Columbia Theological Seminary Bulletin, 3, number 1, July 1910

BULLETIN

OF

Wcp ^ologtral ^mttrarg

OF THE

0jjttii&0 of &tm\\\ (Earolttta

(gwtrgta, Alabama anb

3Uonna

LOCATED AT

(Holnmbta, &mx\\\ Carolina

A Nntabb Sworb

Published Quarterly by the Board of Directors

of the Theological Seminary

of the

Synods of South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Alabama of the

Presbyterian Church in the United States

Vol. 3. JULY, J9J0 No. J,

[Entered as Second Class Matter July 11. 1908. at the Postoffiee at
Columbia. S. C. under the Act of July 16, 1894]

COLUMBIA SEMINARY

A Retrospect

Involving a Responsibility

Its Local This institution is, at present, the joint prop-

Habitation erty of the Synods of South Carolina,
Georgia, Alabama and Florida. It is now
in its 82d year. It is located in the beautiful and historic
capital of South Carolina. Columbia is situated on heights
overlooking the Congaree. It is noted for the salubrity of
its climate, and for the intelligence and refinement of its
people. Latterly it has entered upon what promises to be- a
career of steady if not, indeed, of even phenomenal develop-
ment. The establishment of large manufacturing enter-
prises in the various suburbs of the city means, not only
increased material prosperity for the city, but enlarged
opportunities for mission work by the students of the
Seminary.

Retrospect

Our retrospect will concern itself with exhibiting the aims
and hopes of those who founded the Seminary; and with
inquiring how far these aims and hopes have been realized,
or the reverse.

The Situation in 1828

An Urgent ^ e Seminary formally opened its doors in
Call the year 1828. It was the practical recogni-

tion, by the fathers of that day, of the fact
that they owed something to their own generation and
something also to those who were to come after them.
Looking around them, they saw even then fields white
to the harvest. An increasing population with pressing
spiritual needs was filling the boundaries both of South

Carolina and Georgia. Looking ahead of them into the
future, the fathers of that day foresaw that time would
make the call for efficient laborers in this field only the more
urgent.* Their children, even then, had begun to turn their
eyes westward. The States of Alabama, Mississippi and
Louisiana were being settled by those whose antecedents
were in South Carolina and Georgia. The Christian people
of these two States not unnaturally followed with eager
interest not only the material, but also the spiritual progress
of those who had gone out from them, and were still of
them.

A Worthy ^ e l uest i on * a supply of suitable laborers

Response to overtake the great destitutions existing on

every hand, was a question which at that time
was being eagerly canvassed all along the Atlantic coast.
Princeton, was the answer given by those living in the
Northern tier of States. Union Seminary, in Virginia, was
the answer given by those in the Middle tier. Those living
in the Southern tier felt that the answers given by their
brethren to the north of them would be not a sufficient
answer for the question as it confronted them. They knew
that no other section of the church could appreciate their
needs as they themselves did. It required no great insight
for them to perceive that no section of the church could be
expected to send their best men to supply these needs. Any
supply coming from either Princeton or Union Seminaries
must be drawn, for the most part, either from the surplus or
from the inefficients of these institutions. The latter, of
course, they did not wish. And at a time when the needs of
all were so pressing, the former seemed a far too uncertain
source of supply, f The fathers of 1828 felt that the tier

*In 1830 the total population of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama and
Florida was 1,625,265. In 1900 it was 5,913,886. Today it must be
nearly 7,000,000. In 1828 there were only 8,583 in the Synod of South
Carolina and Georgia. Today in the four Synods there are 67,562
communicants.

