University of Virginia Library

SOME REFLECTIONS GROWING OUT OF THE FOREGOING PAGES.

The desertions from the Episcopal Church in Virginia on the
part of many who were awakened to a deeper sense of religion,
the violent opposition made to it, the persevering and successful
efforts for its downfall, the advantage taken by politicians for promoting
their objects, the abandonment of their charges by far the
greater part of the ministers so soon as their salaries were withdrawn
and when only unprofitable glebes remained to them, are
events in history which must have resulted from some powerful
cause or causes. The leading one must be found in the irreligious

character and defective preaching of the clergy, operating more or
less on the laity, for it will always be, in some degree, "like priest
like people." The ignorance, superstition, and corruption of the
Romish clergy and people invited that grand assault of the great
enemy of God and man upon the Christian Church and religion in
Europe, by the agency of Voltaire and his host of followers, which
led to the French Revolution with all its horrors. It is not wonderful
that the same great foe and his active agents should have
turned their attention to the Church and people of Virginia, in
their then most irreligious state, and made an effective assault
upon them. Infidelity became rife in Virginia, perhaps beyond
any other portion of the land. The clergy, for the most part,
were a laughing-stock or objects of disgust. Some that feared
God and desired to save their souls felt bound to desert them.
Persecution followed, and that only increased defection. Infidels
rejoiced at the sight, and politicians made their use of the unhappy
state of things. The Church fell. There was no Episcopal head
to direct and govern either clergy or people. No discipline could
be exerted over either. It is not surprising that many should
think it was deserted of God as well as of man. Such a view has
been taken of it by some ever since, and most diligently and successfully
urged to our injury. Although our present condition
ought to be sufficient proof that the Episcopal Church itself is
not an offence unto God,—while at one time it came under his displeasure
by reason of the unworthiness of many of its ministers
and members,—yet it may be well to advert, not in a spirit of
retaliation but in the love of truth and justice, to some facts,
showing that the Episcopal Church is not the only one in our land
which has had its unworthy ministers and members, and been of
course so far an object of the Divine displeasure. The history of
the whole Christian Church, as one of our opponents has said, is
the "history of declensions and revivals." The Baptist Church
in Virginia, which took the lead in dissent, and was the chief
object of persecution by the magistrates and the most violent and
persevering afterward in seeking the downfall of the Establishment,
was the first to betray signs of great declension in both ministers
and people. The Rev. Robert Sample, in his History of the Baptists
of Virginia, is faithful in acknowledging this. He informs us
that at an early period Kentucky and the Western country took
off many of their ministers in pursuit of gain. Some of these
ministers had dishonoured the profession. "With some few exceptions,"
he says, "the declension (among the people) was general
throughout the State. The love of many waxed cold. Some of
the watchmen fell, others stumbled, and many slumbered at their
posts. Iniquity greatly abounded." At another time he says,
"The great revival had now subsided, and the axe was laid at the
root of the tree. Many barren and fruitless trees were already
cut down. In many of the churches the number excluded surpassed
the number received." Again, he speaks of the undue
dwelling on some highly Calvinistic doctrines. "Truth is often
injured by an unsuitable application of its parts. Strong meat
should not be given but to men. To preach the deep, mysterious
doctrines of grace upon all occasions, and before all sorts of people,
is the sure way to preach them out of the parts." Again, he says,
in the same connection, "Unguardedness respecting preachers, in
various ways, but especially as to impostors, has injured the Baptists
in many parts, but in none more than on the Eastern Shore.
They have probably suffered more by impostors than any other
people in Virginia." He then mentions several sad instances of
shameful misconduct, adding others afterward. I am also compelled
in honest truth to say, that at a later period, many others
coming within my own knowledge and observation must be united
to the above; but I am also rejoiced to declare, from the same
knowledge, that the character of the ministry of that denomination
for piety and ability, and no doubt that of the people with it, has
been most manifestly improving for many years. I trust that with
the acknowledged improvement of our own, there will be an increased
disposition to forget all former animosities, to think and
speak charitably of each other, and only strive which shall most
promote the common cause of true religion.

