F 104 . •N662 T76 1903

v

Reminiscences

--QF­

THE REV. EDWIN HARWOOD, D. D.,

Rector of Trinity Church,

New Haven, Conn.,

I Bsg-- r8gs.

EDITED BY THE REV. FRANK WOODS BAKER, D. D., Rector of Trinity Church.

NEW HAVEN TRINITY PRESS 1903.

With the compliments of the CJ?._edo,., Wardens ana Vestrymen of Tl'inity Ch.ul'ch, !J{ew Ha"Hn, Connedicut. , c;w.._) 1~ ./Mf ~~ / /7).~.~'.

PREFATORY NOTE.

I cannot let these reminiscences of Dr. Harwood go to press without writing a brief preface. It is only just to those who have given time to their preparation to state that they do not, in any sense, pretend to be a biography of the man of whom they treat; that they can, at best, be only sugges­ tive of the power and real strength of scholarship and per­ sonal charm ofDr. Harwood. I think his friends will agree with me that only those whose privilege it has been to sit down in the quiet of Dr. Harwood's study and listen to his conversation, realize where his greatest power lay. He had read widely and thought profoundly on a great variety of topics, and, whether one agreed with him or not, it was an education and a stimulus to hear him discourse on them. He was a master of the art of conversation on subjects worth talking about. He possessed many personal charms, was a thorough gentleman of the good old school, was al­ ways self-possessed and never affected by the nervous rush ofthe day. I shall always esteem it one of the privileges of my life to have been called to the rectorship of Trinity while he was Rector Emeritus. I came to know Dr. Harwood well and to respect him greatly. I can, however, only imagine what he must have been in his prime. The place which Dr. Harwood occupied in the Church at 1 large was conspicuous. At a time when the Church was in danger of running either to the extreme of narrow evangeli­ calism or that of sacramentarianism and of losing sight of her true catholicity, men like Dr. Washburn, Bishop Potter, John Cotton Smith, Philips Brooks and Dr. Harwood stood as giants of force and intellect and demanded that larger views should be held and that she should recognize her true historic heritage and keep herself as charitably and spiritu­ ally broad as thE teaching of her Divine Master. But what Dr. Harwood's position in the Church at large was, the fol­ lowing papers make plain. Like most men Dr. Harwood had his strong and his weak sides. He cared little for ordinary parochial and pastoral duties. They were irksome to him. He loved his books and he loved to preach and he was always ready to impart the treasures ofhis thought to his chosen friends in the seclusion of his study. He was always a staunch friend to theyoung­ er clergy. In an age of over-organization, when most rectors are overwhelmed by the great increase ofnecessary details con­ nected with their office, and are obliged, almost, to steal the time for study, the memory ofthe erudition of such men as Dr. Harwood should serve as a stimulus to greater scholar­ ship and to more earnest and fearless application of the old truths to the ever changing conditions of the times. FRANK wOODS BAKER, Rector of Trinity Church, New Haven, Conn.

2 Sermon preached by Rt. Rev. Chauncey Bruce Brewster, D. D., in Trinity Church, New Haven, on the occasion of the Memoria( Service for Dr. Harwood, Sunday morming, March t 6, t 902.

