Imágenes de páginas

advantage, ought never to neglect. Still he did attend upon many of these assemblies, and sometimes took an important part in their proceedings. This was the case when the Synod met at Huntsville, Alabama, in 1839, when the New-School party separated from that body, and protested against its action. Here he took a leading part in the deliberations, as a conservative Old-School man. He was on the committee appointed to answer the protest of the seceders, and, as we learn from a copy on record in his journal, was the writer of the paper. He at first tried to unite the parties and prevent any division, but failed in this. He also attended the meeting at Florence, Alabama, in 1844, and at Clarksville, Tennessee, in 1845, where he was the Moderator. The meetings of Synod nearer home he attended, and more frequently those of Presbytery.

He was a member of four different General Assemblies of the Presbyterian Church-first, that of 1819, at Philadelphia, as the alternate of Dr. Green; then of 1834, over which he was Moderator; next of 1846, both at Philadelphia; and finally of 1855, at Nashville, during the sessions of which he died. It may be interesting to state a few facts, touching his position in the Assembly of 1834.

It was his first visit to the East, after an absence of ten years. He had given himself up wholly, during this time, to his great work in Tennessee, and had almost lost sight of ecclesiastical affairs at the East. In the mean time the lines had become more and more distinctly drawn between the Old and New-School parties in the church. It was in the Assembly of 1834 that the first great conflict between these parties assumed the form of an open and uncompromising issue, involving the very essentials of faith and order, at least in the judgment of the Old School. The New School had the majority in the Assembly, as was made manifest by its sustaining the complaint and appeal of the Second Presbytery of Philadelphia against the Synod, and by its action on the Western Memorial. On the one side, there was a struggle for the mastery, in order to sustain the new doctrines and the men who endorsed them. On the other, there was a fixed determination to stand by the old landmarks of the faith once delivered to the saints. It was accordingly, while one of the most important, one

of the most exciting Assemblies which had ever met; and its sessions were protracted through almost three weeks.

Such was the composition and temper of the body over which Dr. Lindsley was called to preside, with scarcely any previous acquaintance as to the actual position of affairs, and, as we have seen, with but little experience in the tactics of ecclesiastical bodies. He was elected Moderator unanimously, and by acclamation-no one else being nominated. Doubtless he was taken by surprise, and finding himself in so unusual and difficult a position, he determined to make the best of it, by discharging his duty with that urbanity and scholarly bearing which marked all his conduct, and that impartial justice which the occasion demanded. Under such circumstances it would have been difficult to give entire satisfaction to both parties, perhaps to either.

The following interesting correspondence with Rev. Isaac V. Brown, D.D., one of his early friends and a leading member of that Assembly, appeared in the newspapers soon after Dr. Lindsley's death, in 1855. It shows very clearly where he stood and how he felt. The allusion referred to in his letter, which Dr. Brown had made in a previous communication, was in these words, speaking of the Assembly of 1834: "I could not tell from your action as Moderator, to which side you inclined in the strife; and I have never met with any evidence to guide my judgment since. But I never doubted that your feelings were with the orthodox."

NEW ALBANY, May 3, 1855.

REVEREND AND DEAR SIR:-I duly received and carefully read your very able "Historical Vindication," etc., for which I beg you to accept my most grateful acknowledgments. Such a work was greatly needed by the present generation, and probably, by not a few like myself, of the past. I anticipate, and wish for it, the widest possible circulation, among our churches and people.

The allusion in your last letter, to my position in 1834, may justify a single remark. When I left Princeton in 1824, I soon found myself so completely absorbed in local and professional matters, as to lose sight of our ecclesiastical and theological controversies in the East. On arriving at Philadelphia, as a commissioner to the Assembly of

1834, I was as nearly ignorant of the state of parties, the bias of individuals, and the precise grounds of dissension, as if I had just dropped from the moon. Among other queer things I soon learned that Drs. Ely and Spring had changed sides, and were regarded as champions of doctrines and measures directly opposed to their former course, etc. etc. I was not a little surprised and mystified by what I daily witnessed. As I had no kind mentor at hand to enlighten me, I resolved to go by the Book, without fear, favour, or affection.

I have always been, as I still am, a Presbyterian, according to the obvious import of our time-honoured standards.

But as I hope soon to see you and to have the pleasure of talking over the scenes and events of bygone years, I will not trouble you further at present.

