University of Virginia Library

1. THE FIRST DAY

The opening day of the Centennial was devoted mainly to religious
services. The first public meeting was held in Cabell Hall in commemoration
of the religious contribution of the University. A somewhat
more formal function, with academic procession, was the Vesper
Service on the same day, followed at night by the Organ Recital, the
first exercise in the new open-air theatre. The day's program was as
follows:

Tuesday, May 31st

       

11.00 A.M.	Exercises in Commemoration of the Influence of the University of Virginia in the Religious Life of the Nation. Cabell Hall. Address by the Reverend William Alexander Barr, '92, D.D., Dean of Christ Church Cathedral, New Orleans. Invocation by Reverend B. F. Lipscomb, D.D., of Charlottesville
	The anthems were sung by the Albemarle Choral Club, directed by Arthur Fickenscher, Professor of Music, University of Virginia
6.00 P.M.	Vesper Services. Cabell Hall. Sermon by the Reverend Henry van Dyke, D.D., LL.D., D.C.L., Murray Professor of English Literature, Princeton University. Invocation by Reverend George L. Petrie, D.D., of Charlottesville. The music was by the Albemarle Choral Club, directed by Arthur Fickenscher, Professor of Music, University of Virginia
8.30 P.M.	Organ Recital, by Humphrey John Stewart, Mus.D., Municipal Organist of San Diego, dedicating the Amphitheatre, gift of Paul Goodloe McIntire ('79)

ADDRESSES ON THE FIRST DAY

RELIGION AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

By William Alexander Barr, D.D.

If by education is meant, in a general way, the enterprise of fitting the
youth of a country, through the medium of definite and directed effort, to
meet the issues of adult life in the most efficient and satisfactory manner:—
then we may say that educational methods were known to the ancient world.

Leaving apart such practices as obtained in behalf of the mental discipline
of the young among the early peoples of the Orient, we find formal
educational methods embedded in the very structure of the Greek and
Roman civilizations.

The Greek conception of the value of a man's life, in the most cultivated
centers like Athens, consisted in an estimate of his fitness to be of use to the
city-state. It was sought to effect this end through the study of art and
literature and the systematic training of his body through the means of
gymnastics.

In the earlier history of the Romans we find the attempts at education
much ruder and more insufficient, but as the empire grew in enlightenment
and power it borrowed much from the Greeks and, in its riper civilization,
developed a system of education. As however the Greek civilization was
already decadent, it proved to be the form rather than the spirit of its culture
which was taken over and the study of rhetoric and philosophy deteriorated
rather than advanced under their course of development.

When Christianity came into the world it confronted this decaying
civilization and its adherents not only hesitated but definitely questioned
the attitude they should assume towards the classical culture. Should they
use what they found as a medium for their own education and development,
or should the pagan culture be swept entirely aside as an evil thing and unworthy
of those to whom the true light had shined? But as is readily understood,
this question resolved itself. Christianity revealed at once its ability
to transfigure all that it touched, so that the commonest things, when penetrated
with its light, assumed a new beauty and a transcendent meaning.
In a very real sense, then, it was able to change the so-called "profane learning"
of the ancient world into sacred learning. From the first, too, Christianity
in its contact with the things of the world, betrayed an inherent
selective principle by means of which it was able to choose from the pagan
learning all that was fine and noble and reject what was unwholesome and
puerile. And thus it came about, in the process of time, that the little flock
entered into its kindgom: the Christian church became the patron of education
and scholarship and, under her guidance, great universities grew up
all over the world.

Centennial Medal

The Christian university has represented the highest type of education
as it has the best scholarship that the world has known. This eminence
that has been attained by Christian scholarship it is not difficult to account
for. That selective principle to which I have just referred accounts for
much. From the first, and all along its history, it has chosen the best of
that which was in the world and has shown the same wisdom in dealing with
the investigations that scholarship has been making all along its path. This
is particularly true of intellectual activity in the physical realm. With all
that has come to it in the nature of discovery it has been able to sift out that
which was of permanent worth and to reject that which was spurious or
ephemeral. Its mission in the intellectual world has been to prove all
things and to hold fast to that which was good. Out of the chaff it has perpetually
sifted the good, the beautiful and true and to those it has tenaciously
clung.