fBetween 1889 and 1904 there were 139 candidates from the Synod of
Virginia at Union Seminary. During that period 123 of the graduates
of that institution on leaving the Seminary settled in the Synod of Vir-

of States beginning with South Carolina, in the extreme
east, and extending westward through Georgia, Alabama,
Mississippi, Louisiana, and across "the Father of Waters,"
needed both more and better laborers than they could
reasonably expect would be raised up for them and sent to
them from other sections of the church. They were not
animated by any sense of a lack of solidarity between them-
selves and their brethren to the north of them. They were
one with these brethren in heart and mind. It was because
they felt their unity with them that they felt their respon-
sibility to help them meet the exigencies which were upon
the church, as a whole. They believed that they could
render this help most efficiently by doing for the territory
contiguous to themselves what the brethren who founded
Princeton, in New Jersey, and Union Seminary, in Virginia,
were attempting to do for the territory contiguous to them.
They believed that the best way to help on the work in the
other parts of the church was by helping themselves. Hence
they determined to pay their debt to their own generation
by building the wall over against their own house : and to
pay their debt to the future by leaving to those who should
come after them not only the actual fruit of their labors,
but the instruction and inspiration of their example. This
is not conjecture. It is history. Let us see.

Aims and Hopes of Founders

The first direct reference that I find to the aims and hopes
of those who founded Columbia Seminary occurs in the
narrative of the Synod of South Carolina and Georgia for
the year 1832. This was four years after the Seminary
opened its doors. The language referred to reads as
follows :

ginia and 18 candidates from that Synod went as foreign missionaries.
In other words, during that period of fifteen years the candidates from
the Synod of Virginia were not enough to supply ministers for its own
churches. Of course, it had none to spare to supply the destitutions of
other Synods.

T b Prin- "** 1S t0 ^ ^P e( ^ t ^ iat ^ e P^od 1S not ^ ar
cipal Source distant, when the school of the prophets to
of Ministerial which principally our Churches look for the
Supply successors of those who are removed from

the Ministry by death for the Pastors who
are to break the bread of life among our numerous Misap-
plied Churches, shall be so amply furnished by Christian
liberality with the means of imparting a complete Theo-
logical Education, that it shall not be behind similar institu-
tions to which the Churches in other parts of our land look
for their spiritual guides."

The same ideas are not obscurely hinted at in this language
found in the narrative of 1834 :

First Fruits "And it is not a small accession to the number
An Earnest of our Ministers, to have ten more young,
vigorous, intelligent, zealous and well fur-
nished for the work, ready to co-operate with those who
have borne the burden and heat of the day. The Synod
will doubtless hail with rejoicing this addition to their
effective force. And as these are the first fruits of an
institution which they have established and cherished and
sustained, they will be regarded as only an earnest of a
more ample supply of able and faithful heralds of the
cross/'

Perfectly unambiguous and directly to the point is the
following statement :

A Matter "-^ * s a matter f vital importance to our

Well Settled church to sustain this institution by their
prayers and contributions; for the necessity
is laid upon us now, more than ever, to maintain our own
sacred and literary institutions, and educate our youth at
home* The Seminary has in connection with it at the

*Between 1889 and 1909 the Synod of South Carolina sent twenty-four
of its candidates to Princeton. Of these, four became foreign mis-
sionaries. Of the remaining twenty, fourteen have never labored a
single year in South Carolina, and ten not a single year in any of the
four Synods controlling Columbia Seminary. Seven have entered the
Presbyterian Church, U. S. A. During the same twenty-year period,
thirteen candidates from South Carolina graduated from Union Sem-

6

present time, so far as our information extends, every
student of Theology within the bounds of the two Synods,
with an exception of two in South Carolina, and one in
Hopewell. f The fewness of Theological students is a
remarkable and affecting fact which well deserves the atten-
tion of our Ministers, our Elders, and our church members.
Without an increase of our ministry, how can our destitu-
tions ever be supplied? The matter is well settled, zve
cannot look for much aid beyond our own bounds"*

More significant still, if possible, is the following from
the report of the Board of Directors in 1841 :

First and "^ * s seventeen years since the Presbtyery

Chiefly a Well of South Carolina first resolved on the estab-
Qualified lisriment of a Literary and Theological Insti-

Ministry tution within its own bounds. The impelling

motives seem to have been a desire to raise
up a well qualified Ministry to supply the destitutions of the
Church, and to provide an institution for the education of
their sons, free from the skeptical influences which then
pervaded the College of the State; and in which piety and
learning should be blended in delightful harmony- but first,
and chiefly, to raise up a native ministry, well qualified to
preside over the Churches already gathered, and to extend
the bounds of our Zion."

