THE life of a christian minister, spent in labour, for the
eternal welfare of his fellow-beings, must always be an object of the greatest
veneration and love to every Christian community. The life of such a man, a
christian people will always wish to become acquainted with; for such a life
will not only strengthen the affection of the good and virtuous, to the great
Redeemer of mankind, and their resolution to adhere to the precepts of his
gospel; but it will have some tendency to promote a reformation among the
sinful and unbelieving.
A true christian will never rest satisfied with his own belief
in the truth of the gospel; neither will he be satisfied with well wishing its
dissemination: he will himself labour in the vineyard; he will “plough in
hope,” although the harvest of his labours may be cut short; he will use always
his best exertions to make the ignorant and prejudiced mind accessible to
divine truth, both by precept and example.
The minister of the gospel of Christ, who sincerely labours
in his calling, is also an object of the greatest respect. Whatever we may
think of that statesman, who, by the labours of his closet is able to set a
continent in arms, or of that philosophy which throws open the mysteries of the
natural world; or of those splendid achievements which adorn a warrior’s name;
how trifling and insignificant, how like the “stuff dreams are made of,” do
they all appear, in comparison with the soldier of Christ, who conquers the
world; who having “ buckled on the armour of God,” follows the “great Captain
of our salvation” to the conquest of the “world, the flesh, and the Devil.”
There is, in fact, something so soul captivating in the christian warfare, that
we must indeed be “trumpet-tongued” before we can speak its praise. There is
also such a dignity of character in the christian soldier, as well as meekness
and gentleness, that if respect did not always accompany sincere affection, we
could hardly determine whether we respected or loved him most.
These few desultory remarks were suggested by reflecting on
the ministry of the late Rev. Doctor Hitchcock, a short account of whose life
we now present to our readers. We however do not affirm, that Doctor Hitchcock
ought to be ranked among the greatest divines: he was probably not so great as
he was good. His doctrines however were truly evangelical. He believed that
Jesus Christ was the way, and the only way to eternal salvation. His sermons
were usually calculated to persuade and convince, rather than terrify or
command. He preached the unbounded mercy and goodness of God oftener perhaps,
than the terrour of divine wrath and justice; although he always made the
sinner acquainted with his real situation; what he had to do and believe,
before he could expect that goodness and mercy. That God would administer
justice, he sincerely believed—but he believed he would administer it in tender
mercy. He always looked up to God as a merciful father, who could not take
pleasure in the death of the wicked: still he believed that justice must be
done, and that the vicarious sufferings of our Saviour satisfied that justice;
not however universally, but with respect to those who were willing to take his
“yoke upon them.”
His sermons also usually contained sound moral precepts.— He
was convinced that sound morality was essentially requisite in every well
regulated community; that in fact the civil order of things depended, in great
measure, upon it. And although it was not in itself sufficient to “see God,” it
greatly aided and prepared the way for the dissemination of gospel truth. “He
was convinced, in fact, that it not only strengthened the social compact, and
rendered mankind more willing to obey the new commandment of our Saviour, to
“love one another,” but that it also prepared the mind for the reception of
evangelical knowledge, and the heart, with the assistance of “preventing grace,”
for that new birth, which our Saviour said to a ruler of the Jews, was
necessary, to “see the kingdom of God.” Perhaps he more forcibly felt the
necessity of morality from the circumstance of his having been a chaplain in
the American army; where from the nature of his situation, he must have
witnessed depravity of the most odious character: where in fact morality was
the only thing he could hope to inculcate with any degree of success.— The din
of war, the loud yelling cries of blood and battle, are too incompatible with
the mild and gentle accents of the gospel; however painful the thought they
cannot be heard: the dulcet notes of the “new song” are too often overpowered.
If a chaplain can enforce, even with the assistance of a strict military
discipline, an observance of moral rectitude, in such a place, it is all ' he
can reasonably expect.