Moreover, Christianity was destined to work out the loftiest ideal of
scholarship because of its inherently progressive spirit. Just because it
carried with it the touchstone for determining what was good and true, it
could advance with perfect assurance upon all unexplored territory and thus
perpetually extend its body of knowledge. It made the intellectual enquirer
perfectly free. He felt himself in his Father's house where all things
were his because he was Christ's and Christ was God's. So he can still
always advance because he is freed from superstition and fear. His natural
attitude is one of looking forward. His is an inheritance of promise, of hope,
of expectancy. He is bidden to forget the things that are behind and reach
forward to the things that are before. Thus he is equipped for the highest
functions of scholarship in investigating, in testing, and in classifying and
arranging. He works with his face towards the sunrise. He is thrilled not
so much with what has been as with what shall be. He realizes that his is a
flying goal. His is the inspiration of an abiding vision of the revelation of
new truth, of the unfolding vistas of new fields of knowledge.

But while the eager and fearless forward gaze has been the glory of
Christian scholarship, it has preserved along with it a due reverence for the
past and a just appreciation of its value to the present. And any so-called
scholarship that would entirely break with the past and disregard its estimates
must eventually become frivolous and fantastic. It is self-evident in
any specific department of intellectual discipline, as in mathematics for
example, that the profoundest genius of the world could make no worthy
contribution to the advancement of the science if he declined to treat with
the findings of the past and undertook to build up for himself the whole
fabric from its foundation. Even if one possessed the necessary faculty,
life is all too short for the accomplishment of such a task. It is in accepting
the results of the past that one makes true progress in the present. The

same thing is true, of course, as to scholarship in general. It is by picking
up the standard where our predecessors have dropped it that we may hope
to carry it some distance towards the heights of victory. The best scholarship
is then wisely conservative as it is fearlessly progressive. It reflects
that the present has its roots in the past and that it must always be interpreted
in the light of that past. The face is indeed turned to the future, but
all the while the feet are planted firmly upon the past.

So long then as scholarship is Christian it will be characterized by true
conservatism. In this it only profits by its earliest lesson, that we press
most effectively towards the future prize as we cherish the precious inheritance
of those who have wrought in the light that shines in Him who lived
and died for men.

It is this Christian scholarship that has found its expression in the
universities that have existed over the world for hundreds of years, and it
was for the advancement of Christian scholarship and Christian education
that universities grew up in this country. Indeed the oldest of our universities
had their beginnings as denominational colleges. It was chiefly for the
training of their own ministry that they were brought into being.

Thomas Jefferson, however, entertained a broader conception of what
a university should be. He thought it should be carried on under the
auspices of the state and minister to the educational needs of all the people
without regard to any religious distinctions whatever. In his proposal for
a university, he aimed no blow at any religious influence that might be
fostered by it. The blow was at sectarianism only: at the religious tests
and shibboleths which he conceived as obstructing the most effective work
of an educational institution. Surprise has sometimes been expressed that
there should have existed at any time, among the people, the impression
that the University of Virginia was irreligious or even non-religious in its
character. But under the circumstances it could hardly have been otherwise.
Jefferson was known to be liberal in his religious views and, a hundred years
ago, Liberalism carried with it the suspicion of practical unbelief. A hundred
years ago, moreover, impatience with sectarianism was easily interpreted
as a want of sympathy with the Christian Faith itself. The founder
of the University himself complained of the report that the influences of the
institution were opposed to all religion and called it a calumny. Let us
believe, however, that it was through no vicious motive that such charges
became current, but through a misunderstanding of the freedom and toleration
which were contemplated in all matters of religion.

As a matter of fact we know that so far as concerns the religious influence
of this institution, from its very inception the wind has always
blown in a single direction. In his plans Mr. Jefferson himself suggested
that there should be space for a building to be used for religious worship

under what he called "impartial regulation." In the meantime two of the
best rooms in the main building were to be set apart for the purpose.

Here then, at the very outset, he not only revealed his sympathy with
religious influence, but set the stamp of his approval upon the provision by
the state of a place and equipment for religious worship. As a matter of fact
such an engagement was entered into by the state. It was fulfilled in something
of a round-about way, providing first for a room in the building and
later, in lieu of the permanent provision of a building, making a fixed contribution
to the expenses incident to maintaining stated services.

