A century ago, Dr. Witherspoon and our fathers were on the busy stage of life. They are gone now. Where shall we be a hundred years hence? Certainly, we shall all be in eternity, but will it be a blessed eternity? Will the world be the better for our having lived in it?

It had been a long and bumpy road to unveiling the Witherspoon statue as is seen in the article, “John Witherspoon Statue, U. S. Centennial, Philadelphia, 1876.” Many individuals contributed their time and talents to complete the twice life size bronze statue of him. Among those involved in planning their contribution to the Centennial were members of the PCUSA General Assembly Centennial Committee, some individuals from the Synod of Philadelphia, and organizations made up of Presbyterian women. The Philadelphia mayor and Pennsylvania governor spoke at gatherings and the architect of City Hall and Presbyterian deacon, John McArthur, Jr., was consulted for guidance regarding nuances of the statue project.

When it came to help with the Centennial and speakers for the unveiling ceremony and associated events, the PCUSA sought to include all branches of the Reformed and Presbyterian family. For example, Princeton University President James McCosh spoke at the unveiling. An example of kindred denominations participating was the United Presbyterian Church which was represented by Rev. W. W. Barr and ruling elder John Alexander. But the elephant in the kitchen for the PCUSA was the Presbyterian Church in the United States (PCUS) which from 1861-1865 had been the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America (PCCSA). Many Presbyterians in the South had left the Old School PCUSA because of the Gardiner Spring Resolutions in 1861 which required affirmation of principles they believed were extra confessional and not within the spiritual ministry of the church. One awkward moment during the unveiling occurred when some members of the crowd recognized Stuart Robinson among the onlookers. There were calls for him to speak even though he was not on the docket of participants. Robinson was the minister of Second Presbyterian Church, Louisville, Kentucky. He had been vocal when the Civil War began and after it ended regarding the PCUSA requiring conformity to what he believed were stipulations contrary to or in addition to the church standards. Shortly after the War, Robinson led several churches in Louisville and the greater Synod of Kentucky to separate from the PCUSA and join the PCUS. If there was any one minister the Centennial Committee of the PCUSA did not want to speak at the unveiling, it had to be Robinson.  Apparently the insistence of the crowd for Robinson to speak was too much for the Centennial Commission to ignore, so he was allowed to speak briefly at the end of the ceremony. When The New York Times reported the unveiling it listed the leading participants and speakers, but Robinson was not mentioned and the article concluded “the attendance was very large and the exercises interesting.” Nothing is said about how much interest was generated by Robinson’s speech.

So, if the PCUSA was going to have a PCUS participant joining the other denominations, who would it be? The General Assembly almost immediately after the Civil War adopted the requirement that a minister desiring a change of call from a PCUS church to one in the PCUSA had to affirm loyalty to the Federal government, support emancipation, deny the Bible teaches slavery, and repent for siding with the Confederacy. The number of PCUS leaders willing to accept all or even some of the requirements limited the group available for selection. Further, if the PCUSA invited a minister who did not affirm the points of the requirement it would have transgressed its ministerial transfer legislation for the single-engagement speaker.

If there would be an official participant from the PCUS, who would it be?

It may be indicative of the trouble answering this question that the General Assembly waited until its meeting in May 1876, which ended up being only five months before the unveiling. The minister chosen to speak was William S. Plumer whose subject was the life and works of John Witherspoon. Plumer left his ministry in Baltimore, 1854, to take both a pastoral call to a church and a professorial call to Western Seminary in Allegheny in his home state of Pennsylvania. Then beginning in 1862 he supplied churches in Philadelphia and served in Pottsville through the course of the Civil War. In the past Plumer had been a minister of the Old School PCUSA in Pennsylvania, so he did not have some of the sectional drawbacks of other prominent PCUS ministers. Also, Plumer was the only minister to be moderator of both an Old School General Assembly, 1838, and moderator of a PCUS Assembly, 1871. He was a father of Presbyterians in his era and was greatly appreciated for his pastoral manner, leadership, and many publications in serials, pamphlets, and books. His admirers transcended the sectional divide. On Sunday evening, October 22, Dr. Plumer delivered his Witherspoon lecture in the West Spruce Street Church in Philadelphia (currently Tenth Church).

The text of “John Witherspoon, D.D., LL. D., His Life, Times, and Writings,” that follows was copied from, Witherspoon Proceedings and Addresses at the Laying of the Corner-Stone and at the Unveiling of the Statue of John Witherspoon in Fairmount Park, Philadelphia, edited by William P. Breed and issued by the Presbyterian Board of Publication, 1877. Plumer’s summary of Witherspoon’s life and works is nicely and concisely done. Note Plumer’s characteristic use for public events of simple but not simplistic language and an effective combination of short and extended sentences. Even though it is a bit tedious to read and was likely more pleasing when delivered with voice inflection and gestures, the staccato of important personalities in history and their birth dates is effective. Even though Witherspoon was distinctively Presbyterian, Plumer’s address does not emphasize his Presbyterianism but instead presents his three-fold life as minister, educator, and statesman for all Americans. Also to be noted is the Civil War had been over just eleven years but there are no sectional or Civil War comments. Plumer was speaking to Americans united for a glorious centennial event to remember Scottish-American John Witherspoon. Aging Dr. Plumer recognized the difficulties of the continuing sectional tension, and spoke as a pastoral and American gentleman with class and character. More ministers like Dr. Plumer who can discern difficult situations, interpret adiaphora, stick to their theological guns, yet minister and teach with grace and peace are needed .