This circumstance might have been the cause, why he so forcibly
inculcated morality—why he so usually blended the moralist with the divine. But
whether we consider him the one or the other, we find sufficient to admire. He
was as faithful a servant of Christ, as he was a sound moral teacher. He was
born at Springfield, in the State of Massachusetts, of respectable parents, in
the year 1744. We have no record of his early life; it is probable, however, that
nothing remarkable occurred; his genius was not of that east, which would be
likely to burst forth in extraordinary youthful blazes. It was left to the
maturity of age to stamp his character with usefulness. His early education
however was not neglected; he was fitted and entered college, and received the
honours of Harvard University, in the year 1767. Soon after he graduated, he
devoted himself to the study of divinity; this however was no new study,
although his views. were now directed thereto, with more particular reference
to entering on the gospel ministry; in which, his course afterwards was
continually progressing and luminous, and in the course of two or three years,
became a preacher of the gospel. “His performances, while a candidate, met with
general acceptance, and in 1771 he was ordained a colleague with the venerable and
excellent Mr. Chipman, Pastor of the second church in Beverly, whose age and
infirmities incapacitated him from publick services. While his life continued,
the two Pastors lived together in great mutual affection and harmony. Dr. Hitchcock
exerted himself for the spiritual and temporal interests of his people, enjoyed
their affectionate esteem, and acquired the approbation and friendship of
neighbouring societies and ministers.”
It was during his ministry in Beverly, that he married Miss ACHSAH
JOURDAN, of Portland, in the District of Maine, a lady of unaffected piety,
whose mind was accomplished, and whose heart was affectionately disposed. With
such a wife he lived in the full enjoyment of connubial happiness. Mrs. Hitchcock
was a member of the church under his pastoral care—and she lived in holy
communion with her spiritual master, which she evinced by the purity of her
life, and a steady adherence to the outward institutions of the visible church
on earth. She died on the fifth day of May, A. D. 1801, lamented by all who had
enjoyed the happiness of her acquaintance.
Early in our national revolution, Dr. Hitchcock became a
chaplain in the army. He was induced to this, from a sense of duty he believed
he owed his country. He probably revolved the whole contest between the mother
country and her colonies in his own mind, before he engaged. He probably viewed
it, as it really was, a contest for dominion
on the one side, and self-defence on
the other. He considered the pretensions of Great Britain unwarrantable;
totally inconsistent with our established rights; and that, had we submitted,
instead of being British subjects, we should have been British slaves—slaves to a British ministerial
faction, who made encroachments on our rights, not so much from the hope of
gain, or of adding strength to the British empire, as from the pride of
dominion. Had the faction permitted us to have been British subjects in
reality—to have enjoyed all the privileges of British subjects, the probability
is we should have owed them allegiance much longer: but being the sons of Sydney, Russell and Hampden, we could not, we
would not be slaves. As our warm and powerful advocate, the Hon. Edmund
Burk observed, “we were a high minded people, who snuff at the approach of
tyranny in every tainted breeze.”— Such was our character, and such was the
character of the faction which wished to triumph over us; and being viewed as
such, Dr. Hitchcock felt himself impelled by a principle of duty to uphold his
native country, in the struggle. Whatever, as a christian, he might have
thought of war in general, a war of self-defence was a righteous war; a war warranted by the first law of nature.
While he was chaplain in the army, “his social qualities and
engaging deportment made him highly acceptable; while his nice regard to
decorum and dignity of character commanded respect and added weight to his
efforts on the side of order and virtue, of patriotick bravery, zeal and
perseverance.” But if any proof was wanting of the estimation in which he was
held in the army, the marked attentions, which the father of our country shewed
him might be adduced. With Washington he was not only personally acquainted,
but on intimate terms of friendship. That great and illustrious chief, at the
mention of whose name every eye sparkles with rapture, respected and loved him;
often invited him to his quarters, when leisure from the “tented field” allowed
him to listen to the accents of friendship and religion—and when that immortal
hero slept with his fathers, the impression which that event made upon his mind
was deep indeed: but being accustomed to practice as well as to teach the
precepts of his divine master, he was enabled to say—“father; not mine, but thy
mill be done.”