Mr. Jefferson insisted only that the whole affair of the religious activity
of the University should be wholly voluntary. Religious services were to be
sustained by free-will contributions and no one was to be compelled to attend
such services. All was to be left to the individual conscience. But it
must not be overlooked that he went out of his way to say that every reasonable
influence might be exerted to persuade the young men to avail
themselves of these privileges which would "instil in them the principles of
virtue."

While on this subject let me take occasion to say that by this time it
should be known far beyond the confines of this university that Mr. Jefferson
expressed the hope that the various religious bodies would establish
theological seminaries in the neighborhood. In this he thought of the benefit
they might derive from the use of the University library as well as its courses
and scholastic functions; as also the mutual uplift to be realized through the
interpenetration of the faculties and students.

This suggestion was but another indication of that shrewd practical
sense that marked the great statesman. The Presbyterians of the North
know only too well the advantage that has inured to them through the long
affiliation of their seminary with Princeton University. In the same way,
Union Seminary in New York profits immeasurably from its proximity to
Columbia University and its terms of reciprocity with that institution.
And who can doubt that if this suggestion had been heeded there would
have grown up here a great community to shed luster incalculable upon the
church, the state, and the general cause of education? But while this hint
was not acted on, his general religious attitude became rooted in the consciousness
of the institution.

Under any circumstances, in its past history the University of Virginia
could never have been anti-Christian or even non-Christian. It was essentially
Virginian and Virginia has been a Christian commonwealth. Indeed
the whole Southern people were practically a Christian people and out of
Christian homes and Christian churches came the men who thronged its
halls. But be it repeated once again, from the beginning there was no
attempt to discourage religion, but only to make it free. In this respect the

earliest wishes have been realized. Throughout the whole history of the
religious activities of the University of Virginia they have been a free-will
service.

The earliest devotional exercises of which we hear are the prayer-meetings
that were held in the various pavilions of the faculty. The University
was formally opened in 1825 and these prayer-meetings must have been
inaugurated, if not at the opening, at least in no very long time thereafter.
But the matter of regular religious services at the University became a
growing concern with the members of the faculty and three years after the
formal opening, that is to say in 1828, they made an appeal, not as an organized
body but as individuals, to the pastors of the several churches in
Charlottesville. The latter consented to arrange a system of weekly services
and accordingly, in the same room in the rotunda that was used for lectures
in law, mathematics and languages, these pastors, so far as we know, faithfully
fulfilled their agreement as best they could with very inadequate
provision.

As time went on, however, those most interested felt that the system
was inadequate to the needs of the institution and determined upon the
voluntary support of a chaplain who should give all his time and strength
to a University ministry. He was called for a period of one year when he
was obliged to give place to a representative of a denomination other than
his own. Up to the year 1837 they continued to use the same room in the
Rotunda. But in that year, upon the vote of those interested, one of the
professors drew up a petition which set forth not only the desirability of a
building suitable for religious purposes, but also declared that this poorly
equipped room could accommodate not more than half of the student body.
For some reason this petition failed of presentation to the Board, but it is
supposed that its contents became known. At all events during that year
the south-east room of the Rotunda was converted into a chapel.

From the year 1833 to that of 1848 chaplains continued to serve each
for a single year. They were carefully taken in order from the four denominations
of the State, that is to say from the Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian
and Episcopal. In the latter year the term of service was made
two years instead of one. So these four churches supplied the chaplains in
order down to the year 1896. In the fall of that year the chaplain-elect
conducted one service which proved his last as well as his first: he was overtaken
by death in the following week. This unexpected issue was the
occasion for discontinuing the old system. In that year it was abandoned
for another.

When one considers what must have been an inherent difficulty in finding
good men who were willing to fall out of line in their own churches to
accept the chaplaincy for so short a term, it is surprising that the system

yielded results so satisfactory through the long period of sixty-three years.
Few mistakes appear to have been made and these not of great moment.
On the whole they formed a long line of intelligent and consecrated men and
in not a few instances their high character and gracious influence abide to
this day as a delightful tradition in the life of the University. For many
years the beautiful church on the lawn, erected by voluntary contributions,
has stood as a monument to the service of the chaplains and the free-will
method of religious endeavor in this institution of learning.

