A Note on William Stuart Red (from the Introduction to A History of the Presbyterian Church in Texas) :

God in His providence took the Reverend W. S. Red, D.D., from his earthly labors, on this day, July 8, 1933, before he had completed this last task, so very dear to his heart—the writing of the history of his Church in Texas.

Mr. Red from early youth had exhibited an abiding interest in the “beginnings” of his Church. This is not surprising when his early environment is considered. He was born of pioneering parents, staunchly Presbyterian with a long Presbyterian heritage, who took a leading part in the work of the Church in Texas. His father came to Texas in 1844, during the days of the Republic. He was an elder in the historic Prospect Church and a charter member of the Board of Trustees of Austin College. His mother was a pioneer in the education of women, being associated with Dr. Miller [i.e., James Weston Miller, 1815-1888] in founding one of the first Presbyterian schools for young women . His uncle, Dr. Miller, took part in the organization of the Synod of Texas (PCUS), being its first Stated Clerk. His early childhood was spent in the shadow of the “Cradle of Presbyterianism,” old Chriesman’s school house. He spoke of passing this historic place, when, as a boy, he made his regular horseback trips to mill.

Mr. Red devoted practically his whole life to gathering this material. Many weary hours were spent in the basement of the old Main Building at the University, delving into the Austin and Bexar Archives. This was years before a library had been built or an archivist had catalogued these papers.

It was a grief to him that Presbyterians did not feel, or perhaps realize, the importance of preserving their precious documents. Consequently, he was a prime mover in securing for our Church the Historical Foundation, as is shown from [Foundation director] Dr. Tenney’s letter: “The service your husband has rendered all along through these years, from 1903, has been very great; but strange to say, in such a manner as that his name does not get into it . . . He does not concern himself with the outward reward and glory here; his zeal is for the Kingdom, yet just because of this we who appreciate his unselfish and sacrificial service feel that his name should be associated with his service.” [Letter to Mrs. Red from Dr. S. M. Tenney, dated January 25, 1927.]

Words to Live By:
He seemed to be larger than life, but then aren’t all Texans?  Yet it is important to remember that his love for the state of Texas was grounded in Christian Presbyterianism in Texas.  Paul’s haunting question in the New Testament was “How shall they hear without a preacher?”  Rev. Red wanted Presbyterian preachers to train and serve their Lord and God so that his fellow Texans could hear the unsearchable riches of God’s grace.  That is true for all of our states.  Pray for where God has placed you on this day that the everlasting good news of eternal life might impact your state.

For Further Reading:
Dr. Red’s magnum opus, A History of the Presbyterian Church in Texas, is not currently available in digital format, and print copies are somewhat scarce, the book having been published in 1936. Another, earlier work by Dr. Red is available on the Internet: Texas Colonists and Religion, 1821-1836: A Centennial Tribute to the Texas patriots who shed their blook that we might enjoy civil and religious liberty. (1924).

What follows is a letter from Dr. J. Gresham Machen, in which he declines an invitation to serve as president of the William Jennings Bryan University. That school was officially chartered in 1930 “for the purpose of establishing, conducting and perpetuating a university for the higher education of men and women under auspices distinctly Christian and spiritual, as a testimony to the supreme glory of the Lord Jesus Christ, and to the Divine inspiration and infallibility of the Bible.” In 1958 the school was designated a college and in 1993 its name was shortened to Bryan College. The text of this letter appeared on the pages of THE PRESBYTERIAN, vol. 97, no. 27, on this day, July 7, 1927 and Samuel G. Craig, editor of THE PRESBYTERIAN, here provides a brief introduction to Dr. Machen’s letter of reply:—

Dr. Machen Declines the Presidency of Bryan University.

In reply to the request to accept the presidency of the proposed Bryan Memorial University, Professor J. Gresham Machen wrote the following letter—a letter we count it a privilege to print in full because of what it tells us about Dr. Machen himself as well as what it tells us about his convictions relative to the conditions at Princeton Seminary, in the church-at-large, and in the field of education. Did the fact not stare us in the face, we would think it a thing incredible that two General Assemblies should have withheld their approval of such a man with such convictions and outlook as the professor of Apologetics in one of our theological seminaries—a man so well fitted to present that “fresh and powerful apologetic which will make its appeal to the perplexed mind of the modern world,” and which is so much needed to-day, according to the report relative to the church’s progress by the Special Commission of Fifteen:

June 25, 1927.

