had come in March, 1862, to take part in the consecration of Dr. R. H. Wilmer as Bishop of Alabama. Having been, under God, privileged to be with him during the last thirty-six hours of his stay upon earth, I would fain speak of the solemnities of the closing hours of this man of God. But that work has been committed to another; and so I conclude the duty assigned to me by asking you to stand for a moment at the end of this history, and see what, under God, he was permitted to accomplish. He began his ministry when the Church in Virginia was at its lowest ebb, -so low that the General Convention made a record to the effect that its restoration might be considered hopeless. Against the protests of friends who thought it a real sacrifice that such talents as his should be given to the Church, he entered the ministry. Against their more earnest protests that he should not go into the Episcopal Church, and become identified with what they declared emphatically was a lost cause, he entered our ministry.

When we remember how he toiled, how he denied himself, how long he had to wait, and then what the Church in Virginia was before he left us, we thank God that the dear Bishop's own eyes were permitted to see the glorious triumph. In a sermon upon the occasion of the Bishop's death, Dr. Sparrow eloquently recites the points here touched upon, and adds,

"And he had his reward: he lived to see the Church in Virginia in great prosperity. Never was it so prosperous as at the beginning of our national troubles. The Bishop then saw around him a body of Clergy surpassed by none for efficiency and faithfulness. He saw the congregations committed to their care increasing yearly in all

the fruits of the Spirit. Missionary zeal was spreading on every hand, and substantial aid more and more afforded to the cause. Neither foreign, domestic, nor diocesan missions were overlooked. The Education Society, for the aid of young men preparing for the ministry, was deriving an adequate support from Virginia alone, though helping young men from all the States; educational institutions for both sexes in connection with the Church were prospering; and the Theological Seminary was far better provided with every species of accommodation, and better filled with students, than it had ever been before. In the progress of things toward this point of prosperity, it should also be mentioned, there had been very little fluctuation and no backsets.' Owing to the consummate prudence of him who took a leading part in all these matters, the progress of the Diocese had been as continuous and unbroken as the advance of the dawn to the broad daylight."

6

We may truly add, he left a Diocese loyal to the truth as our standards set it forth, loyal to all the requirements of the Church.

I feel it to be a simple yet bounden obligation, as the author of this narrative, to put this statement upon record. So many and so absurd have been the accusations that have been bruited about for years as to the irregularities in this Diocese, that my account would be unfair and incomplete if this part of it should be suppressed. Our Missionary Bishops in the wide West, or some of them at least, tell their Clergy to remember that the PrayerBook was made for man, and not man for the PrayerBook. They urge them to speak the truth boldly and in love as they have opportunity; to go on in the way of common sense, and not to let themselves or the word of God be bound by impossibilities in the matter of our full liturgical worship. When we remember that almost all of Virginia was missionary ground for many years after

1785, it would be strange if our Clergy could always find themselves able to preach the Gospel along with the enjoyment of our service in its integrity. But, despite all their disadvantages, they adhered to that ritual with a fidelity that deserved what was said of them sixty years ago. It was in the Convention of 1825. Bishop Moore had urged the great excellences of the liturgy; and, fearing that the charges against his Diocese which had been scattered broadcast might have some foundation, he affectionately addressed his brethren upon the subject. The Committee on the State of the Church, whilst indorsing all his eulogium, and seconding his fervent appeal for a close adherence to the prescribed order, said, "At the same time, the Convention feels bound, in duty to the Church in Virginia, to state that but few instances of departure have occurred, and also that there is a growing attachment to the services of the Church throughout the Diocese."

In closing this necessarily hasty survey of the labors, the trials, and the successes of Bishops Madison, Moore, and Meade, let us chronicle this as the greatest of their successes, that they built up, under God, a Church loyal to the Gospel of Christ, loyal to the Prayer-Book, Protestant Episcopal Church. And, with a very slight change in words, let us believe with the venerable senior professor of our seminary in his address at the semicentennial

a

"Should the time ever come when another spirit than that of Bishop Meade shall be the spirit of this Diocese, when another gospel shall be preached here and another theology taught here, when, though the symbols of the Divine Presence are here, that Presence

itself shall be withdrawn, then shall voices be heard, as when Jerusalem was destroyed, saying sorrowfully, 'Let us depart hence;' and the fingers of a man's hand shall come forth, and write upon our pulpits, The glory is departed.''

But without any such foreboding, and indulging in no vain spirit of prophecy, I would rather close here with the words of Bishop Madison in 1791, - words in such exact sympathy with the opening sermon of this Council:

66

'My brethren, vain will be our endeavors for the prosperity of our Zion, unless they be attended with fervent prayers that God will graciously enable us to perform our duty with zeal, fidelity, and success. Our sufficiency is of God: to Him let us look with our united supplications, that He will look down from heaven, and behold and visit this vine and the vineyard which His right hand hath planted; that He will shed the dew of His blessing upon the labors of His servants here assembled; that He will prosper the ministry in their endeavors to revive a just sense of true religion; that He will dispose the hearts of the people to receive the Word; and that the fruits of righteousness may abound more and more in every member of this Church, through our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen."

THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF VIRGINIA.

BY RT. REV. GEORGE W. PETERKIN, D.D.

I AM to speak a few words to-night in the interests of the Virginia Seminary.

The history of that seminary in its general outlines, and the work in its main features, are so well known, that, even if no one else were to speak on the subject, I need not go into many of those details which in themselves would be interesting and important. It is only about twelve years since the alumni and friends of the seminary met to celebrate its semi-centennial, and I doubt not but that the remembrance of that occasion is still fresh in the minds of many who are here to-night. The addresses of Bishops Johns and Lee, and of Drs. Packard, Andrews, Tyng, Slaughter, and Dalrymple, made on that occasion, have been preserved in suitable form, and furnish to-day a rich storehouse of material for him who would make himself familiar with the history and work of the seminary.

We learn from those published addresses, that to the Diocese of Virginia belongs the credit of being the first in this country to take steps to provide for the education of its candidates for Orders.

This was in 1813; and the movement culminated ten