Alms and Omitting matters of interest upon which I

Hopes of have elsewhere touched, I think we' may

Founders fairly assert that Columbia Seminary was

but the concrete expression of a deep-rooted
conviction that such an institution was in the interest of the
Presbyterian Church, as a whole, and absolutely indispen-
sable to the best interests of that particular portion of the
Presbyterian Church located in the tier of States beginning
with South Carolina in the East, and terminating with

inary, Virginia. Of this number one became a foreign missionary and
ten have never labored for a single year in any of the four Synods
which Columbia Seminary was founded to foster.

fCompare the figures given above. *

*Do not the facts cited above confirm this statement?

Louisiana and Texas in the West. It was established in
the hope and with the expectation that it would raise up
from the Churches in these States a ministry for the
Churches in these States. Its founders believed that its
mere presence within this territory would serve to direct the-
attention of many promising and worthy men to the min-
istry, who would otherwise not enter it at all. It was
founded upon the conviction that this part of our common
Church would have, under God, to look largely to itself for
the adequate supply of its ministerial, as well as its other
needs.

Results

Ha e Results ^* us now turn anc * cons ^ er tne other ques-
Justifled Their tion proposed at the outset: Has the institu-
Conviction? tion realized or has it disappointed the aims
and expectations of those who founded it?
Have the results justified the pertinacity with which those
charged with the maintenance of the institution have
' refused every inducement from without and every tempta-
tion from within, to turn over to other hands the work upon
which they had entered, and to look to some other source
for a supply of ministers for the Churches within this terri-
tory? Again, let history answer.

On turning to the Minutes of the Synod of South Caro-
lina for the year '39 (p. 14), we find the following entry:

A Statement "** 1S num ^ n nature to be attracted by that
Worth which is near. And the very establishment

Pondering f f%{ s Seminary has been the direct means
of bringing into the ministry tzvice the
number that would have entered it had they been left
without this institution in their vicinity to awaken their
attention to the subject. But move it five or six hundred
miles off, and it is to be feared that the result would be
disastrous."

This is not the language of disappointment. If the facts
stated are correctly stated, there was no room for disap-

8

pointment. Nor is the following the language of those who
felt, that their reasonable expectations had failed of realiza-
tion :

More Than "Since the commencement of the Seminary
Thirty-Three in 1831, eighty students have, in whole or in
Per Cent, in part, received their Theological education
Years within its walls. Of the whole number,

seven have departed this life. Five have
failed through ill health to enter the ministry; twenty-one
are laboring in other Synods; and six have become sepa-
rated from us in the division of the Church ; and forty-one
are now connected with our Synod, being considerably more
than one-third of its whole number. Many of these young
brethren, had the Seminary not been in existence, would
have entered the ministry after a very partial course of
study, and some perhaps would not have entered it at all."
And just a little further on we read :

"Our Seminary is steadily but slowly increasing. We
have thirty-five more ministers than we had in 1829. "

Service to Church as a Whole

Answering This, however, is but a very partial answer
Facts to the question under consideration. Nor

will our space permit us to give the answer
in full. We can only hint it. It will be well to divide the
question. Let us, then, ask, in the first place,

Has it been in the interest of the Church, as a whole, that
Columbia Seminary was founded and maintained at great
expense during a long term of weary and discouraging
years?