But the history of the progress of religious worship in this university
cannot be appreciated without reference to a particular movement which
had its rise as early as 1858. I refer to the organization of a branch of the
Young Men's Christian Association.

That was a year in which the religious feeling was greatly quickened
among Christian communities over the world. This had extended to the
churches in Charlottesville and had been much felt among the students of
the University. Previous to this epoch there had existed an organization
among the students known as the "Society of Missionary Inquiry." The
avowed aim of this society was not only the cultivation of the Christian
graces in its members, but also the furtherance of genuine missionary activity.
So for a number of years prior to the formation of the Young Men's
Christian Association, student prayer-meetings, initiated and maintained
through their own efforts, were held regularly on Sunday afternoons: a
Sunday school for white children and one for negroes were kept up in the
college buildings and the students went out into the Ragged Mountains, to
the county Poorhouse and other places to conduct Sunday schools and teach
religion as occasion might offer. The society under which these activities
went forward, rather seemed to regard itself as a branch of the work of the
college chaplain, feeling responsible to him as its head and looking to him
for approval.

But for a considerable time it had been felt that the various religious
activities might be better coördinated and the avenues for usefulness multiplied
by the organization of a college branch of that fellowship among
young men which was already becoming well known in the life of many of
the larger cities of England and America. It was in the early summer of
1858 that several meetings were held with this interest in view and in the
opening of the ensuing college year, the first college branch of the Young
Men's Christian Association was launched. That it was indeed the first
has, I think, been conclusively shown in the paper of Dr. Hugh McIlhany
on the subject which was published some years ago. In the case of the rival
claim it was found that the society in question became a part of the Young
Men's Christian Association only in recent years. For many years it was
but a college religious society such as existed in numerous institutions. But

at this place it was formally determined to take the first step in this direction.
The constitutions of the Associations of London and Boston were secured
and with them as models the constitution of this branch was carefully drawn.
The object of the Association, as stated in this constitution, was "the
improvement of the spiritual condition of the students and the securing of
religious advantages to the destitute points in the neighborhood of the
University." Its organization seemed to prove effective from the first. It
provided for a "standing committee," consisting of twenty members at
the least. These were selected from the various boarding houses of the
University and, in the words used by the Association itself, they were expected
to "exert themselves to interest their respective districts in the
objects of the Association and labor to induce all suitable young men to
connect themselves with it; to endeavor to bring their fellow students under
moral and religious influences by securing their attendance at prayer meetings,
and also to take in charge all contributions for benevolent objects."

The early history of the Association shows remarkable prosperity. In
no long time the attendance upon the religious exercises had increased to a
wonderful degree and each Sunday found as many as fifty young men
actively engaged in the Sunday schools round about or in missionary work
in the surrounding country. For the first two years its enrollment was large
and in these early days it opened a library for general use. From the first
it commanded the adherence of students whose character and ability gave
them influence in the University community. Very soon after its organization
its career was sorely disheveled by the shock of the Civil War. During
those awful years the fires at the Institution almost went out. But through
them all the flame of the Young Men's Christian Association, though flickering,
continued to burn, and when the halls of the University filled up again,
it was ready to renew its life in the various activities it had originally undertaken.
Through many years it held on its course and influenced for good
the young lives that were touched by it. Naturally as to its position and
influence amid the changing scenes of university life, it met with vicissitudes.
But eventually, in the providence of God, the evolution of circumstances
placed it upon a permanent base and gave to it a commanding eminence.

The voluntary system of worship, with its chaplains in residence, had
resulted in the erection on the grounds of a church building between the
years 1883 and 1885. After the building of this chapel the same system
continued in force up to the year 1896. We have seen that in that year the
chaplain who had just been elected and was beginning his term, suddenly
died. As this event left no chaplain either in fact or in prospect, the thought
of those in authority recurred easily to a subject which had been under consideration
at various times, and it was finally determined to follow the
example of many other institutions by calling a young man to be Secretary

of the Young Men's Christian Association and at the same time to act as a
sort of college pastor and to arrange for Sunday chapel services by clergymen
invited from a distance.