IT was the request of your Rector, which I found myself un­ able to gainsay, that on the occasion of this visitation I should speak ofthe eminent man who was for somanyyears Rector ofthis historic Parish, and who has lately beentaken from the Parish and the Diocese. I could wish that this duty had fallen to some one more competent by reason ofcloser acquaintance in recent years. I can only say that my words this morning do not claimthe dignity ofa memorial sermon and must necessarilybe a very inadequate tribute to one whose memory I should count it a privilege more worthily to honor. As I think ofDr. Harwood there comes to my mind that ancient description of the son of Jesse: "A mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters (in the Revised Version, prudent in speech), and a comely person, and the LoRD is with him."-I Sam. XVI: 18. The first thing one is i:rp.pelled to say is: This was a man. The manliness of him whom we remember, it is worth our while to note. When we remember that ofthe ministers of a : certain school in a former generation there has been record­ ed the observation: "A gently complaining and fatigued spirit is that in which Evangelical Divines are very apt to 3 pass their days," when we observe among the students in some of our theological seminaries a type which would seem more fitting in the candidates for the Girls' FriendlySociety, we are more ready to appreciate this fine example of manli­ ness in the Christian ministry. There was in him no slight­ est suggestion of theeffeminacythat is sometimes associated with religion. As you remember his comeliness of person, that fine type ofmanly beauty that to me seemed endowed with perpetual youth, that head so like the great Thomas Arnold's, that firm and massive lip, that well-knit, muscular frame, that erect carriage; you know also that the outward man was the index ofwhat mannerofman he was inwardly. He was characterized by an undeniable masculinity and strength ofmind and temper and will. His was always a robust vigour of thought. In his sermons and platform ad­ dresses, in his very manner of utterance one might be sen­ sible of a virile tone. There was certain positive directness and down-rightness in his fashion ofspeech and thought. One derived an impression ofhis strength of nature from a certain reticence regarding his deepest feelings and experien­ ces. That which he thought and felt was kept under the lock and key of a masterful will, repressing any full expres­ sion ofmuch that was characteristic within. In intercourse with him one felt the quiet power of self-control. A man of rare personal dignity, he manifested the gravity of a noble seriousness in tone ofconversation and in outward bearing. It was evident that his mind was resolutely set to meditate upon great and worthy things. Dr. Harwood was a typical scholar. Graduated from the University with high honors, he gave his best energies in loyal devotion to the Queen of Sciences, Theology. He had read widely, studied diligently, and thought profoundly. Especially was he a student ofsacred Scripture. From 1854 4 to 1859 he was Professor of the Literature and Interpreta­ tion of the Scriptures in the Berkeley Divinity School. Thence he brought to this parish the treasures of his scholarship. I well remember, as a boy, sitting in this Church, he1ng impressed by his reading of the Scriptures. That office he performed with a reverence and dignity and an accurate touch ofemphasis which brought out the mean­ ing ofevery word ofthat HolyWrit he knew so thoroughly. He was a man of vast reading in theology. That which especially characterized him as a theologian, I should say, was, first, his love of truth, and, secondly, his courageous faith in truth. Devotion to truth was with him a passion. His reverence for the authority of truth made him fearless, that is to say, he was not afraid of the truth and he was not afraid for the truth. Nor did he ever fear to speak out what he believed to be the truth. In theological controversy he was truly "a man of war," a foeman of undaunted prowess. As an example of his virile doggcdn ~ Js and fear­ lessness, let me quote these characteristic words from a pamphlet ofhis regarding a controversial topic: "We have ­ heard lately that this is a closed topic! Pray, will any one I tell me what is closed? How was it closed? When was it closed? Who closed it? It is not a closed, but a very open I topic." The words sound like him, one who has drunk de­ light ofbattle with his peers, "a mighty valiant man." "There is no note How dread an army hath enrounded him." It was impossible that such a man should be content with any narrow theological position. His feet must be set in a large room. He was conspicuous among a number ofprom­ inent Churchmen who moved on out of the old Evangelical party into a larger position, characterized by a tone and temper at once less given to literalism and less emotional, 5 more scholarly and thoughtful, with a wider outlook and broader sympathies. He appreciated the largeness of the spaces ofthe Kingdom of Christ. His was a mind that must r-.. bring truths into relation with each other in a large unity. With him the intellect must have its rights. He belonged to that school ofChurchmanship which approaches Christ on the intellectual side, which stands upon that promise: "Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." He would have been slow to call himselfa Connecticut Churchman. In his own way, however, he valued the his­ toric and Catholic position of the Church. In early life he had come under the influence ofthe great Dr. Muhlenberg, a seer who had visions ofwhat was for many men yet below the horizon. With Muhlenberg he was more closely asso­ ciated than any other clergyman, as trusted friend and fellow-worker. The name of Edwin Harwood is prominent on the list of names appended to the famous Memorial to the House ofBishops in 1853. This movement, regarded at the time as revolutionary, had for its object the vindication ofthe Church's Catholicity through a more thorough adap­ tation to the wants ofthe country and the times. It aimed to emancipate the Episcopate from some of the canonical limitations that fettered it. It urged upon the Bishops a certain course which was, in the language of the Memorial, "believed to be the peculiar province and high privilege of your venerable body as a college of Catholic and Apostolic Bishops, as such." This memorial movement was too far in advance of the time, but it was the forerunner ofthat declaration which we have been privileged to witness, the Chicago.Lambeth overture of Anglican Bishops addressed to' th.e world, thefirst signal step in the directionoftheunity of Christendom. Dr. Harwood's ecclesiastical services are especially worthy G ofnote. Having attended the English Church Congress, he brought to this country the idea of such an arena of frater­ nal discussion, and, having earnestly advocated a Church Congress here, he inaugurated it at a meeting of prominent clergymen held in his study in this city in May, 1874. That same year the first American Church Congress was held in New York. Thus to him, more than to any other man, was due the inception of an institution which has done much to moderate the rancour and to elevate the tone of theological controversy by bringing representatives of differing schools .and parties together and bringing them to a better under­ standing of each other. From 1877 on, he was elected a deputy to seven General conventions. In the House of Deputies he served on important committees; he was a member of the first Joint Committee on the Revision of the Prayer-Book, and he was Chairman ofthe original Commis­ sion on Marginal Readings in the English Bible. In the Con­ ventions ofthis Diocese he was for years foremost in debate and counsel. He was one of the Examining Chaplains of the Diocese and was for seven years Archdeacon of the New Haven Archdeaconry. For thirty-six years he has been Rector ofthis Parish, and since his restgnation, in 1895, he has been Rector Emeritus. As a preacher, you who heard him can describe him more adequately than one who speaks only out of the recollec­ tions ofboyhood. As I remember him in the pulpit, he was dignified in bearing and in manner, intellectually cogent, and with deep moral earnestness, but little given to emotional appeals and exhortations, a strong, weighty, and incisive preacher. He was certainly "prudent in speech," if by pnl­ dence we meftn that which is opposed to inconsiderateness, the wisdom which comes through much study, especially of those Holy Scriptures which are able to makP one wise, the