Nomen Perhaps the briefest answer to this question

Venerabile is furnished by a single name James Hen-

IvEy Thorn weix. It is easy, of course, to
say that Dr. Thornwell was never a student in Columbia
Seminary. It is easy to say that he would have entered the
ministry and done his work for the Church had there been
no such institution. It will not be found easy, however,
to overlook the fact that it was through his connection with

9

Columbia Seminary that he was led to produce, and leave
as a legacy to the Church, his mature thinking upon many
of the great problems of Theology. What is more, it was
through his connection with this institution that he suc-
ceeded in stamping himself indelibly upon the minds of a
large body of students who went forth to uphold, to unfold,
to apply the great principles that they received from him.
But Dr. ThornwELL was not the only master-mind who
has been enabled through this institution to multiply and
perpetuate its influence in every part of the Church. Not
to mention the names of some still living, it is enough to
recall those of George Howe, John B. Adger, William S.
Plumer, and John L. Girardeau. Erase these names
from our Church's roll; eliminate from her history the
influence that has emanated from the splendid personalities
of these men, and see if her glory and her influence will not
be sensibly diminished.

Ably Who are the men who to-day have been

Represented called by the Church and entrusted by her
In All of Our w }tn the solemn responsibility of equipping
her ministry? I find among these men the
names of Thomas R. English, of Union
Seminary, Va. ; C. R. Hemphill, of Louisville Seminary;
R. A. Webb, formerly of Clarksville, now of Louisville;
and W. T. Hall. Nor would this list be complete should
I fail to name others ; some of them no longer with us, and
some no longer engaged in this special work of training men
for the ministry. Among the latter class I may mention the
names of Thornton C. Whaling, William E. Boggs,
Joseph R. Wilson, Benjamin M. Palmer, Daniel J.
Bbimm, James E. Forgartie, Samuel C. Byrd, Edwin
MullER. Among her dead, in addition to those already
mentioned in the preceding paragraph, are recorded the
names of Thomas Goulding, A. W. LEland, Charles
Colcock Jones ; and last, but not least, James F. Latimer,
T. D. WithErspoon and James Woodrow. Really, it
begins to look as if in attempting to build the wall over

10

against her own house, the Synod of South Carolina and
Georgia had been busily engaged in building a wall all
around our Southern Church. It looks as if in raising up
a ministry for her own territory she had taken a pretty
vigorous hand in raising up one for our whole Southern
Church.

Influential in ^ et us ^^ at ^ e sery i ce which this Semi-
Giving' Being' nary has rendered the Church from another
to Our point of view. The Southern Presbyterian

Church as such entered upon its organized
existence in the city of Augusta, Ga., in the year 1861.
Forty-nine years have elapsed since then. During all these
years, by the blessing of God, she has steadily prospered,
developed and progressed. To-day, her position among the
great sisterhood of churches of like common faith is better
established and her influence more of a recognized factor
than at any time in the past. The reason is that, for the
most part, she has adhered to the principles and followed
the lines of development marked out for her by those who,
under God, started her on her way. Now, it derogates
from the honor of no one ; nor is it an empty boast to say
that this beloved church of ours owes much if not most of
that which is distinctive in her character and principles to
influences emanating directly from Columbia Seminary.
The facts are these :

Thirteen ^ the fifty-two ministerial Commissioners

Ministerial who were present, honored by their Presby-
Commission- teries as men worthy to be entrusted with the
Assembly responsibility of deciding whether, as a
Church, we were to be, and what, as a
Church, we were to be, thirteen were alumni or honorary
alumni of this Seminary; six were alumni of our sister
Seminary in Virginia, and the remainder, apparently, were
not Seminary graduates, or were the alumni of institutions
outside of our bounds. The alumni of this institution came
from the following Synods, viz : Synod of Alabama, G. W.
Boggs; Synod of Arkansas, John I. Boozer; Synod of

11

Georgia, J. E. DuBose, C. C. Jones, D. D., J. R. Wilson,
D. D., LL. D. ; Synod of Mississippi, W. C. Emerson, B.
M. Palmer, D. D., LL. D. ; Synod of South Carolina, J.
H. Thornwell, D. D., LL. D., A. W. Leland, D. D.,
J. L. Wilson, D. D., D. E. Frierson, D. D., J. B. Adger,
D. D., D. McN. Turner, D. D.

