142 
Dr Alexander devoted, of course, far more of his time and energy 
to theology than to philosophy. And it may safely be said that 
among his contemporaries in Scotland there was no more generally 
accomplished a theologian, although he was doubtless surpassed by 
several of them in particular qualities. He attained a high reach of 
excellence alike in exegetical, historical, apologetic, systematic, and 
practical theology. In all these departments he produced excellent 
w T orks. On any special theological problem he could at once bring 
to bear ample knowledge and a rich combination of strong and 
disciplined mental powers. It cannot, indeed, be said that in 
theology, any more than in philosophy, he opened up or even 
followed out new paths of research. His mind rapidly reached 
maturity, and the religious opinions which he formed in youth 
remained almost unmodified to the close of his life. Within the 
limits of so-called orthodoxy, however, his intellect acted with 
admirable freedom and effectiveness. He held firmly to the 
Calvinistic system of doctrine and to the Congregational scheme 
of Church government, but with conspicuous independence of 
judgment. On various theological and ecclesiastical questions he 
differed decidedly even from those with whom he was in the main 
most in agreement. This appears very clearly in his Memoirs of 
Dr Wardlaw, in which criticism mingles so largely with admira- 
tion. 
Dr Alexander took a somewhat prominent part in most of the 
religious controversies of his time. On the platform and through 
the press he felt called to set forth his views on Episcopacy, Anglo- 
Catholicism, Romanism, Church Establishments, and the like; he 
was drawn into the Voluntary, Spiritual Independence, Morrisonian, 
and some minor conflicts. It will be admitted by all, however, 
that while he .always fought with vigour, he also always fought 
without bitterness or unfairness, and obviously from no love of 
strife itself or desire for personal or party victory, but from a sense 
of what he felt due to truth and the public good. As was to Lave 
been expected in the case of one whose mind w T as so justly balanced 
and so catholic in its sympathies, the more experience he acquired 
of religious controversy the more disappointed he became with its 
results, and in his later life he kept aloof from it. 
As a pulpit orator he was of remarkable merit. Never aiming at 