7 wisdom which comes of profound reflection and brooding meditation upon the greatest things. Favored, indeed, the people whose privilege it has been to learn of a teacher who had won his place among "those who know." As a parish priest his characteristic reserve made him seem to some undemonstrative and probably often prevented the expression of his feelings as a pastor. There are, however, many among you who saw another side of the man, who learned to love him for what he had been to you and who can never forget his sympathy, devotion, and labor of love. To the students of the University he was naturally drawn and was to many of them a counsellor and friend. To his brethren ofthe clergy he was a faithful brother and many of them found in him indeed a friend in need. There are those to whom life cannot be the same, as they think of this man gone and know they shall not look upon his like again. In his own life he was a man that had seen affliction. The trials and sorrows that befell him he bore with the uncom­ plaining reticence that was in accord with his nature, and that, moreover, betokened his patience of faith and the for­ titude of one who was willing to bear the cross after the Master and be partaker ofHis sufferings. In his sturdy manhood he seemed like a veteran oak that for many a year has battled with winds and tempests and witnessed the flash ofthe lightning-bolt, but yet stands unbroken, erect, unscathed. At last there came a final stroke, not to be withstood, that uprooted him and laid him low. He was bereft of her whose gracious companionship had blessed his life full fifty years. It is not for us to look upon that affliction, upon its overwhelming desolation or upon his child-like submission to be guided .through the darkness into light and peace. To you, his people, I commend his memory and example, 8 and particularly the lessons to be learned from the strength of his Christian character, from·the patience and fortitude with which he endured, as a soldier ofJesus Christ, from his loyal devotion to truth, his valor on behalf of truth, his courageous faith in truth and in the living God of truth. "A mighty valiant man, and a man of war," one of God's chivalry! "One who never turned his back but marched breast forward,, Never doubted clouds would break, Never dreamed, though right were worsted, wrong would triumph, Held we fall to rise, are LatHed to fight better, Sleep to wake. * * * * * • • • * Bid him forward, breast and back as either should be, "Strive and thrive!" cry "Speed,-fight on, fight ever There as here!"