An Alumnus ^ e se l ect i n f a suitable presiding officer
the First for that first Assembly was a matter of no

Moderator small importance. The man occupying that
position on that occasion must needs be one
capable, not only of commanding the respect and confidence
of his brethren, but of the entire Church of God. Upon
him also more than upon any one else would devolve the
responsibility of guiding and shaping the action of the body
that had placed him at the helm. We all know upon whom
the choice of his brethren fell; nor has there ever been a
moment since when the Church repented that choice, or
failed to be proud that when the emergency arose she had
in Benjamin M. Palmer a son worthy to meet it.

Part Borne ^ e new-born Church received her name on
by Alumni the motion of J. H. ThornwELL, D. D.,
which motion was seconded by A. W.
Leland, D. D. The committees through whom the Assem-
bly was to carry on its business were also appointed on
motion of Dr. Thornwell. He was himself chairman of
the committee which drew up for our Church her Magna
Charta "The Address to the Churches of Jesus Christ
Throughout the World." Associated with him on this
committee were C. C. Jones, D. D., of Georgia, and John
I. Boozer, of Arkansas. Dr. Thornwell was also an
influential member of the Committee on Bills and Over-
tures. Indeed, it is but history to add that to him probably
more than to any other single individual, our Church owes
most of what is distinctive in her principles and her polity.
To him we are largely indebted for the Book of Church
Order, under which our Courts at present administer the
business of our Church. "The Letter on the Religious

12

Instruction of the Colored People," issued by the Augusta
Assembly, was the masterly product of C. C. Jones, D. D.,
of Georgia, who was also chairman of the Committee of
Home Missions. The venerable D. McN. Turner, D. D.,
who continued his labors until over eighty years of age,
and has only comparatively recently gone to his reward, was
Clerk of the Assembly. The Standing Committee on
Foreign Missions, appointed by that Assembly, consisted of
J. R. Wilson, D. D., Jas. Woodrow, D. D., James H.
ThornwEUv, D. D., George Howe, D. D., F. P. Mul-
ivALivY, D. D., A. A. Porter, D. D., and J. B. Adger, D. D.,
all alumni or honorary alumni of this Seminary.

So much for the relation of Columbia Seminary to our
beginning as a Church.

Time and space would fail to give in detail the record of
the influence, the far reaching and beneficent influence
exerted by the honored' alumni of this institution in every
Assembly since 1861; in every Synod in the South and
Southwest ; in every Presbytery of South Carolina, Georgia,
Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas and
Texas, not to mention Tennessee and Kentucky. The
names of our alumni cannot be spread before the public,
but just as little can their activity in the Courts of the
Church be concealed.

Moderators of lt wil1 P erna P s throw at least a gleam of light
The General over this large theme to call attention to one
Assembly single fact. Of the forty-eight noble men
who have graced the position of Moderator
of the General Assembly of our Church, nineteen have been
chosen from among the alumni of this institution. Their
names and Synods are as follows, viz : Benj. M. Palmer,
D. D., Louisiana; George Howe, D. D., South Carolina;
W. S. Pujmer, D. D., South Carolina; H. M. Smith, D.
D., Mississippi; J. L. Girardeau, D. D., South Carolina;
C. A. Stdxman, D. D., Alabama; J. R. Wilson, D. D.,
North Carolina; Thos. A. Hoyt, D. D., Tennessee; T. D.
WiThERSpoon, D. D., Kentucky; H. C. DuBosE, D. D.,

13

South Carolina; C. R. Hemphill, D. D., Kentucky; Geo.
T. Geotchius, D. D., Georgia; E. M. Green, D. D.,
Kentucky; R. S. Mallard, Louisiana; W. T. Hall, South
Carolina; S. M. Neel, Missouri; J. T. PlunkEtt, Georgia;
J. R. Howerton, North Carolina; W. E. Boggs, Florida.
of these Drs. Plumer and Wilson are honorary alumni,
having occupied chairs in this institution. To them might
well be added the beloved name of Thos. E. Peck, D. D.,
who while not an alumnus, was really a son of this Semi-
nary. This is not a record to put to shame the confidence
of the men who founded and maintained Columbia Semi-
nary; and who, time after time, against hope, believed in
hope.