His funeral discourse on the death of his friend, abundantly
shews in what light he viewed him, and what were his feelings—notwithstanding
he was compelled to exclaim in the language of his text on that occasion1—“The
beauty of Israel is slain upon thy high places. How are the mighty fallen, and
the weapons of war perished”—and mourn, “incessantly mourn,” as Israel did, the
death of Moses; notwithstanding, in this instance, he felt the peculiar effect
of the awful sentence of “dust to dust,” still he was enabled to say, “the Lord
gave, the Lord taketh away, blessed be the name of the Lord.” But besides a
duty of resignation, his discourse, on that event, finely illustrates the
publick and private character of Washington. It is also replete with
instruction, both on moral and political subjects. It shows the necessity of
civil institutions; the necessity of restraints from civil law, as well as the
duty of civil obedience ; all which are forcibly inculcated; while a vein of
unaffected piety runs throughout the whole.
While he was chaplain, his duty compelled him to relinquish
the pastoral charge of his people at Beverly. Accordingly he was amicably
dismissed from that people in the year 1780.— Soon after that event, he
occasionally preached in Providence, when he had leisure from the duty of the
camp. The first congregational church and society, in this place, were so much
charmed with his preaching, so much delighted with his doctrines, and his
character as a servant of Christ, that they earnestly gave him a call to become
their Pastor. His feelings told him he was sincerely called, and we hope and
trust, called of God, “as was Aaron,” to the high and responsible office of
priesthood. With humility he obeyed the call, accepted the office of Pastor,
and was installed minister of that society on the first day of October, A. D.
1783. In this office, beloved by his flock, he continued for nearly twenty
years, till the 26th day of February, A. D. 1803, when he departed this life,
regretted by all, in the 59th year of his age, and expiring said “I sleep in
Jesus.”
As we before observed, we do not rank him with those who
possess the greatest talents; but we may with those who possess the most useful.
While in the performance of his ministerial duties in this town, he not only
promoted with all his power the best interests of the religion he professed,
but he never let pass an opportunity of rendering unto society any other
essential benefit. The education of youth, in a particular manner, occupied his
attention. Impressed with the necessity of early and good education, he was
always foremost in the establishment of institutions for that purpose. He was
the first “who led the way” to the establishment of free schools in this State,
and to procure an act to be passed the Legislature for that purpose. The wisdom
of design, and the benevolent execution of this plan, will always be remembered
with gratitude and love. ‘Thousands of poor and orphan children, who otherwise
would have been left to the uncertainty of chance, or to the frigid support of
extorted alms, even for those first rudiments, which are necessary, in the
unshapen beginning, in the Aurora of the mind, must now always remember his
spirited and noble exertions for its2 establishment, with the most
thankful hearts.
How must, also, many a useful citizen feel, when he discovers
that to the exertions of this philanthropist, he owes all his importance, all
his reputation in society, and all his ability to be useful to his
fellow-beings. Surely his soul will cling to his memory, as humble repentance
does to the remembrance of forgiving mercy.—His remembrance “being written
within the book and volume of the brain,” he will not, he cannot forget him.
But the exertions Doctor Hitchcock made to establish free
schools, and to promote the education of youth, constitute by no means the most
valuable part of his character. Notwithstanding he was a friend to youth, he
was a greater friend to manhood and old age. In the language of Dr. Tappan, who
preached his funeral discourse, “he laboured with great zeal to promote
brotherly union among christians, and ministers of different denominations. For
this purpose he introduced and eagerly cherished stated friendly meetings—one
embracing the several clergymen of this town—another, the pastors and other
leading members of the various christian communions. The result of these and
similar measures, was the growth of mutual esteem, and confidence of religious
candour and fellowship, with all their lovely and happy effects. He was also
distinguished by habitual and active benevolence. This he exemplified in his
warm and steady friendship, in his generous and cheerful hospitality; in his
kind and soothing offices to the sick and afflicted; in his tender and liberal
donations to the needy; in large contributions to publick and pious uses. The
same spirit remarkably adorned and endeared his domestick conduct. His
affectionate and unceasing attention to his amiable consort, amid her long
continued bodily infirmities; his paternal goodness, living and dying, to his
adopted child; the benevolent patronage which he afforded to other connexions;
his humane and condescending behaviour to his servants, especially to a
faithful African, whom his kindness redeemed from bondage and exceedingly
attached to his person and service—these facts are striking monuments of his
excellent disposition.”
