sion made by his exegetical exercises in the seminary. They never can forget the clearness of his expositions, and the power which he possessed of unfolding the Word of God in its connections; nor can they ever lose the impression made on their minds of his reverence for the Scriptures, and his childlike submission to their authority. So far as the general public are concerned, his reputation must rest on his published commentaries. Of these, alas! he lived to complete only a small part of those which he intended to write. His works on Isaiah, on the Psalms, on the Acts of the Apostles, on the Gospel of Mark, and of the first sixteen chapters of Matthew, are enough to keep his name in grateful and perpetual remembrance. They evince great learning, accurate scholarship, great powers of analysis, sound judgment, wonderful clearness of statement and felicity of expression, and a devout and reverent spirit.

There are two kinds of commentaries. With the one the text and context are the immediate and special object; with the other, the truths the sacred writer intends to teach. The one is characteristical, verbal; the other doctrinal. These two methods can never be, or should never be, entirely dissociated. Grotius furnishes an example of the former, Calvin of the latter class of commentators. Dr. Alexander belongs to the former rather than to the latter. His work on the Psalms is the most verbal in its character. It is designed to give in English a fac-simile of the original. In his other commentaries his scope is wider ; but in all there is the strictest attention to verbal exposition, giving each word, tense, case, and particle its proper force.

force. Besides this, however, the subject-matter is exhibited in the clearest light; and the hand of a master is visible throughout.

Dr. Addison Alexander was for a long course of years oue of the most frequent contributors to the Princeton Review. His contributions are on such a wide range of subjects, are so diversified in character, they exhibit such amplitude in his resources, such refined wit and sarcasm, such power of argument, such research, and such perfection of style, that

many of his friends are disposed to think that they afford the best means for forming a correct estimate of the man-of his tastes, talents, and attainments. On this subject his biographer says:

" It is the judgment of some thorough Biblical scholars that Dr. Addison Alexander's contributions to the Review set forth his splendid literary abilities in a much stronger light than any of his other writings. It is very certain he wrote in the quarterlies and magazines with a bold, free hand which was somewhat fettered when engaged on the commentaries. He writes in the same free way in his newspaper-squibs, children's books, and some of his letters, and in his European journals. The greater part of what he did, however, in this reckless, slap-dash style, was not intended for preservation, and, though on merely literary grounds it is often exquisite, is for other but equally weighty reasons kept back from the eye of curious readers. The essays in the Repertory, on the whole, give one the best notion of the variety of his gifts and accomplishments as a writer of English. They give the best notion, too, of his masculine tastes, his general knowledge, his progressive moderation, his sterling good sense, his genial humor and true politeness, his fine wit, his facetious irony, his power (never used without provocation) of withering sarcasm, and the marvellous cunning of his diction. Viewed as an unbroken collection, these pieces 'certainly possess extraordinary merit; and all the more so that some of them were floated off as the veriest waifs."

By common consent of all who knew him, Addison Alexander was a 'man of profound and varied erudition; of extraordinary and manifold mental endowments; of sound judgment and practical wisdom; of elevated piety and of firm faith in the Divine authority of the Scriptures; he occupied a position in the first rank of teachers, of preachers, of commentators, and of reviewers or essayists. If there be any other man, whom our country has produced, of whom all this can be truthfully said, we do not know who he is. This man we lost in the maturity of his power and usefulness.

Art. VIII.--The Presbyterian Church-its Position and


The feeling is general throughout the land that the Presbyterian Church, by the recent re-union of the two branches, has entered upon a new career of spiritual life and missionary labor. It must, however, be kept in mind that the mere con

junction of two smaller bodies will not in itself necessarily produce any marked change upon the character and operations of the enlarged organization.

A large body is not always the most efficient. In certain lines of duty and of effort, the co-existence of two similar yet independent churches may be weakness, but in others, they may so act and react upon each other as to arouse a higher devotion to Christ's cause, call forth a larger amount of individual strength, and sustain greater endeavors for the promotion of truth and righteousness in the earth. Something more is needed for the accomplishment of any great enterprise or moral result than mere bulk. Inertia is a danger of large bodies. This the re-united church must at the outset understand, so as to comprehend the pressing duties of the present, and the dawning necessities of the future, and rise at once to meet them.