J Leighton ^ ut t ^ ie Srv ^ ce f Columbia Seminary to the
Wilson and Church, as a whole, has not been confined to
Foreign its beginnings nor to any single department of

its activities. I have already adverted to the
fact that it was to the hands of that most apostolic man of
modern times, Dr. J. Leighton Wilson, that our Church
committed the work of devising and putting into execution
for her a scheme of Foreign Missions. It is only those
who will be at the pains to inform themselves, who can
appreciate to what an extent the whole course of the subse-
quent development of our work in foreign lands reveals the
impress stamped upon it by Dr. Wilson in its beginnings.

Missionary Thus it appears that a son of Columbia Semi-
Alumni nary projected the mission work of our
Church along the lines upon which it has
since been expanding and developing until it has reached
its present encouraging proportions. Not only so, but both
prior to the time of our independent existence, and subse-
quent to that time, the alumni of Columbia Seminary have
been working side by side with their brethren in all the
mission fields of our Church. J. L. Merrick, a classmate
of Dr. Wilson, went to Persia, and there labored for seven
years; then for three years longer he preached the Gospel
among the Nestorians. The following list of names tells

14

its own story of the part that Columbia Seminary has borne
and is bearing in the Foreign Mission work of our Church :
To India, she gave L. L. McBryde and M. M. Charl-
ton ; to China, S. R. Brown, R. C. Way, J. W. Quarter-
man, J. K. Wight, J. A. Danforth, H. C. DuBose, P. C.
DuBosE, H. M. Smith ; to Japan, S. R. Hope, R. E. Mc-
Alpine and Toji Takada ; to Korea, L. O. McCutchen ;
to Siam, Alex. Waite, and James Waite; J. G. Hall to
the United States of Colombia and then to Mexico, and
finally to Cuba; Frank H. Wardlaw to Cuba; to the
Indians, A. M. Watson, C. J. Stillman, J. H. Colter,
J. J. Read and J. C. Kennedy; to Brazil, William C.
Emmerson, J. R. Baird and Dr. Allyn. This list would
not be complete without mentioning the fact that the late
venerable Dr. J. B. Adger, long a professor in this Semi-
nary, came to her from a mission' field and filled with a
missionary spirit.

Alumni and ^ ^ a * so to t ^ ie * ot ^ t ^ ie Committee of
Home which Dr. Wilson was Secretary to gather

Missions an d foster the scattered flocks of our South-

ern Zion when our people stricken, stripped and peeled,
were confronted on every side with the destitutions and
desolations caused by war.

And from that day to the present the influence of Colum-
bia Seminary has made itself distinctly felt in shaping and
developing the Home Mission work of our Church. For
more than twenty years one of her honored alumni, Dr. J.
N. Craig, had this work in hand. During that time, despite
adverse circumstances, its growth was marvelous. More
recently this great work has been expanding steadily under
the efficient supervision of the beloved Dr. S. L. Morris.
Not only so, but the record of Home Mission work in the
Synod of Texas cannot be written, up without giving much
space to the activities of such veteran workers and wise
organizers as Josephus Johnson, A. P. Smith and S. F.
TennEy. If we turn to Kentucky and consider the splendid
progress made in that Synod, we find that it is in a consider-

15

able measure traceable to the organizing ability and aggres-
sive home missionary activity of the sainted T. D.
Witherspoon and Dr. E. M. Green. . If, again, we turn
to Virginia, conspicuous among the men who have not only
themselves labored in her home mission field, but have
organized and administered this department of her activities,
will be found the name of F. J. Brooke.

