RELIGIOUS PROGRESS AND CHRISTIAN CULTURE. 3! 



gland in feeling, in moral character, in intelligence, in social customs, in 

 speech, in family surnames, as it ought to be, in the speaker's humble 

 opinion, in geographical and politi'cal allotment. 



Such havin.;: been the point of departure, and such the motives and in- 

 fluences under which progress was begun, we turn now to view the process 

 of moral and religious development. The chief formative influence with- 

 out doubt, at that time was the pulpit. The ministry was not subordinate 

 to, so much as it was co-ordinate with, the magistracy. Indeed, in some 

 respects the latter was subordinate. All civil regulations being based upon 

 the Mosaic code, and the minister being the authorized interpreter of that 

 code, to him the magistrate often looked for judicial direction. The func- 

 tion of the pulpit in those days was large. The minister had to read and 

 think for the entire community. He was the fountain not only of Theol- 

 ogy, but of Philosophy, moral, political, social, natural. No review or 

 newspaper invaded his province. The pews had never read in advance of 

 the Sunday's sermon. The pulpit was the type of that modern invention, 

 the phonograph, which gathers into its ear whatever voices may be stir- 

 ring in the air, and grinds them out again with an intonation of its own, 

 for the benefit of the curious bystanders. What the ministers were think- 

 ing about in those days, what were the subjects which enlisted religious 

 and speculative thought, is a question which it would be interesting to fol- 

 low out, It was not Evolution. It was settled more firmly in their 

 minds, than the everlasting hills upon their foundations, that the universe 

 visible and invisible was created out of absolute non-entity in si.x literal 

 days of twenty-four hours each. It was not Inspiration. The Book as 

 they held it in their hands was the immediate product of the breath of 

 God, blowing through human lips and tremulous in the penman's stylus. 

 The Hebrew of the Old Testament was, by that fact, acknowledged the 

 Holy tongue once spoken in the Karthly Paradise and to be spoken again 

 by all redeemed souls as the one dialect of Heaven. It was not Eschatol- 

 ogy. The last thmgs to be revealed were as fixed and palpable to their 

 anticipations, as were the unchangeable facts of the past to their memory. 

 What then were they thinking about ? If anyone shall wish two hundred 

 years hence to know what themes engaged the thoughtful men of this year 

 of grace 1883, I leave for him now this piece of advice: that he go to the 

 libraries of our Colleges and Theological Seminaries and hunt up, if thev 

 are then in existence, the Commencement programmes containing the 

 themes of our graduates. Vour Commencement orator prides himself in 

 wrestling with the problems of the time. 



Now during the first century of our country's history there was a suc- 

 cession of remarkable men filling the pulpits of these churches who were 

 graduates of Harvard College. These were: 



1. Nathaniel Brewster, in Brookhaven, 1665 — '90. 



2. Joshua Hobart, in Southold, 1674 — 171 7. 



3. Joseph Whiting, in Southampton, 1680 — 1723. Of whom Cotton 

 Mather writes in the Magnalia: "Joseph is at this day a worthy and pain- 

 ful .minister of the Gospel, at Southampton, on Long Island." 



4. John Harriman, in Southampton, 1675 — '79. 



5. Joseph Taylor, in Southampton, 1680 — '82. 



6. George Phillips, in Brookhaven, 1697 — -1739. 



7. Ebenezer White, in Bridge-Hampton, 1695 — 1748. 



8. Nathaniel Huntting, in East-Hampton, 1696 — 1746. 