9 Article by the Rev. Samuel Hartt D. D.t on Dr. Harwoodt from the Hartford Courant.

TO the briefnotice of the life and work of Rev. Dr. Edwin Harwood of New Haven, which accompanied the an­ nouncement of his death on Sttnday last, there may well be added a more full statement ofthe position which he held in the Episcopal Church and in the community, and a tribute to his character and to the value of the services which he rendered. Born in Philadelphia nearly eighty years ago, he was graduated at the University of Pennsylvania with rugh honors, atthe age of eighteen, in 1840. He studied theology at the General Theological Seminary in New York, complet­ ing his studies there in 1844, and was ordained with others by BishopB. T. Onderdonk on the 30th. ofJune in that year. It was a time of much theological excitement, especially in New York, where the Carey ordination had taken place but the year before; and Dr. Harwood was accustomed to say that he was a member of the only class of candidates ever ordained without an examination, the controversies at the seminarynotgivingthe professors any time in which to hold one. He began his ministrations in Oyster Bay, Long Island, but soon became rector of St. James's Church, New 10 York, then assistant minister of Grace Church, and in 1852 rector ofthe newly organized Church of the Incarnation, of whichhewasin reality 1:he founder. In 1854, Mr. Harwood became Professor ofthe Literature and Interpretation of the Scriptures in the Berkeley Divinity School, which was estab­ lished thatyearin Middletown; and there he spent five yean! in study and teaching, greatly enjoying the work and giving to the students the inspiration of his varied and graceful scholarship. In 1859 he was called to the rectorship of the important parish ofTrinity Church, New Haven, and there he continued as rector for thirty-six years, resigning in 1895 and receiving an electon as rector emeritus. He attained, as he deserved, great influence in New Ha­ ven, in the diocese of Connecticut, and in the councils of the Episcopal Church in this country. The Church Congress owes its inception very largely to him. He had attended the sixth meeting of the English Church Congress, and was greatly impressed with its workings and their possibilities, and havmg spoken earnestly in favor of similar meetings in this country, he brought the matter before a joint meeting of the clerical clubs of New York and Boston, held in his study in New Haven. The result was the establishment of the American Church Congress, which held its first meeting in 1874, and ofwhich Dr. Harwood continued an influential member. He was elected a deputy from Connecticut to the General Convention of1877 and to six succeeding triennial 1 conventions; and, beginning in 1880, he was a member ofthe veryimportantcommittee ofthe House ofDeputies on amend­ ments to the constitution. He was also appointed in 1880 a member ofthe fi.rstjointcommitteeonliturgicalenrichment and the revision of the Prayer-Book; and at a later day he v;as appointed chairman onthepartoftheHouseofDeputies, of the original commission on marginal readings for the 11 English version of the Bible. For many years he was a member ofthe committee on constitution and canons of the Connecticut Diocesan Convention, and after the death of Rev. Dr. Beardsley in 1891, he was its chairman and practi­ cally the leader ofthe house. From 1878 he was one of the examining chaplains of the diocese, by appointment of the bishop, and from 1879 a trustee oftheagcdandinfirmclergy and widows' fund, in which he was much interested, as also . in the more recently established clergy retief fund. In 1885 'Ydi .,, h J he was elected archdeacon of the New H.:n·en archdeaconry, and held the office until his resignation in 1892. A little more than five years ago Dr. Harwood was warned by a sudden attack that he could not continue in all the work which had remained to him even after he had retired from active service as rector; and he resigned his duties in the several positions which have been enumerated. His last public service to the Church was rendered in 1900, when he was appointed chairman of a committee to act with the bishop in sending an address from the diocese to the vener­ able Society for the Propagation of the Gospel on its two hundredth anniversary. Dr. Harwood's degree in divinity was conferred by Trinity College in 1862. In 1853 he gave an oration before the Trinity College Chapter ofthe Phi Beta Kappa, theBeta of Connecticut; and again in 1895, at the semi-centennial of the chapter, he delivered the oration. His published works include only occasional sermons and addresses; among the latter are two on the early history of the Episcopal Church in New Haven, to the study ofwhich he had given much at­ tention. He also translated a part ofLange's commentary for the American edition. He wasaconstantstudent, a care­ ful writer, and a thoughtful and earnest preacher; and, in every particular