F.E.  Robinson, Esq.,
President of the Bryan University Memorial Association, Care of Malcolm Lockhart, Esq.,
840 West End Avenue, New York City.

Dear Sir:

On my return from a lecture trip in Great Britain, Mr. Lockhart has conveyed to me the question of the Bryan University Memorial Association as to whether I could consider accepting the presidency of the University.

In reply, I desire above all to say how very great is my appreciation of the honor which has thus been conferred upon me. Particularly at the present moment, when I have just been subjected by the General Assembly of the church to which I belong to a most extraordinary indignity, it is profoundly encouraging to me to know that there are those who do not acquiesce in such a low estimate of my services and of my character. In these days of widespread defection from the Christian faith, I rejoice with all my heart in the warmth of Christian fellowship that unites me with those who, like you, love the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, and are willing to bear the reproach to which a frank acceptance of the gospel subjects them in the presence of a hostile world.

At the same time, though to my very great regret, I am obliged to say that I should be unable to accept the important position to which your suggestion refers.

In the first place, I do not feel that just at the present moment I can honorably leave my present position. Princeton Theological Seminary is an institution which for a hundred years, and never more successfully than now, has been defending and propagating the gospel of Christ. It is now passing through a great crisis. If the re-organization favored by the General Assembly which has just met at San Francisco is finally adopted next year—if the proposed abrogation of the whole constitution of the Seminary and the proposed dissolution of the present Board of Directors is finally carried out; if, in other words, the control of the Seminary passes into entirely different hands—then Princeton Theological Seminary, as it has been so long and so honorably known, will be dead, and we shall have at Princeton a new institution of a radically different type. But meanwhile—during this coming year—the Seminary is still genuinely and consistently evangelical. And it is by no means certain that the work of destruction will really be authorized next May. The report of the Committee that dealt with the subject this year was adopted only because of the gross misrepresentations of fact that the report contained, and it is quite possible that the true facts may still become generally known and that the sense of fair play which, we hope, is still possessed by the rank and file of our Presbyterian Church may make itself felt, so that the right of thorough-going conservatives in the Presbyterian Church to have at least one seminary that clearly and unequivocally represents their view may still be recognized and Princeton may still be saved. Meanwhile—until this issue is decided—I do not think it would be right for me to desert my colleagues here or to desert the institution that I so dearly love.

In the second place, I doubt very seriously my fitness for an administrative position like that which you have done me the honor of connecting with my name. My previous efforts, to say nothing of their imperfections even in their own sphere, have been of an entirely different kind. The very importance of the position which you are seeking to fill makes me question very seriously, to say the least, whether I am at all fitted to be its occupant.

In the third place, I am somewhat loath, for the present at least, to relinquish my connection with distinctively Presbyterian work. I have the warmest sympathy, indeed, with interdenominational efforts of various kinds; I have frequently entered into such efforts on my own part; and I understand fully that the real attack is not directed against those points wherein Calvinism differs from other systems of evangelical belief, and is not directed even against those points wherein Protestantism differs from the Roman Catholic Church, but that it is directed against the points wherein the Christian religion—Protestant and Catholic—differs from a radically different type of belief and of life. That radically different type of belief and of life is found to-day in all the larger ecclesiastical bodies; and in the presence of such a common enemy, those who unfeignedly believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ are drawn into a new warmth of fellowship and a new zeal for common service. Nevertheless, thoroughly consistent Christianity, to my mind, is found only in the Reformed or Calvinistic faith; and consistent Christianity, I think, is the Christianity easiest to defend. Hence I never call myself a “Fundamentalist.” There is, indeed, no inherent objection to the term; and if the disjunction is between “Fundamentalism” and “Modernism,” then I am willing to call myself a Fundamentalist of the most pronounced type. But after all, what I prefer to call myself is not a “Fundamentalist,” but a “Calvinist”—that is, an adherent of the Reformed faith. As such, I regard myself as standing in the great central current of the church’s life—the current which flows down from the Word of God through Augustine and Calvin, and which has found noteworthy expression in America in the great tradition represented by Charles Hodge and Benjamin Breckenridge Warfield and the other representatives of the “Princeton School.” I have the warmest sympathy with other evangelical churches, and a keen sense of agreement with them about those Christian convictions which are to-day being most insistently assailed; but, for the present at least, I think I can best serve my fellow-Christians—even those who belong to ecclesiastical bodies different from my own—by continuing to be identified, very specifically, with the Presbyterian Church.