Leaving my own State and Diocese, I proceed to speak of some
at a distance who have experienced like declension from the true
faith and practice. Col. Byrd, of Virginia, in his "Westover
Manuscripts," concerning a tour through the State in the year
1733, speaking of the Pilgrim Fathers of New England, says,
"Though these people may be ridiculed for some Pharisaical peculiarities
in their worship and behaviour, yet they were very useful
subjects, as being frugal and industrious, giving no scandal or bad
example, at least by any open and public vices. By which excellent
qualities they had much the advantage of the Southern colony,
who thought their being members of the Established Church sufficient
to sanctify very loose and profligate morals. For this reason
New England improved much faster than Virginia." Strict, however,
as were the morals, and evangelical as were the doctrines, of

the Pilgrim Fathers of New England, the time of declension in
both came on. We may trace the declension in doctrine to that
which was the Mother-Church to many of them,—the Church of
Scotland. The moralizing system began there, as it had done in
the English Church. I remember to have heard Mr. Balmaine—
once a member of that Church—often compare together the moralizing
and evangelical parties of his early days,—now a hundred
years ago. Dr. Blair and Mr. Walker were the representatives of
the two parties, though associate ministers in the same church in
Edinburgh. He had heard them both. The more worldly and
fashionable delighted in the sermons of Dr. Blair, who preached in
the morning. The more zealous and evangelical attended in
greater numbers the services of Dr. Walker, who preached in the
afternoon. Dr. Witherspoon also, former President of Princeton
College, has, in his work entitled "Characteristics," exercised his
unsurpassed wit as well as pious zeal in portraying the two parties,
—the one, calling itself the "Moderate Party," which he charges
with being "fierce for moderation," and zealous in nothing else.
The same soon began to exist in New England. Low views of the
qualification for baptism, the Lord's Supper, and the ministry,
gradually crept in. The moralizing system took the place of the
evangelical. The distinctive principles of the Gospel were kept
back, and thus the way was prepared for the Unitarian heresy.
The morals also of the Church, as might be expected, began to
fail. The labours and preaching of Edwards and others and the
great revival under them did much to arrest the downward tendency;
but the evil went on. The love of pleasure in the young
and of strong drink in both young and old increased in many
places. Deacons and elders sold rum by wholesale, and other
members by retail. Nor did the clergy lift up their voices in
solemn warnings, as they should have done, but very many freely
used the intoxicating draught. That aged and venerable man, the
Rev. Leonard Woods, of Andover, states that at a particular period
previous to the temperance reformation he was able to count
nearly forty ministers of the Gospel, none of whom resided at a
very great distance, who were either drunkards or so far addicted
to intemperate drinking, that their reputation and usefulness were
very greatly injured if not utterly ruined. He mentions an ordination
at which he was present, and at which he was pained to see two
aged ministers literally drunk and a third indecently excited by
strong drink. "These disgusting and appalling facts," says this
most esteemed minister of the Gospel, "I could wish might be
concealed. But they were made public by the guilty persons; and
I have thought it just and proper to mention them, in order to
show how much we owe to a compassionate God for the great deliverance
he hath wrought."[15] (The Ninth Report of the Am. Tem.
Society, as quoted in the Temperance Prize Essay, "Bacchus," pp.
79, 80; edition of 1840.) To this I add a testimony of my own.
About thirty-five or thirty-six years ago, I devoted some time to
the service of the Colonization Society, forming the first auxiliaries
and selecting the first colonists in some of the larger cities of the
Union, North and South. Of course, I mingled freely with ministers
and members of different denominations and had opportunity
of knowing what I now affirm,—namely, that many ministers of
respectable standing, and not confined to any one denomination,
were in the habit of using themselves and offering to others who
visited them, not merely at the hour of dinner, but long before,
brandy and other drinks. I have special reference to one large
city, where, in a few years, the evil effects were seen and felt, in
the reproach brought on several denominations by the partial if
not total fall of some of their chief leaders. In proof of the prevalence
of such a ruinous habit I mention the fact, that in a funeral
sermon preached about that time over a deceased minister, and
published to the world, it was mentioned to his praise, that such
was his hospitality that he never permitted even a morning visit
to be paid him without offering wine and other refreshments. How
thankful we should be to God for the great change which he has
caused to take place in the hospitalities of our day! As for myself,
I can never hear without pain a slighting remark made by any one,
especially by a minister, and more especially by one of our own
Church, concerning that society which I believe God has raised up
in our land, as one instrument by which so much has been done
for the diminution of this great evil.

From this digression, if it be a digression, I return, and draw
this article to a close.