22'd PROF. F. F. ROGET, ON FREDERIC GODET, SWISS DIVINE, 



to save the Church. The event proved that Godet was a man 

 who could be trusted to dominate the contradictory aspects of 

 such a situation, turning them to good purpose for the political 

 consolidation of the connnunity. The Kepublican regime, from 

 the point of view of the safe-guarding of the Kingdom of God, 

 seemed to afford no worse opportunity than the good old regime 

 it displaced. 



In 1860 Godet lost his wife, who had made him the father 

 of seven children. The man who said of books: ''View them 

 as dust and let them return to dust," was now for the Hrst time 

 put to a serious personal trial. He would have wished to dwell 

 upon his loss and cultivate the memory of the one who had 

 gone. But the torrent of his occupations, lessons, letters, 

 pastoral visits, did not allow him to linger beside that grave, 

 where, when it closed over the body of his wife, his heart swelled 

 with gratitude that he had been allowed to keep for fifteen years 

 the treasure that God had given him. 



In 1862 he entered upon his second union by marrying 

 Mademoiselle Caroline Alioth, who for some time already had 

 supervised the education of the two eldest of his daughters. 



At that time Godet was far forward with his Commentary on 

 St. John, his principal work, in which his son George was the 

 scribe. The manuscript of this work was almost lost in a fire. 

 Its publication began in 1863, at Paris. It should be noticed 

 that the author of that, and of so many other excellent contri- 

 butions to biblical philology, lacked the academic title of Doctor 

 of Divinity. 



In 1866, tiring of the double burden of his pastoral and pro- 

 fessional duties, he laid down his pastoral charge. He was right 

 in sacrificing his pulpit to his cliair. 



His credit as a commentator of Scripture kept increasing, and 

 though his life became more monotonous, immersed in books, 

 lectures and letter-writing, so that we have henceforth little to 

 relate about his long career, his influence waxed in direct pro- 

 portion to his concentration of effort upon an object suited to 

 expand his notoriety. His authority lay in this, that he was a 

 man of brain, flesh and temper, rather than a scholar ; a Chris- 

 tian rather than a divine. 



The dogmatic formula of his faith sprang from the innermost 

 sanctuary of his Christian soul ; his theology was all employed 

 in the service of righteous living. He would accept or reject a 

 dogma according as it brought him nearer to, or seemed to part 

 him from, Christ. He upheld the pre-existence of Christ 

 for no other reason than that. But he asserted also the 