showing the scholar, his sermons had a 12 strong influence on his parishioners, the community, and the many Yale students who listened to them. He was the last survivor of a body of scholarly men with whom he was specially associated in the Church Congress, prominent a­ mong whom was Dr. \Vashburn, once of Hartford and after­ wards of New York; and as he confessed that it took him a long while to understand and appreciate the New Englanders among whom he had come to live and to minister, so he felt for a considerable time that, though he had been a pro­ fessor in Bishop Williallls's school of divinity, yethewas not entirely in touch with the diocese in which his lot was cast. As years passed on, he understood his townsmen and neigh­ bm·s better and they understood him better; and what has been said above will show the honorable positions which were ungrudgingly accorded to him. Such recognition was a tribute r~ndered to learning and influence and character in a man who might not be called a typical Connecticut church­ man, but to whom Connecticut churchmen weregladto give deserved honor. In the library of the rectory of Trinity Church, New Haven, Dr. Harwood caused to be painted in large letters two sentences from ancient authors, which suggest the prin­ ciples by which he sought to guide his studies and his life. One, taken from Sallust, tells how harmony of action is a source of strength to that which is by nature weak, andhow discord can bring ruin to great enterprises: "Concordia res parv. wmk; eeH:l:g: a Essay delivered before the "Clerical Club," o_: the Diocese of Connecticut, Monday, April 7th, t902, by the Rev. W. G. Andrews, D. D., Rector of Guilford, Conn. C h Yi s r e h ~· ' rl-;, " WHEN the Rector of Trinity Church, New Haven, gratified and honored me by asking me to givethisclubsomething like an estimate of his predecessor's services to theology, I shrank from the task. My own unfitness for it, the scanti­ ness of material in the form of published writings, and the impossibility of supplementing these by vivid recol­ lections of frequent intercourse, owing to my removal from New Raven, more than twenty years ago, showed me thatI could not do just that. But a hearty friendship extending over a period of thirty-five years, and a beneficent influence, almost unconsciously exerted, on my ownreligiousthinking, should have helped me to appreciate some aspects of Dr. Harwood's work, particularly interesting to myself. I shall seek to show, then, from my own point ofview, whathedid, in virtue ofhisparticulartheological position, for the Catholic Church. In this way I may be able to add something to the testimony lately born to his great gifts and attainments as a Christian divine, by his closest friend, the Rev. Stewart Means, to whom, and to our associate, Dr. Hart, I ammuch indebted in my attempt. Edwin Harwood was a native of Philadelphia, where he was born on the twenty-first of August, 1822. His ancestry 15 ; r, was at least in part Episcopal, but the associations of his immediate family were PresbyCerian. Apparently hebecame a communicant in his youth, under the guidance of the dis­ tinguished Dr. Bethune, one ofwhose hymns (a translation) is the four hundred and nineteenth of our Hymnal- "It is not death to die." Dr. Bethune, a man of rare eloquence, was in those days pastor of a Reformed Dutch Church in Philadelphia, but he and his people were essentially Presby­ terians, and in close sympathy with those who bore that name. The influences which surrounded the young convert were no doubt strongly evangelical, inthesomewhatnarrow sense which the word than bore. During his university course he must have beenanintelligentandinterestedobserv­ er of the heated controversies which resulted, in 1838, in what may be called a double schism. The Old School and New School parties in the Presbyterian church then became two distinctdenominations, and theformer dissolved a union, in some degree organic, which had been formed between the Presbyterians and the Congregational Churches ofConnecti­ cut in 1801, and had been very useful in preventing local schisms. These events illustrated, whether youngHarwood remarked it at the age of sixteen or not, the tendency to schism which is created by the imposition of theological systems on ministers. And, on the other hand, his attention might have been drawn to the true and righteous princi­ ple, whichsome ofthe ablest leaders on the conservative side had contended for without success, that even dangerous errors, not subversive ofthe elemen~s of an accepted ~ystem, do notmakeitimpossibletoreceive ~h as'tl. standard honest­ ly nor make itnecessaryto cut offthosewho holdthc4. This was ahvays the view ofDr. Charles Hodge of Princeton, one of the very foremost of Calvinistic Theologians. Twoyears later, in 1840, Edwin Harwood went to the Congregational 16 seminary at Andover to prepare himself for the Presbyterian ministry. Andover theology was not gravely obnoxious even to