In the fall of 1900 was begun the practice of keeping the visiting clergymen
in residence for the period of a month instead of a single Sunday. I
recall that it was my privilege to inaugurate this experiment in spending
here the opening month of that session. Two services were held each
Sunday in the chapel and, in the same place we had prayers every afternoon
in the week at five o'clock. During the week I had the opportunity of mingling
familiarly with faculty and students. As I look back through the years
I am conscious that among the large number of happy visits made to this
greatly loved spot, the memory of none is more tenderly cherished than of
this one to which I advert. I believe, however, that the difficulty encountered
in finding men who could arrange their affairs so as to make so protracted
a stay was very great and the undertaking did not long survive.

In 1896, then, instead of securing a chaplain to replace the one who had
died, the first General Secretary of the Young Men's Christian Association
was called. From this period the organization entered upon a more vigorous
life than it had ever known and assumed a new position of influence among
the students of the University.

In 1902 the late Dr. Hugh McIlhany was travelling Secretary for the
International Committee of the Young Men's Christian Association. He
became much interested in the University Branch, conceiving that it occupied
a position of peculiar importance. The subject of a concentrated and
sustained effort to provide a suitable and worthy building had already been
broached and, a vacancy occurring at this time in the office of local Secretary,
he was glad to accept the position and entered upon a period of five
years of fine and fruitful service. Several acres of favorably situated land
had already been secured for this purpose. Through the persistent effort of
the new Secretary in availing himself of the influence of persons prominent
in the operations of college associations, in no very long time Madison Hall
arose, beautiful to the eye and invaluable for its end. This building was the
gift of Mrs. William E. Dodge, of New York. It was dedicated on October
18, 1905, on which occasion the invocation and benediction were offered by
men who were of the founders of the Association in 1858. Nothing in the
construction and equipment of this building was left undone that could
contribute to its efficiency in serving the purposes it was designed to fulfill.
It was opened with a library of one thousand well-selected volumes.

As was expected, this building became at once the religious headquarters
of the University and it has served a noble purpose during the years
of its existence. While complaint may at times be made that the growing
power and position of the Young Men's Christian Association have interfered

with the religious activity connected with the chapel, yet we fancy no
one would care to reëstablish that activity if the price demanded were the
lessening of the efficiency of the work represented by Madison Hall.

It should be mentioned in passing that in October, 1908, the fiftieth
anniversary of the creation of the University Young Men's Christian Association
was impressively celebrated. Thirty of the original members still
survived in that year and nine of them were able to be present and participate
in the ceremonies of the occasion. In the morning a sermon was
preached on the benefits of coöperation as exemplified in the Young Men's
Christian Association, and following the sermon an historical sketch of the
Association was read. At four o'clock in the afternoon a service of song was
held in Madison Hall at which brief addresses were made by various representative
persons. In the same place in the evening was held a service
reminiscent in its character at which addresses were made and letters were
read from old members who were unable to be present. On Monday morning
a service was held in the old post-office building which was originally
Temperance Hall. It was in one of the upper rooms of this building that the
University Branch was organized in 1858. And here was photographed a
group of the founders in attendance.

But no survey of the history of religious influence at the University
would be adequate without attention to one of the most significant of its
movements: a movement which resulted in the establishment of a school of
Biblical Literature as a constituent part of the institution.

As far back as the year 1892 a missionary board of one of our denominations
began the execution of an idea with which it had been for some time
concerned. It provided funds to sustain a so-called "Bible Lectureship" at
the University of Michigan. This was in pursuance of the purpose of establishing
such lectureships at state universities in general. Unless I am
mistaken only four of these came into existence and, in order of time, the
University of Virginia was second. This lectureship simply threw a competent
Bible instructor into the institution to go at his own charges and find
subjects for tuition as best he could. It could do no more. State universities
not only declined to make any provision for the study of the Bible, but
some of them had direct legislation against it. It was found by those who
had the work in hand that students who were driven from day to day with
work required by those who would win degrees, had to be extraordinarily
earnest if they were to choose voluntary study no matter what the nature,
where it would require regular appointments and count for nothing upon
their college work. However it may have been at other places where the
experiment was tried, it is certain that the results of the lectureship at this
university were not such as to encourage the lecturer or those most interested
in the outcome of the effort. As a consequence the friends of the movement,

