretensions. If, however, we have mistaken the case; and this thing
cannot be; there we are prepared to maintain that the prevalence of that
Church in this country is far, very far from being desirable.”
He then enters on the
subject at large, and goes over the whole ground of the Episcopal
controversy, with as much minuteness as could be compatible with the
space afforded in twelve numbers of the Magazine. At the close of the
fourth number, which appeared in the Magazine for October, he says, “it
is due to ourselves and readers to state the reason why this review lies
under the disadvantage of appearing in fragments—at long intervals. The
truth is simply this: the writer’s daily avocations are fully sufficient
to occupy the time and attention of at least three men of his calibre.
He is therefore obliged to write in ends and corners of time, by
sentences and half sentences, otherwise he must neglect much more urgent
duties. For his own sake and that of his readers he wishes the case were
otherwise. But as he was called on to notice the Bishop’s book, he
thought it better to write in these unpropitious circumstances, than not
at all.” This statement of the Doctor is true as it respects his great
pressure of business. Yet his reply to the Bishop is one of unusual
ability and power and research. He goes over the whole ground of
controversy between the Bishop and the Bible Society; and the Bishop, as
a diocesan of the strictest sort, and the Presbyterian Church; and also
that between the Bishop and himself. The whole production is a
masterpiece of polemics. The
Bishop was an open,
fearless man—a high churchman. He wrote strongly but unguardedly. The
Doctor showed himself far his superior in Theological literature, and
caution, and the suavity of controversy. He shows from history, and fair
deduction of argument, founded at last on history, that the High Church
notions of the Bishop are inimical to the advancement of true piety, and
even the existence of godliness, and are opposed to civil liberty; and
will either govern the State as Pope, or be allied as an Establishment;
and that they are all founded on error in the interpretation of
Scripture, and the misconstruction of historical facts and the opinions
of the Fathers. |