WorKfor Our Church has not done her duty to the

Colored colored people. But if she has failed it has

People k een for no lack of shining examples of

genuine devotion to the spiritual interest of that people.
She had had few sons more gifted, and none more godly
than John L. Girardeau, C. Coixock Jones, Chas. A.
Stii^IvMAn, and J. R. Howerton. The first two, before
and after the war, gave the best energies of heart and mind
to the evangelization of the colored people. Stillman Insti-
tute is today a monument and memorial to the practical
interest which Dr. Charges A. Stuxman felt in the salva-
tion of his brother in black. Dr. Howerton gave some of
the best years of his earlier ministry to professorial work
in that institution. All four of these men are alumni of
Columbia Seminary. If any other four men in our Church
have exerted a deeper, more permanent, and more bene-
ficent influence in this department of the Church's activity
than has been exerted by those just mentioned, I confess
that I do not know who they are.

Female Turning another department of the Church's

Education activity, we find that this Seminary has fur-
nished quite a number of leaders in female
education, among them the following :

Rev. J. M. H. Adaims, for the Yorkville Seminary; Rev.
William Curtis, Principal of Limestone Springs Sem-
inary; I. S. K. Axson, D. D., and Rev. H. Hendee, each
for a term of years Principal of the Sy nodical Female Col-
lege, at Greensboro, Ga. ; Rev. T. F. Montgomery, Prin-
cipal of the Masonic Female College, at Auburn, Ala. ; N.
W. Edmunds, D. D., formerly of Sumter Female Institute;

16

S. R. Preston, D. D., and Rev. J. H. Alexander, each
Principal for a term of years of the Female College at
Wytheville, Va., the former was also for a term of years
President of Chicora Female College, at Greenville, S. C. ;
W. R. Atkinson, D. D., for some years President of Pres-
byterian College for Women, at Columbia, S. C, and previ-
ously engaged in successful work at Charlotte, N. C, and
doubtless many others.

Presidents ^he ^ as f urn i sne d Presidents and dis-
and tinguished Professors to the following insti-

Professors tutions : to the College of South Carolina, at
Columbia, as Presidents, J. H. Thorn weix, D. D., and
James Woodrow, D. D. ; as Professor, J. W. Funn, D. D.
To the Presbyterian College of South Carolina, at Clin-
ton, she gave its honored and widely known founder, W. P.
Jacobs, D. D., who is also head of that most admirably
managed and beneficent institution, the Thornwell Orphan-
age; one of its Presidents, Rev. E. C. Murray, D. D., and
two of its Professors, J. F. Jacobs and W. S. Bean, D. D.
To Davidson College, in North Carolina, she furnished a
President, Luther McKinnon, D. D. To Arkansas Col-
lege she gave its President, that noble worker, J. I. Long,
D. D., and to Indian Territory, the Rev. J. J. Read. To
the Southwestern Presbyterian University, she has given,
as Professor, James E. Fogartie, D. D.

Influence ^ e P en was never mightier than it is in our

Through the day. The press has become the indispensable
Press auxiliary of every enterprise. Through this

agency also, Columbia Seminary has fostered and furthered
the interest of our whole Church. No periodical published
among us was, in its day, more thoroughly representative,
able, or more influential and useful than the Southern Pres-
byterian Review. That enterprise was inaugurated under
the auspices of this Seminary. As an exponent of what was
distinctive in our views, as an educator of our people and
especially of our ministry, and as an agency for stimulating
and cultivating the literary and scholarly spirit among us.

17

it proved invaluable. Founded by Drs. ThornwELL and
Palmer, it was long under the editorial management of Dr.
James Woodrow. Its worthy successor is the Presbyterian
Quarterly. Turning now to the weekly religious press, we
find the following influential journals have been conducted
by the alumni of this institution, namely: The Southern
Presbyterian, which was founded by Dr. A. A. Porter, and
for long years edited by Dr. James Woodrow, who was suc-
ceeded by Dr. W. S. Bean, who in his turn has been suc-
ceeded by Rev. J. F. Jacobs; The Southwestern Presby-
terian, long presided over by the beloved and honored Dr.
H. M. Smith, and subsequently in the hands of Dr. R. Q.
Mallard, supported by an able corps of assistant editors.
The Alabama Presbyterian, published in Birmingham, under
the editorship of Dr. J. M. P. Otts, and The Christian Com-
panion, under that of R. S. Latimer, D. D.