within a few years, fell vigorously to work to transform this lectureship into
a professor's chair. At the outset and on its face this enterprise seemed
almost fantastic, but in the event, through the generosity of friends combined
with the liberal policy of the Board which had given the lectureship, a
fund was raised for the endowment of this chair. In 1909 final steps were
taken to make it one of the regular schools. As in the case of the other
schools, its work is elective, but like them also this work is accepted in the
attainment of a degree. The history of this chair has been one of growing
prosperity and popularity. Its courses are open to graduates as well as those
of the academic schools and, as the incumbent is told upon his induction
that it is desired that he conduct, under the auspices of the Young Men's
Christian Association or otherwise, Bible classes for those unable to take the
regular work, it will be seen that every facility is provided for those who wish
to study the Bible. Indeed if a student wants nothing to do with the Bible
it may be said that he is obliged to go a long way around in order to avoid it.

May it not be said, in the same way, that throughout the whole career
of this university, if a student has wanted no contact with religion, he has
been compelled to go a long way around in order to avoid it. For to the
influence of those activities that have been described must be added that of
the many members of the faculty who have been shining lights in their
generation and have made these walls more sacred because they lived and
wrought in them. Many of them not only exhaled the atmosphere of a life
hid with Christ in God, but they spoke the words of this life with power.
Across the years there come to us the voices of McGuffey and Cabell, of
Minor and the Davises, of  Kent  and others as those of great defenders of the
truth and distinguished preachers of righteousness.

In this address I have refrained from the mention of individual names
excepting where they were virtually necessary to the story. And this
because I felt that time would fail me to tell of the valiant part played by
the many heroes of our history. But as we touch the subject of the Christian
influence of members of the faculty, I may be permitted to speak of one who
as student and teacher has been with his Alma Mater through the greater
part of her history, who has seen generation after generation as they came
and went and whose presence in the evening of life continues to be the benediction
it has always been. None who has been associated for long with the
University but has been glad that it was given him to know Dr. Francis
Smith.

A tree is known by its fruit and we believe that in their attitude towards
religion the alumni of the University of Virginia are hardly behind those of
other educational institutions. They have occupied positions of eminence
in all the walks of life and frequently have been as marked for their Christian
allegiance as their intellectual ascendency. Large numbers of them, moreover,

have occupied places of honor and leadership in the various branches
of the Christian ministry and have gone with the Gospel to all the corners of
the globe. From China and Japan, from India and Africa and from the
islands of the sea rise the voices of devoted men and true who hail this university
as their Alma Mater. Truly her voices is everywhere heard and her
line has gone out into all the world.

Let us pray for her prosperity and peace. May she be in the future, as
in the past, a city set on a hill. May she so command the devotion of her
sons that her efficiency shall be greatly increased. Above all, by God's good
grace may she so keep her gaze fixed upon the hills from whence cometh her
help that in the future, as in the past, there may issue from her many streams
to make glad the city of God.

A PROPHECY OF AMERICA

By Henry van Dyke, D.D., LL.D., D.C.L.

And their nobles shall be of themselves, and their Governor shall proceed
from the midst of them. Jer. 30: 21.

This prophecy of a divine charter for democracy has been strikingly
fulfilled in the history of the United States of America. Twenty-eight
Presidents have led the republic, all good men, and several of them great
men,—a better record than any royal house can show for the same period.

This proves that the so-called divine authority of kings is certainly not
superior to the providential guidance of the people's choice in producing
worthy rulers. Doubters of democracy, take note! Popular election is not
an infallible method. But for the highest office it works better than the
mechanism of princely marriages.

Another thing about the Presidents of the United States is significant
and not generally known. Every one of them, with a single exception, has
come from pre-revolutionary American stock,—those plain people who
crossed the ocean when a voyage meant more than a mild adventure in seasickness,
to face the perils of a vast wilderness, and to win liberty and
living for themselves and their children.

This proves that though our country may have become to some extent
a "melting-pot," the American hand and spirit still direct the process of
fusion. So may it be until by common education and united work the last
hyphen is melted out, and a mighty people emerges owing an undivided
allegiance to America and to God!