“His discourses from the desk,” says the same pious divine,
“were chiefly occupied in explaining and urging evangelical faith and
repentance, goodness and charity, and the whole train of christian virtues, as
recommended by the example of our divine Master, and enforced by the gracious
and sublime discoveries of his gospel. The style of his compositions was
perspicuous, neat and correct.” “The closing scene of his life gave an
impressive display of the force and excellence of his christian principles. It
exhibited that patient resignation to the will of God; that triumph over pain
and death; that comforting anticipation of future glory which the spirit and
hope of the gospel are fitted to inspire.” But his exertions to promote the
interests of religion may be considered the most valuable. He not only exerted
himself in the pulpit, in private meetings and families, to promote the gospel,
but he gave more than six thousand dollars to the first congregational church
in Providence, for the support of a christian ministry. Such a noble enthusiasm
in the cause of religion and virtue, must always be remembered with gratitude
and joy, and we hope will have tendency to induce others to do likewise.
Very soon after his settlement in Providence, he was elected
into the fellowship of Rhode-Island College, (now Brown University) and in that
important office rendered very essential services to that seminary of learning.
He very often suggested to the professors and tutors, useful plans for
government and instruction: in fact, very few were so adequate in devising ways
and means “to teach the young idea how to shoot,” or to direct the mind into
the most useful channel.
His conversation in private circles was always pleasant, but
never light. He had a great idea of dignity of character on all occasions; of
course he never allowed his manners or conversation to be tinctured with any thing
that was light or trivial.—Perhaps his invariable dignified deportment was
considered by some as originating in pride, but those who best knew him, were
convinced it arose from a desire of being exemplary in all his conduct. The
influence of example he thought to be great, and 80 far as his example might
go, he was determined it should be good.
He was a member of the society
of Cincinnati; and very few, with more warmth, “espoused the fraternal,
humane and publick views of their institution.” In fact, in whatever light we
view him, we find much to admire, and little or nothing to condemn. We
therefore hold him up to our readers, and to the world at large, as a man,
though not great, yet useful—as a man whose conduct through
life was governed by honest and upright principles. He published several small
but useful treatises on different subjects; and one treatise in particular,
entitled, “An answer to the question, why
do you observe the rite commonly called the Lord’s Supper?” certainly
possesses considerable merit. He forcibly sets forth the reasons for
celebrating that christian ordinance—elucidates the nature of the institution,
and its use and design, while he portrays the temper and character the
communicant ought to possess, to render his attendance upon it, a “service
acceptable to God,” or profitable to himself. He also explains the subject in
such a manner as to remove the doubts and scruples which arise in many minds,
“from St. Paul’s strictures on the licentious conduct of the Corinthians.” This
reproof of St. Paul has undoubtedly detered many well meaning persons from
coming to the table, for fear they should eat and drink unworthily, and thereby
be “guilty of the body and blood of Christ;” but from his explanation, “there
is nothing in the nature of this institution to excite fearful apprehensions,
nor any thing in the words, the time, or circumstances of its original
appointment, that can deter any person of sober life and conversation from it.”
This treatise is written in very plain and simple style, adapted to the
capacity of any reader. The subject is well digested, and arranged with method:
and although the arguments may not be thought conclusive by some, they must,
nevertheless have great weight with all: in fact, they are generally supported
by texts from scripture. It is a subject, however, about which a great deal has
been said and written: we therefore forbear to make any comment; we only wish
to state what were his impressions. We are sensible it has been a subject about
which different sects in religion have entertained widely different opinions,
about which there has been much disputation. According to our regulations
therefore, we must hold ourselves aloof from espousing any particular sect, or
advancing any doctrine which may be considered polemical.