some Old School men, and the fine Biblical scholar­ ship of Professor Moses Stuart was recognized on all sides. Mr. Harwood wasbornto bea scholar and undersuch tuition he was likely to learn how best to ascertain the exact mean­ ing of the Scriptures, rather than how to import meanings into them from human systems. But the influence which he felt most powerfully at this time, was that ofColeridge, the second American edition ofwhose "Aids to Reflection" had then just appeared. Coleridge's disciples in Christian phil­ osophy moved along paths even more diverse than those of Horace Bushnell and ofEdwardIrving, both his disciples, and they were not easily kept within rigid traditional lines. He taught them to value truth supremely, and tobelieve in their possession, as really spiritual beings of moral freedom, and the power ofintuition, through what he called the reason. The Scriptures, indeed, reveal truths beyond the reach of the reason, but that can, and must (if those truths are to be ac­ cepted) perceive them to be in harmony with what it does discover. Coleridge's statement of distinctively Christian doctrine began with this; "that a mean of Salvation has been effected and provided for the human race by the incarn­ ation ofthe Son ofGod." Here is the germ of a theology which, making the Incarnation central, grows naturally out of the Creed, and should bear fruit, as it often has done, in some noble and great conception ofthe Church. Mr. Harwood, I suppose, went to Andover a Calvinist and he used to say thathe should always have been one but for the new scholarship. Coleridge might have left him a Calvinist, as he did leave others, and certainly there is noth­ ing in the "Aids to Reflection" which could havelessened this di:;ciple's strong and lasting sympathy with St. Augustine. 17 His own profound sense ofthe_ greatness ofGod would always, I should think, have saved him from Arminianism. But it must have been growing clear to the young scholar that to use his freedom as not only Coleridge but as St. Paul and as Jesus Christ authorized him to do would not be easy in any communion which declared itself Calvinistic. And probably inherited instincts and an increasing appreciation ofwhat is beautiful and dignified and reverent in worship were draw­ ing him towards the Church ofthe Prayer Book. It is said that he finally entered it under theguidanceofDr. Tyng, then of Philadelphia. He doubtless did so not only as more or less an Evangelical but as a Low Churchman, and perfectly aware of11is right to be one. The right was perfectly clear, for not many years before, Low Chnrchmen oftheTillotsoni­ an school of Bishop White, and those of the very different school of Dr. Tyng, would have constituted a strongmajority in the Church, ifthey could have acted together. The new High Church majority, still led long after his death, in 1830, by the great soul of Hobart-Puritan and Methodist com­ bined in Anglican-was a good deal inclined tobeintolerant, but was embarassed by a Red Spectre from theTiber, haunt­ ing its councils. When, however, in 1842, Mr. Harwood rt moved to the General Theological Seminary in New York, seeking perhaps a larger freedom in our church, he did not find freedom enough togivesecurityforpeace. Earlyin1841 the Tractarian, or Oxford Movement (in which it is hardnot to trace an impulse from Hobart, whom its earliest leaders greatly admired) had sounded its last warning in the ears of the High Church Peter; Newman's Tract 90 had demanded a shelter for Roman doctrine behind the Protestantrampart of the Thirty-nine Articles. This was in reality a plea for freedom of opinion, and Dean Church regards Newman's reasonipg as· "part of the more accurate and the more temper­ 18 ate and charitablethoughtofourday." MostEpiscopalians did not see this quite clearly, and the ordination ofthesaint­ ly Arthur Carey, suspected ofRoman tendencies, and in the face ofa protest, in 1843, was thought to imply sympathy with Rome on the part ofthe authorities, and increased the prevailing excitement, though it should never be forgotten that the ordination was defended by Dr. Tyng. IftheGener­ al Convention of1844 had been of the temper of the General Assembly of 1837, it, too, might have caused a schism. But the Convention disclaimed jurisdictionas respects "theerrors of individuals" and thus averted the danger. Dr. Harwood long afterwards declared this to be "good law," as long as proper courts are provided, and little ashesympathizedwi~h the Oxford Movement, it is improbable that he would ever have had its adherents excluded from the ministry. He was getting lessons in toleration, and he had found a church, after all, in which there was freedom enough to makeschism unreasonable. Having been ordained in 1844 and servedfor a few years in rural or surburban parishes, he accepted in 1850 the charge ofwhat soon became the Church of the Incarnation, in the city of New York. Earlyin 1851hemadetheacquaint­ anceofthat almost