Of all our Presidents not one was more emphatically American than
Thomas Jefferson. He has been called the "Father of Democracy." He
would have preferred, I think, to be called its son. Born of its blood and

Academic Procession to Vespers, First Day of Centennial

nursed upon its milk, he was a lover and a leader, a truster and a defender
of the plain people of his land.

True, he also loved France. But from 1776 to 1921, a grateful love of
France has been one of the qualities of real Americanism.

True, he was an educated man, familiar with the philosophy of liberty,
and well-read in its ancient and modern literature. But it was not from
books that he drew his faith. It was from the soil whence he sprang and the
folks among whom he was bred and brought up. Contact with them enlightened
him, convinced him, inspired him. He knew that they were trustworthy,
fit to rule themselves, and he was determined that they should do so.
For their liberties he was willing to fight, in time of war, against foreign
oppression. For their rights he was willing to contend and work in time of
peace, against domestic oligarchy and the domination of the money power.

It was on this issue that he came to the presidential chair, and for this
he was mistrusted and abused by those who were not liberal enough to
understand that, in a free country, the only conservative force is an equalhanded
justice. Popular government; no class privileges; personal liberty
within the bounds of common order; home rule for all the States, not separate
but indissolubly united; a nation strong by virtue of the strength of its
component parts; sound finance instead of kiting; trade not stifled by artificial
barriers; and peace, so far as in us lies, with all mankind,—these were
Jefferson's ideas. By them he led the young Republic for eight years, and
gave to her future course a direction which, pray God, will never be permanently
altered.

He was an idealist, of course. All our great Presidents have been that,
and all of them have been reproached for it. But somehow or other these
idealists, men of the tribe of that dreamer Joseph, have had the faculty of
making many of their dreams come true. And if by reason of the jealousy
of their brethren they do not realize at once all their lofty ideals, they have at
least the knowledge that heavenly lights have shone upon them:

Without the vision the people perish. Our true leaders have not been controlled
by narrow considerations of self-interest, but by the loftier view of a
"People guided by an exalted justice and benevolence," by the larger hope
of "America first," not only in wealth and power, but also in the councils
of the nations for the peace of the world. This has been the star of our
Presidents from Washington to Wilson. This we trust will be the leading
light of our present honored Chief Magistrate.

The positive and practical achievements of Thomas Jefferson are not

always remembered. Careless of his own fortune to the point of negligence,
he had an ideal of financial integrity and solvency for his country by virtue
of which he was able to pay off thirty-three million dollars of public debt,—
a sum as large for those days and conditions as thirty-three billion would
be for the United States of to-day. He had a vision of what he called "an
Empire for Liberty," and by the peaceful means of purchase he expanded
our national territory from the Alleghanies to the Rocky Mountains, from
the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico. He was the first to propose a League
of Nations to enforce peace in the Mediterranean, and, though his scheme
did not go through as planned, he was also the first to send an American fleet
into foreign waters to put down the pirates of North Africa. He said truly,
"Peace is our passion," and therefore he was willing to fight in its defense.
He was opposed to "entangling alliances," because he wanted something
larger,—a coöperation of all nations for the good of the world and the
progress of mankind.

Such were the ideals and aspirations of this eager and enthusiastic man.
If he sometimes made mistakes in working them out, that was only human.
It is better to be sometimes mistaken than to be all the time dead.

Let us turn now for a moment to consider the three things by which he
desired to be remembered: that he wrote the Declaration of Independence,
and the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom, and that he was the Father
of the University of Virginia.

Mark you, these are in a way very simple things. They are not glittering
political or military victories; they are triumphs in the realm of the spirit;
they are pure offerings on the altar of Liberty.

Mark also, and mark it well, they are not disconnected and haphazard
things. They are closely and inevitably woven together in the unity of the
spirit and the bond of peace. They are made of one stuff and dedicated to
one purpose.

The Declaration of Independence is a profoundly religious document;
a gospel of human rights as conferred by God, and therefore inalienable, and
a definition of human government as deriving its divine authority from the
protection of those God-given rights.

But how shall men understand their rights and learn how to use them
wisely in harmony with the rights of others, unless they are taught to see
clearly, to reason rightly, and to will nobly? Popular education is the first
and greatest need of a republic. Without wisdom and discretion the sovereign
people are but as a flock of sheep or a drove of wild asses. Therefore
he that supports schools and establishes colleges is a strengthener of the
foundations of democracy.