The present time is auspicious for enlarged spiritual efforts. The idea has grown up in the church, that the two portions coming together harmoniously can do more for the great benevolent movements of the age, than by acting apart. This is in itself a power. If real, it will soon assume shape and be clothed in deeds which will give a quickening impulse to thought and a broader sweep to endeavor. The achievements of the past and the practical forces of the present will not suffice. These, however grand in themselves, are not, under this prevailing sentiment, what the united body can content itself to simply sustain. Nobler deeds must mark its future, holier zeal its movements, and the flow of its benevolence must be more generous and deep. The change of vote, on the day of the union of the two branches, from one million to five millions of dollars must be an index of the advanced position which the church is ready to take in regard to work. Upon this every thing must tell. The exuberant joy, the earnest desire, the hopeful wish, the doubting spirit of different individuals or parties must now comıningle, and these, if rightly blended and properly directed, may be the means, in the hands of the Spirit, of giving higher vigor to the action of the body.

The similarity of views in all that enters into and sustains Christian life and aggressive action will do much to fulfil the

general expectation for enlarged effort. The same standards are acknowledged, the same doctrines are avowed, and the same measures of policy are adopted by each. There is to be no change in ecclesiastical institutions and no re-adjustment of church relations. Both branches have been laboring in most departments of work, and both in their united capacity are prepared to give the preference to the ecclesiastical over the voluntary organization. Each has reached this result, if not in the same way and time, yet by such a process as to give the promise of unity in all co-operative movements in the future. Then there may be found on investigation in the different schemes, such variety in the details of labor and in modes of procedure as may impart to them hereafter greater vigor and efficiency-yea, there may be born in the very inquiry, What is this union to accomplish ? some more decisive means of developing the resources and consolidating the strength of the church.

In aid of this feeling is the fact that this one church is not composed of two hitherto independent churches, with different names and principles. Each has kept, since the division, the saine name, each has held to the same creed, each has the same polity, each has a common ancestry and a common heritage; the fathers of the one are those of the other, great names of the past are alike dear to both, and to them they have in turn appealed, or have gloried together in their labors, influence, and successes. Their origin is the same; but, like a river that is separated by a portion of land in its onward course, the-two parts have flowed in parallel lines until the intervening obstacle is removed, when they have again met. The two were formerly one, and whatever their differences, jealousies, and alienations, they now believe that they see eye to eye in the essentials of faith, government, and work. In their aims and aspirations, in the forms of spiritual life, in geographical boundaries, and in administrative economy, the two are one. Side by side they have labored. The ministers of the one have passed over to the other, and the same has been freely done by the members, and each of these has felt at home in his new communion and relations. This frequent interchange has done much to smooth the way,

wear down the barriers that had been reared, and bring to a point the increasing tendencies of the two separate parts toward union. They can thus, without friction, readily fall into line and prepare themselves, with their combined energies, for work. In the separation, with its attendant conflicts, lessons have been learned and experience gained that will have a hallowed influence over modes of thought, policy, and life; and, in the future, they will live in, more accord with the principles of their faith and with the policy of their church. If the one part be numerically the stronger, this will be generously used for the common good, while the other may seek to infuse new energy into the whole, to make up in any thing which either lacketh, that the cause of Christ may be more rapidly advanced and God's glory be promoted in the earth. But the dissolving process of the two parts may go on so rapidly that it may soon be difficult to tell to which distinctive organization any one belonged

Tros Tyriusque-nullo discrimine agetur. One other hopeful sign may here be mentioned that this re-union is effected without loss. Before this, Presbyterian bodies have been incorporated into one.

The Secession Church in Scotland was made up of two parts. The United Presbyterian Church there and in this country were each composed of two distinct organizations, with different names. But in all of these, and others that could be mentioned, there was a part missing, that would not go into the union. Thus far, we have heard of no separatists from the joint body. Previous to its consummation, there was considerable discussion as to the desirableness of union, and not a few objections urged against the thing itself. These were generally set forth with manliness and frankness, and did much to prepare the way for the harmonious action of the two Assemblies at Pittsburg. The men who feared and doubted will neither leave the church nor work coldly in it. They feel that it is not now a mere policy or party, but a beloved church whose interests and success are involved, and these will receive their sympathy, prayers, and active, generous aid. They can individually say, with deep and true emotion--“Thy people shall be my people,

« ElőzőTovább »