ideal Christian, William Augustus Muhl­ enberg. Muhlenberghadforsomeyears been suspected, and, as he himself confessed, not quite unjustly, of Puseyism. He had never, unfortunately, believed in Baptismal Regener­ ation, but he had, most fortunately, "passed through the mists ofvulgar Protestant prejudices," and his real position was not generally understood. It was when he was charg­ ed with crypto-Romanism that the young Low Churchman became his intimate friend, and ga-ve him his zealous co­ operation in his most cherished plans. This seems an ex­ ample of our honored friend's characteristic courage, though 19 of course he had not been long in finding out that Muhlen­ berg was now as good a Protestant as himself. A few months after the two men met, the younger became the as­ sistant of the elder in the publication of the "Evangelical Catholic." This name defined Dr. Muhlenberg's own posi­ tion, as he conceived ofit, anditmusthavedefined, approxim­ ately, that of his fellow laborer. Each was Catholic, as holding the Catholic faith, set forth in the Apostles' Creed (I follow Dr. Muhlenberg's statements) and therefore believ­ ing, as the Creed requires, in the Catholic Church, or in Christianity, not as an abstract doctrine, but as embodied in an institution, adapted to all mankind, in all ages, and embracing all of mankind who confess the one Faith in the one Baptism. Each was Evangelical as insistingspecifically against Rome, that this Faith, thus confessed, suffices for a title to all rights in the Church and is the faith oftheG"ospel, and the Gospel is, as Muhlenberg affirmed, in its essence the truth that the.&on ofGod became man in order to make be­ lieving men the sons of God. "Here," he said, "is the origin of the Church-the incarnation of the eternal Son." Dr. Harwood wrote ofhim after his death, "The Incarnation of the Word ofGodinJesus was thecentralideaofhistheology.'' It is very easy to suppose, though I have no right to affirm, that the name of the younger man's new parish, "The In­ carnation," given to it in 1853, was one indication of his ac­ ceptance of Muhlenberg's theological position. The word Evangelical (used, be it observed, to qualifY "Catholic," the more important word) thus received a broader meaning than that usually assigned to it by the Evangelical School, most ofwhom would have made the doctrine ofjustification by faith central. But this doctrine haditsproperplacewith­ in the larger conception ofthe Gospel. Thus when Mr. Har­ wood's position first seems clearly outlined we find him 20 standing squarely on the principle (laid down by the Lord in sending His ministers to baptize) that only the Faithis to he required of Christians, and, by necessary consequence, that no set oftheological opinions may be required. In 1853 Mr. Harwood aided Dr. Muhlenberg in the pre­ paration of the famous "Memorial" addressed in that year to the Bishops of our Church. The idea was Muhlenberg's, but the document contains words and phrases contributed by his associate, who wasundoubtedlyinfullsympathywith its aims, and entirely willing to promote the methods which it indicated. The first aim was that ofbetter adapting this Church internally to its task in America, by multiplying and giving freer play to its appliances both for work and for worship. The second was that of making this Church the nucleus of a larger ecclesiastical system, embracing baptized Christians of various names, not bound by our rubrics and canons (and of necessity neither controlled by nor represent­ ed in our General Convention) but bound to us and to each other by the common acceptance of "an American Catholic Episcopate." Dr. Muhlenberg accordingly addressed the Memorial not to the House ofBishops, a co-ordinatebranch of the General Convention, but to the Bishops in Council, acting simply "as Bishops," under Christ's commission to His ministers, and capable offulfilling in their catholic char­ acter the shepherd's office for "the whole of Christ's dispersed sheep.'' It was a great, noble, and, as I believe, eminently wise effort in behalf of Church unity, worthy of the man in whom we behold more fully, perhaps, than in any other American Christian, the union of the saint and seer. And by throwing all his own strength into the effort, Edwin Har­ wood (who was the lastsurvivorofthe Memorialists of1853) had thrown himself unreservedly into the great Catholic movement of the nineteenth century. That cannot possibly 21 be limited to what is sometimes called the Anglo-Catholic movement, either in its Tractarian or its Ritualistic forms. To do so, indeed, is to rob it ofits splendid birthright, for it is the lawful offspring ofthe great Evangelical movement of the Eighteenth century. That brought, in spite of its many misconceptions, a clearerwa_ and.s happier recognition of the fatherhood of God, and followed naturally by a new discovery of the brotherho~d of man, fully expressed in the brotl;lerhood of Christians, or in the Church