Finally, however, let me say how warm is my sympathy with you in the noteworthy educational effort in which you are engaged. Very amazing to me is the complacency with which many persons contemplate the educational conditions that prevail at the present time. As a matter of fact, we have fallen, I think, into a most deplorable and most alarming intellectual decline. I do not, indeed, under-estimate the achievements of modern science in the material realm; and the Christian man should never commit the serious error of belittling those achievements. This is God’s world, and those who penetrate into its secrets are students of God’s works and benefactors of their fellow-men. But such material advances have gone hand in hand with an intellectual decadence in many spheres—an intellectual decadence which is now threatening to engulf all of human life. I do not see how anyone can contemplate present-day educational conditions without seeing that something is radically wrong. And about one thing that is wrong—indeed by far the most important thing—there can be no doubt. It is found in the widespread ignorance of the Christian religion as that religion is founded upon the Word of God. If, indeed, the Christian religion were not true, I should not desire to see it continued on the earth, no matter what benefits its continuance might bring.

But then, as a matter of fact, I hold that it is true; and I do not believe that there can be any truly comprehensive science that does not take account of the solid facts upon which the Christian religion is based. Hence I sympathize fully with your desire to promote an education that shall be genuinely Christian. And I pray that those who, like you, wherever they may be, cherish such a desire, may not be discouraged by the opposition of the world. You represent a cause which cannot ultimately fail. And even now, despite all the forces of unbelief, despite hostile actions even of the organized church, the gospel of Jesus Christ still shines out from the Word of God and is still enshrined in Christian hearts.

Very truly yours,

(Signed) J. Gresham Machen.

From an Earthly General Assembly to the Heavenly General Assembly
by Rev. David Myers

Our subject today is Moses Hoge. Yes, he was an American Presbyterian minister from the past, in the nineteenth century, down in our Southern states. Yes, he had both the calling of being a faithful pastor in two Presbyterian churches and a Calvinist theologian in the halls of collegiate and seminary education. Yes, he was an insightful author of several books and published sermons which enriched the hearts of many believers in his day.

So what else is new, you, the reader might be thinking or saying, having read many a post from our This Day in Presbyterian History blog with similar qualifications for other Presbyterian personalities? This author challenges you to consider the following characteristics of his life and ministry.

Early on, a statement by Samuel Stanhope Smith challenged the young Moses Hoge. What Smith said was “sanctified learning is the greatest blessing; unsanctified learning is the greatest curse.” This concise statement sank deep into the heart and mind of our subject today. He determined that he would be a man of learning, even sanctified learning. Early on, he gave his heart to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. After that spiritual commitment, he made up his mind to serve Him in gospel ministry.

Being born in Cedar Grove, Frederick County, Virginia, on February 15, 1752, and raised by godly parents, his beginning commitment aided him in his calling. Learning at the feet of William Graham at Liberty Hall Academy (later Washington and Lee university), Hoge graduated in 1785, thus adding to that “sanctified learning,” so decided upon in earlier days. He next studied theology under the tutorship of the blind preacher, James Waddel. Thereafter, Rev. Hoge’s pastorates were at Moorefield, Virginia and Shepherdstown, Virginia, in the then pre-Civil War times era.

But it was in the area of Christian education that he “made his mark” in training others in “sanctified learning.” In 1807, he moved to Hampden-Sidney College in Virginia as president, resuming the theological education started there by others. And when in 1812 the General Assembly moved to begin the theological seminary in Princeton, New Jersey, the Virginia Presbyterian Synod resolved to have its own seminary, electing Dr. Hoge to serve as their professor at the newly established Union Theological Seminary, in Richmond, VA. Dr. Hoge served both the Hampden-Sydney College and Union Seminary in the role of teacher. Married twice, two of his sons followed him into the ministry and that “sanctified learning” lifestyle.