PulDit Once more, if we were asked to name the men

Influence who, so to speak, have set the standard of

pulpit eloquence in the Southern Presbyterian
Church, perhaps the names that would come instinctively to
the lips of all of us would be those of James H. Thorn-
well, Moses Drury Hoge, John L. Girardeau and B.
M. Palmer. Of these four, three have been the gift of
Columbia Seminary.

Can any Church in any section of our land boast of a
more illustrious trio? How potent, how persuasive their
eloquence, whether in the council chambers of the Church
or before her popular assemblies. Their voices have been
heard amki the uproar of battle, when shells were bursting
and minie balls whizzing over the heads of the soldiers in
the trenches; they have been heard amid the awful hush
that attends the presence of the pestilence. When were
they ever heard without bringing courage and hope to the
soul? Their praise is in all the Churches. They are no
longer with us, but their memory is an ointment poured
forth. This splendid gift, greatly as it has enriched our
Church, has not exhausted the liberality of this Seminary.

18

The reader has only to look around him to see the orna-
ments which she has supplied with lavish hand to the pulpits
of almost every Synod within our bounds, and to some
beyond them.

To Texas, she has given Drs. A. P. Smith and W. M.
Anderson, Thornton C. Whaling, of Dallas; Dr. JosE-
phus Johnson, of Victoria; S. F. Tenney, of Crockett;
Dr. W. S. Jacobs, and others ; to the Synod of Mississippi,
she has furnished Drs. B. M. Palmer, T. R. Markham, J.
H. Alexander, J. H. Nall, G. S. Roudebush, E. P.
Palmer, J. A. Witherspoon, Rev. A. H. Mecklin, T. M.
Lowry, and others; to Tennessee, Drs. Jerry Wither-
spoon, George A. Trenholm, Eugene Daniel, W. E.
Boggs, J. L. Martin, J. W. Rogan, and others; to Ken-
tucky, Drs. E. M. Green, C. R. Hemphill, T. D. Wither-
spoon, and others; to Arkansas, Drs. J. R. HowERTon, S.
C. Alexander, D. McN. Turner, and others; to North
Carolina, Drs. A. W. Miller, J. F. Fair, J. E. Fogartie,
Eugene Daniel, J. D. W. Burkhead, W. S. P. Bryan,
and others; to Virginia, Drs. D. K. McFarland, J. Y. Fair,
S. R. Preston, W. T. Hall, A. McIver Fraser, F. P.
Mullally, and others. In another connection, perhaps,
account will be taken of her gifts to the pulpits of her own
Synods; but as already indicated, every effort to give an
idea of her service to the Church through the ministers sup-
plied to its pulpits must of necessity give only a partial list
of the more than seven hundred alumni who have gone
forth from her halls to stand as watchmen on the walls of
Zion.

The What department of the Church's activity is

Ornament there that has not been enriched, invigorated,
and Organ an d ennobled, and that in a marked degree,
Church G ky influences issuing from Columbia Sem-
inary. Indeed, it can be truly said that she
has exerted a great, a permanent and a blessed influence in
determining the genius of our Church and in shaping and
securing its development, especially in what may be called

19

the Cotton States, and in the Southwest. The fathers of
18&8 were right. When they built the wall over against
their own house they wrought not merely for themselves,
but for the entire Church of God. The institution that they
planted had of necessity a local habitation and a name. That
institution, however, by the sweep of its influence and by
the munificence and catholicity of its benefits has proven
itself to be not the agency of any limited section, but the
ornament, and an indispensable organ of the Church at
large. The name of Columbia Seminary for those who,
either in the present or in the future, care to inform them-
selves, will be a synonym for much that is best and most
vigorous in the life and in the activities of our beloved
Church.