He also published “a serious address to communicants, with
some short meditations, devotional exercises of heart, and forms of prayer,
suitable for the communion season.” This short treatise also possesses
merit.—It shews his own temper of mind, and the disposition of his heart,
towards that God on whom he humbly relied, in all situations in life, as well
as the necessary temper of all, in the communion season. But perhaps his own
words would best show what that temper was, and what the disposition of his
heart. “While I adore,” says he, “the goodness of God, as, displayed in man’s
redemption, let. me. consider my own meanness and unworthiness; and while I
receive the symbols of a crucified Saviour, let me consider how, often I have
crucified the son of God afresh, and put him to open shame. Often has he been
wounded in the house of his friends. Should God be strict to mark iniquity, I
cannot answer. His mercy is the ground of my hope—Christ hath begotten us to a
lively hope. He is the author both of life and hope to the penitent believer.
The brightness and strength of this hope is observed by the imperfection of my
faith and obedience. Under a sense of my transgression let me now bow before
the Lord, and: with an humble, penitent soul, seek his face and favour, that
the elements now before me, may be made effectual to the end of their
appointment.” In fact, the whole of this address is very well written; and when
read in a proper frame. of mind, cannot fail of having very beneficial effects,
It cannot fail “to wake the soul” and “mend the heart,” while. it will enlarge
our knowledge of the meaning of that sacred: ordinance, the Lord’s Supper.
We now will close this. article with one or two remarks.—
Although we do not wish to impress our readers with an idea that Dr. Hitchcock
had no faults or weaknesses of character; on the contrary, we are willing to
allow, that like other men, he had frailties—no one is perfect—but from the
best information, derived from those who knew him. perfectly, we are warranted
in saying he had no particular weakness, unless the desire he had to be
considered an author, might be one. He published some books which did not meet
with much success in this country, although they were handsomely spoken of by
European. reviewers: but we will not praise or condemn them; we merely state.
the fact as it is, as we are bound to do, in giving a faithful outline of his
character. We shall only remark, that if he had faults, they are lost in the
blaze of his excellencies—they are mere trifling spots, which cannot, which
ought not a moment to obscure the brightness of his reputation.
_______________
1 Yes, the princely soul of our beloved
Washington has taken its flight! he is no longer disturbed by the concussions
of our jarring elements. The Heavens opened wide their huge portals to receive
his pure and ennobled spirit; angels hail him welcome to his native seat; the
immense temple of God becomes the place of his residence forever. He has ceased
from his labours, but his virtues will long live. The inscription on the lofty
marble will for a long time inform the inquisitive traveller—Here lies the
venerable chief—“first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his
countrymen.” ‘The monumental inscription shall mouldering time efface; but his
heroick and benevolent deeds are recorded on the tablet of the heart—while man
lives, they will live—so long as virtue has a name, they will be admired; yea,
his justly acquired fame shall survive the wreck of nature, and wreaths of
glory crown his head when time shall be no more.
(Dr. Hitchcock's funeral discourse on the death of Washington.)
2 Our readers will pardon us if we embrace this
opportunity to render to the town of Providence a tribute which is justly their
due. Notwithstanding the act of the Legislature, entitled “An act to establish
free schools,” the only publick act we believe ever passed in this State for
the encouragement of education, was repealed, still the town of Providence, in
their corporate capacity, governed by a policy which does honour to the hearts
and to the wisdom of its citizens, would not relinquish the motives and the
provisions of the act. And they still continue to pay, out of their own
treasury, about four thousand dollars annually, for the support of free
schools. Such conduct as this we deem worthy of the highest praise, as it is of
the greatest reward: and we have no doubt the town of Providence will reap a
just compensation, in the superiour value and worth of its citizens, which such
policy cannot fail to promote. Such conduct as this we deem worthy of imitation, and we hope the virtuous and patriotick
throughout our little State will
follow the example.
SOURCE: “A Sketch of the Life and Character of the Late Rev.
ENOS HITCHCOCK, D. D. Pastor of the First Congregational Church in Providence,”
The Rhode Island Literary Repository,
Vol. 1, No. 6, September 1814, pp. 283-92