Very truly and respectfully yours, etc.




TRENTON, July 13, 1855.

DEAR SIR:-In looking over the recent correspondence I have had with the late Dr. Lindsley, I fixed my eye upon the preceding, probably one of the last letters Dr. Lindsley ever wrote to a distant friend,-particularly as it explains his position and character theologically to the day of his sudden and lamented departAs he was a man of very superior talents and attainments; standing in the highest grade among the literary, accomplished and eloquent men of the present century, I feel a pure gratification in this, his dying declaration, which authorizes us to place him among the truly orthodox members and devoted friends of our beloved church. At some future day, it will certainly be proper to give some detailed account of the character, life, and labours of our illustrious departed brother.

With great respect and esteem, dear sir, as ever, etc.

REV. DR. MCKINNEY, Editor of Presbyterian Banner.


In reference to the foregoing letter, to which Dr. Brown had called our attention, he remarks in a communication just received as we were

preparing the present memoir, "I am pleased to find that you have obtained Dr. Lindsley's letter to which I referred you. It is the most important document for your purpose, in my knowledge. Dr. L. was calm, decisive yet impartial, through the whole of the tempestuous sessions of the General Assembly of 1834, which lasted three weeks, and was a scene of unceasing conflicts."

Although he had thus in his office of Moderator over an Assembly of the whole church, acted with such even-handed impartiality that his intimate friends could not tell which way he inclined, still, when the issue was made up, and the final division effected in 1838, there was no indecision or hesitation as to his position. He took his stand firmly with the Old School in his own Presbytery and Synod, as was fully evinced in the decisive action of the latter at Huntsville in 1839. Conservative as he was in all things, and utterly opposed to fruitless. speculation and innovation in theology, he could not have done otherwise.


It has not been our aim to tell the story of Dr. Lindsley's life by narrating events in their chronological order, but to single out certain prominent periods as landmarks along the way, and to fill up the intervals between, by grouping together his chief studies, attainments, pursuits and characteristics at each epoch, so as to supply what was wanting to the two preceding sketches. Of course we need not stop now to speak of his great life-work at Nashville, as an educator, filling up the twenty-six years of his presidency in the University, or of his ministerial character and labours during that long period. These we have already attempted to describe in the two former volumes. It remains only to touch upon a few points of interest, connected with his resignation of the presidency, and removal to another field of labour, at a time of life when it might have seemed more congenial to his feelings to remain where he was, and repose on the trophies of the past. At this period he had nearly reached the age of sixty-four. His intellect was active and vigorous, and his studies were still pursued with much of the ardour of youth. But for some years back, at times his health had given way, and under the weight of recent


bereavements in the family circle, though his eye was not dimmed in the least, his physical strength was somewhat impaired.

We have seen with what reluctance, even after a long struggle, he had torn himself away from Princeton in 1824. To this painful separation was probably owing the fact that he never saw it again, though he visited the East many times during a period of thirty years. Still more trying must have been his removal from Nashville. There all his largest plans had been laid, and all his best energies exerted for the public good. There some of his children were already married and settled in life. There the strongest social ties had been formed with many faithful friends, who for twenty-six years had borne with him the heat and burden of the day. And there too, recently made, were the graves of the dearest objects of his heart. All his interests were closely identified with the place and people, and until the combination of circumstances occurred which led finally to his removal, he had probably, for many years, entertained no other thought than to spend the remnant of his days there. To those at a distance who knew all the facts of his history, it seemed that Nashville could better have spared any one else of her citizens. And to those who rightly appreciated both him and the city, it seemed a matter of regret that he should not have laboured on, even to the close of life, at the post he had held so long.

It is not our purpose here to enter into any detailed account of the causes which led to the separation. That may be safely left to the future historian of the University. All that is necessary now is simply to state some of the more prominent circumstances in view of which he was induced, after so long, laborious and successful a career, to leave the city of his adoption and enter upon another department of the work of instruction elsewhere. It often occurs that the ablest and best men, under an unexpected, perhaps unavoidable combination of circumstances, are led to give up fields of usefulness, which all others may think them best qualified to fill; and in such cases, while we wonder at the change, we are reconciled to it only in the belief that an All-wise Providence is thus accomplishing some greater good.

In 1849, in order to carry out certain views which he had long

« AnteriorContinuar »