But that will not be so if education is controlled and dominated by external
authority, by the enactments of political senates or the decrees of

ecclesiastical councils. The mind of man must be free to seek, to find, to
embrace and to follow the truth, by observation in science, by reasoning in
philosophy and government, and by conscience in religion. There is no
other way, nor is there need of any other. An opinion enforced is a foreign
body in the mind and never becomes part of it. A creed imposed is a treason
to faith, a mockery of piety, and an offense to God. He has seen fit, in His
great school of life, to make religion an optional course and worship a voluntary
exercise. Therefore religious liberty is essential to the doctrine of
Christ, who said, "if any man will come after me let him deny himself, and
take up his cross, and follow me." Jesus would have only willing disciples,
and to them He promises, "Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall
make you free."

My brethren, the fundamental convictions of Jefferson are in harmony
with the spirit of Christianity, which is a democracy of souls under the
sovereignty of God and the leadership of Christ. In these latter days we
have special need to revive these convictions and hold them fast, for the
safety of the republic and the welfare of religion.

Secret and dangerous heresies are at work in our times. We are in peril
of forgetting that the main object of government is not the imposition of
national uniformity, but the protection of the individual in his rights of life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We are in peril of forgetting the
supreme importance of common education in a democratic state. With our
lips we do reverence to it, but in our deeds we are apostates. We are spending
more for fleets and armies than for schools and colleges. We are paying
our plumbers and carpenters more than our teachers. We are blindly allowing
a generation, white and colored, to grow up on our land, ten per cent. of
whom can neither read nor write, and forty per cent. of whom have no real
conception of the fundamental rights and duties of freemen. The republic
is not safe under such conditions. To breed ignorance is to beget disaster.
We must reverse our course. We must devote more of our wealth and effort
to the education of our people than to any other national purpose. We must
cultivate "preparedness" not only for the exceptional emergency of war, but
also and more resolutely for the permanent and normal demands of peace.
We must build our national defenses in the character and intelligence of our
young manhood and womanhood. The pestilent diseases of Bergdollism and
Brindellism must be extirpated. Not only our schools and universities but
also our homes must be places of training for the serious responsibilities of
American citizenship. Fathers and mothers, as well as teachers must take
their part in the building of those living, spiritual bulwarks of enlightenment
and patriotism by which alone our country can be safeguarded from the
ruinous revolts of ignorance, the bold assaults of demagogues, and the insidious
usurpations of gilded arrogance.

And what of religion, that sustaining and restraining power, that sense
of a personal relationship between man and God which ennobles every daily
duty and inspires every noble sacrifice? Never has our country needed it,—
pure, potent, undefiled,—more than she needs it to-day. Materialism,—
wealth—worship in the form of pride or in the form of envy,—ungodly
devotion to the things that perish in the using is the vice of the age and the
enemy of the republic. Without religion democracy is doomed.

But how shall we revive religion, how sustain and spread it? By
authority and power, by pains and penalties for unbelief, by stricter censorship
of opinions and conduct, by compulsory worship and blue law Sundays?
Nay, beloved, never was faith fostered, nor church prospered, by such
means. "Conscience is God's province." With the first table of the Ten
Commandments civil government has nothing to do; only with the second
table is it concerned. What man does to his fellowman law may regulate;
how he stands with God is his own affair. Sunday is a beautiful park wherein
the state keeps order that the people may find rest: the Sabbath is a holy
Temple in the park, wherein those who will may enter to find the joy of
worship.

My friends, what we need is not less devotion to Christianity, but more
confidence in it. It is not a weakling demanding shelter, nourishment,
propaganda from the state. It is a vigorous, God-reliant religion, manly in
its strength, womanly in its tenderness, sure that Christ is the love of God
and the power of God unto salvation. It was born in the open air; it was
taught on the lake-shore and the mountain-side; it travelled the dusty road
on foot and clasped hands with every seeker after God; its supreme, triumphant
sacrifice was offered on a green hill, beneath the blue sky, among
sinners and for their sake. Get back to that, tell men that, live by that, and
Christianity will revive to bless democracy and make it safe for the world.