The header is from the Library of Congress Digital Collection and is titled, “Grand United States Centennial Exhibition 1876. Main Building. Farmount Park, Philadelphia.” This is the huge building described in the first paragraph of the article, “John Witherspoon Statue, U. S. Centennial, Philadelphia, 1876.” The portrait of Dr. Plumer was given to the author by C. N. Willborn of Covenant Presbyterian Church in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary. For information on Robinson and the Kentucky Presbyterians see Moore’s Digest, 1898, p. 126ff. In the transcription, a few comments have been made in brackets [ ].

This article was first published May 29, 2020 and has been revised for the current post in remembrance of the 250th anniversary of the United States and the 150th anniversary of the John Witherspoon centennial statue located in Fairmount Park in Philadelphia.

Discourse of Dr. Plumer

John Witherspoon, D.D., LL.D.—His Life, Times, Writings and Services
by William S. Plumer

Most men live and die unknown beyond a narrow circle. Their memory soon fades from earth; but if in this life they walked with God, their record is on high, and in the best sense they shall be held in everlasting remembrance.

A smaller portion of mankind are of low and vicious tastes and habits. They are the tenants of the abodes of infamy and wretchedness. They are led on till they fall into the worst vices and crimes. For fame they have infamy. They have notoriety, but it is with disgrace. Their names rot. They are covered with ignominy.

A still smaller part of the human family rises high in personal worth and accomplishments, in usefulness and honor. They are by Providence favored with good opportunities, and they embrace them. Their names are enrolled among the good, the wise, and the great.

Such men are helpful to each other. Like the stars, they are often seen in constellations. The example of one draws many. This remark is illustrated through the eighteenth century. It was ushered in by bright lights, though some of them were great blessings, while others were not. Literature then greatly revived. In many places a marvelous spirit prevailed. Both truth and error, both virtue and vice, had giants for their defense. Addison, born 1672, Pope, born 1688, and their friends and contemporaries, mightily stirred the British mind in the early part of the last century. At the same time, Voltaire, born 1694, Rousseau and Diderot, both born 1712, and their allies, were preparing to shake continental Europe. On the other hand, Turgot in France, born 1727, and Necker in Switzerland, born 1732, gave to the world new and wondrous views and thoughts on finance and the best modes of making a nation great. Still later Mirabeau, born 1749, and Napoleon Bonaparte, born 1769, were rising up to move the world, one with his eloquence, the other with his military genius. If we return to England, we see Johnson, born 1709, early giving token that a man of prodigious powers had come into the world. Lord Chatham, born 1708, Edmund Burke, born 1718, Charles James Fox, born 1749, William Pitt, born 1759, and several of their contemporaries would have made any age or country great. Nor was distinction confined to the Old World. The British colonies shared largely in like honors. In 1706 was born Benjamin Franklin; in 1732, George Washington; in 1735, John Adams; in 1743, Thomas Jefferson; in 1750, James Madison; in 1755, John Marshall; in 1757, Alexander Hamilton; and in 1758, James Monroe—all of them illustrious and some of them peerless.

The same century and people were remarkable for many fine specimens of eloquence. George Whitefield, born in 1714, Samuel Davies, born 1724, James Waddel, born in Ireland, 1739, Patrick Henry, born 1736, and Lord Erskine, born 1750, wielded power that would have been felt in any age. These estimates are not extravagant. When Patrick Henry heard Waddel preach on the creation he said, “When I was listening to that man, it seemed to me that he could have made a world.” Of Henry’s eloquence, Jefferson said it was “bold, grand and overwhelming…. He gave examples of eloquence such as had probably never been excelled.” Of Franklin, Turgot said, Eripuit cœlo fulmen, sceptrumque tyrannis [He snatched lightning from the sky and the scepter from tyrants]. Lord Chatham spoke of Franklin as one whom all Europe held in high estimation for his knowledge and wisdom and ranked him with our Boyles and Newtons—which was an honor not only to the English nation, but to human nature.

And what shall be said of Washington? The strength of his character is found in its symmetry, propriety and high moral principles. He felt exquisitely, but his passions never dictated a single measure of his life. Jefferson’s testimony is clear and has been accepted by mankind. Of Washington he says, “His integrity was the purest, his justice the most inflexible I have ever known, no motives of interest or consanguinity, of friendship or hatred, being able to bias his decision.” Lord Brougham says, “It will be the duty of the historian and the sage, in all ages, to omit no occasion of commemorating this illustrious man, and until time shall be no more a test of the progress which our race has made in wisdom and virtue will be derived from the veneration paid to the immortal name of Washington.”

In such times, and with such contemporaries there was born in Haddingtonshire, Scotland, February 5, 1722, John Witherspoon, the son of a pious, faithful, scholarly minister of the gospel, and a lineal descendant of John Knox of blessed memory.

At an early age he was sent to school at Haddington. Here his good habits, quick conception and rapid progress gave assurance that one day he should fill a large space in the eye of mankind. From fourteen to twenty-one years of age he attended the University of Edinburgh. In each class he was respectable; in the divinity class he displayed much soundness of criticism and remarkable precision of thought.

Read More