It was in Philadelphia that he was translated to heaven and buried in the Third Presbyterian Church burial ground, on This Day in Presbyterian History, July 5, 1820.

Words to Live By:
It is testified that near the pulpit of Third Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia is a slab which records these words: “Near this monument erected by filial affection, reposes all that was mortal of the Rev. Moses Hoge, D.D., president of Hampton-Sydney College, and professor of Divinity in the Union Theological Seminary of the Synod of Virginia. A man of genius, profound erudition, and ardent piety, he lived, loved, and died lamented, aged sixty-eight. From the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America to the General Assembly of the Church in Heaven, his translation, inflictive to his friends, but joyous to himself, was accomplished July 5, 1820.”

Question to our Readers:
We have the remarkable testimony of a servant of the Lord Jesus. It all began with “sanctified learning.” Where are you in such a spiritual quest in your Christian lives?

Happy Independence Day

On this Independence Day, we reflect on what freedom means to us as Bible-believing Presbyterians. Among all the benefits which we enjoy as Christian citizens of this nation, chief among them we know to be the freedom to worship God according to the dictates of our conscience, as regulated by His Word, the Bible. Our freedoms are granted us, not by the government, but by the God whom we serve. May he continue to be so gracious toward us; may the judgment due our sins be averted by His mercy.

It was on this day, July 4, 1814, that the Rev. Daniel Dana delivered a sermon in commemoration of American independence. It would be difficult to present the entire sermon, but his closing words remain strikingly appropriate for us today:— 

Further; let us learn the true source of national prosperity and happiness. Inspiration declares it in a word. RIGHTEOUSNESS exalteth a nation. Another lesson, it is true, has been taught in Europe. Modern philosophy, trampling on this sacred maxim, and the book which contains it, undertook to diffuse happiness among the nations, and to regenerate the world, by a system of rank atheism. The experiment has been made. And now behold the result. Read it in that scene of blood, of devastation, of varied, accumulated misery, which Europe has exhibited for more than half an age. What loud and solemn warning is thus given to the world! And how emphatically is this warning addressed to us as a people! For we have but too readily caught the contagion of European infidelity and licentiousness. As a nation, we have forsaken the God of our fathers; and He has forsaken us. We have disobeyed His voice; and He has suffered us to walk in our own infatuated counsels. We have trampled on the holy maxims and precepts of His word; and we are now reaping the bitter fruits of transgression. My hearers, if there by any hope for our agonized and bleeding country, it must spring from repentance; deep, thorough, general repentance and reformation. Without this, peace itself, should it come to us, would scarcely be a blessing. Returning prosperity would but too probably harden us in sin, and precipitate us in the downward path of ruin. Oh, shall we not, as a people, humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God? Shall we not, while His judgments are made so manifest, come and worship before Him, and glorify His name, and hallow His sabbaths, and keep His judgments, and His ordinances? Might but this be the issue of our calamities, our present despondency would vanish, and hope, like lightning in the gloom of midnight, would again cheer our disconsolate nation.

To conclude : we may see what is the only remedy for the sins and miseries of our restless world. It is the gospel. It is real Christianity. The gospel while it reconciles man to God, sets him at peace with his brother man. It subdues those turbulent passions of the soul, whence wars and contentions arise. Thus it cuts off the streams, by drying up the fountain. It inspires the dispositions of kindness, compassion, forbearance, equity and universal love. Did it every where prevail, in its purity and power, the world would be in perfect peace. Mankind would constitute one affectionate, united, happy family. Earth would resemble heaven. How inspiring the thought, that such a delightful period is promising in the infallible word; that is hastening on; and that even the darkest, direst events that pain the heart, shall help to introduce it! O come, Lord Jesus, come quickly! DESIRE OF NATIONS! Ascend thy universal throne! Sway thy resistless sceptre! Heal a bleeding world!

[excerpted from A Discourse delivered in Newburyport, July 4, 1814, in commemoration of American Independence, and of the Deliverance of Europe, by the Rev. Daniel Dana, pastor of a church in Newburyport. An original print copy of Rev. Dana’s sermon is preserved at the PCA Historical Center.]

STUDIES IN THE WESTMINSTER SHORTER CATECHISM
by Rev. Leonard T. Van Horn

Q. 89. How is the word made effectual to salvation?

A. The Spirit of God maketh the reading, but especially the preaching, of the word, an effectual means of convincing and converting sinners, and of building them up in holiness and comfort through faith unto salvation.

Scripture References: Psalm 19:7. Psalm 119:130. Thessalonians 1:6. Romans 1:16. Romans 16:25. Acts 20:32.

Questions:

1. What do we mean by the “word” in this question and how is it made effectual?

We mean by the “word” the scriptures of the Old and New Testament, that revelation of God. It is made effectual through its preaching but also its reading.

2. How is the word of God to be read?

Our Larger Catechism Question No. 157 tells us, “The Holy Scriptures are to be read with a high and reverend esteem of them; with a firm persuasion that they are the very word of God; and that he only can enable us to understand them.”

3. Who has the right to preach the Word of God?

Those who are called of God to preach the Word (I Timothy 4:14) and who have been given gifts by God (Malachi 2:7).

4. How should the Word of God be preached?

Again our Larger Catechism tells us in Question 159, ” … to preach sound doctrine, diligently, in season and out of season; plainly, not in the enticing words of man’s wisdom … faithfully, … wisely, …. zealously, …. sincerely …. “.

5. Why is the Word of God called the “Primary means of Grace” by the Reformed Faith?

It is so called because the Bible states it is. When the Word is preached, souls are saved and brought up in the faith, according to the Bible.

6. How are sinners converted and built up in the faith by the preaching of the Word?

Sinners are converted and built up in the faith by the Spirit as the Word is preached. He opens their eyes, turns them from darkness into light and then begins the work of sanctification in them.

THE EFFECTUAL WORD—TO BE HEARD!

The man who is called to preach the Word of God has at least one consolation in the midst of a difficult and trying life: the Word, the preaching of it, is effectual! God has so promised in His Word. Paul speaks in I Thessalonians 2:13 of ” … the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.” The Word of God is also effectual to men’s condemnation. It will either lead men to Christ or lead them to condemnation if they refuse to believe. One of the Puritans used to say, “Dreadful is their case who go loaded with sermons to hell.” The Word of God is “quick and’ powerful and sharper than any two-edged sword” and we can praise Him for it.

There is going about in this world today a false belief. This belief, that seems to be propagated more by men than women, is that one can be just as good a Christian not going to church as one can be in the church. Time and time again we hear this statement made by those who profess to be Christians. The argument is that it is not really necessary to be in church every time the Word is preached. This is indeed one of the most subtle lies of the devil! “How shall they hear without a preacher” is still in the Bible and is just as true and important as any other verse. The exhortation to not forsake assembling ourselves together is still in the Bible. And yet men persist in thinking they can live a good Christian life apart from the preaching and teaching of the Word.

In addition to what the Bible states regarding this matter, there is still another proof that is very plain. Any minister of the Gospel will tell you which of his members, with few exceptions, will be the ones with the following characteristics:

(1) Willing workers in the Lord’s vineyard;
(2) Always willing to teach and witness;
(3) Able to handle problems that come to them in their lives.

The members with these characteristics are those who are faithful to attend upon the teaching and preaching of the Word. They are God’s faithful ones, they are those whom He calls on time and time again to do His work. They are the families. with few exceptions, whose children are truly brought up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Word is effectual and all of us have the awesome responsibility to take heed to it, to always be present when it is taught or preached. God will do great and mighty things in us and through us when we are faithful in this regard.

Publicized by The SHIELD and SWORD. INC.
Dedicated to Instruction in the Westminster Standards for use as a bulletin insert or other methods of distribution in Presbyterian churches.

Vol. 6, No.6 (June, 1967)
Rev. Leonard T. Van Horn, Editor.