universal. The magnificentphilanthropicwork ofthe last century, forms one aspect,(or, if the;'-are two, they are twin currents, in one mighty stream of Christian love,)of the Catholic movement. Muhlenberg, the Evangelical Catholic, was pre-eminent a­ mongphilanthropists. Andiftheproper aimofthemovement be the reunion of Christendom (to be followedbytheworld's believing that the Father sent the Son) then we can find it pervading the life ofAmerican Christianity, howevertumult­ uous or feverish or convulsed, from the first year ofthe nine­ teenth century on to this second year of the twentieth. As a very slight but not insignificant example of the multitude offacts by which this statement might be supported, I may say that I heard all the bells ofmy own village of Guilford, led by the Methodist, ringing together at sunrise on Easter Day. The Catholic character ofthe Muhlenberg Memorial, recognizing the claims of the Past along with those of the Present, will hardly be disputed, even ifitbethoughttohave looked too littletowards a possible reconciliationwith Rome. The man whose part in the effort was, I will not say second, but next, to that of Muhlenberg, cannot be denied the name of Catholic, and the less for his being, with Muhlenberg, an Evangelical Catholic. That name, as they understood it, committed them to the Church Idea in distinction from the Sect Idea, a Catholic attitude, ifthere be such a thing. And 22 their attempt in the Memorial to substitute, as far as might be, unity for schism, was a farther interpretation, in the same sense, ofthe now almost forgotten title which the one made venerable and which the other, as we shall see, went on interpreting, by his life, for half acentury. TheEvangeli­ cal principle that the Faith is a1lthatmaylawfullybeimpos­ ed on Christians evidently cuts the nerve ofsectarianism, for sects, as a rule, exist to propagate beliefs which lie outside of the Faith, while the Church exists to propagate that· and that only. Almost forty years ago the late Dr. John Henry Hopkins, then editor of the Church journal, said this in a highly characteristic way (the italics are his;) "When there is nothing left of a sectarian but an attachment to thegener­ al truths of Christianity, there isjust enough left ofhim to make a good Churchman of." (Sept. 14, 1864.) If my memory serves me Dr. Hopkins afterwards declared, with great vigor, that even a High Churchman may be a terrible sectarian. At all events it is true. Dr. Harwood never repudiated the fundamental ideas of the Memorial. Not only did he have an important share, in later years, in promoting its minor aim, by his services on the committee of the General Convention on liturgical en­ richment, but as a member ofits committee on amendments to the constitution he joined in presenting and supporting, as lately as 1895, the remarkable amendment proposed by Dr. Huntington (on whom Muhlenberg's mantle may seem to have fallen) under which Bishops would have been form­ ally authorized to take the oversight of congregations hav­ ing other forms and usages than ours. He lived to see the Convention of 1901 recognizing that inherent right of Bish­ ops to do this for which Muhlenberg earnestlycontended. I do not know whether Dr. Harwood approved of this recog­ nition, and I do know that in 1886 he refused to sign a 23 petition addressed to the Bishops in Council, and accompani­ ed by a copy of the Memorial of 1853, in which they were asked to offer ordination to qualified men not intending to serve within our Church, but willing to be responsible to its chiefpastors for teaching the Catholic Faith, and adminis­ tering the Sacraments according to Christ's institution. The petitioners (among whom there were Low Churchmen and Broad Churchmen and Ritualists) believed, with Muhl­ enberg, that this right, also, is inherent in the Episcopate. But Dr. Harwood had learned to cherish a not unnatural jealousy of Episcopal prerogative, as did Dr. Hopkins, for that matter, while the House of Deputies (which is Presby­ terian by nature) has again and again fought for ~rity in government with all its might. And Dr. Harwood had even come to believe that the Memorial itself had done harm by encouraging Bishops to act outside oflaw in the ordering of worship. But he said in his tribute to Dr. Muhlenberg, after the death ofthe latter in 1877, that he had by his "ap­ peal to the Bishops and the Church," in 1853, "left the impress of his Christian wisdom upon our entire Church." Nor did he ever cease, I am confident, "to look towards unity" (as he once expressed it) nor to believe that it must be attained, if at all, through the Episcopate. Atthc Church Congress of 1887 he said; "When men, our Protestant brethren, especially, are longing for a restoration of a lost unity, let us hold forth the episcopate . . . . With the sanction of seventeen hundred years or more attached to it, good, thoughtful, learned men will listen as they have never listened before to us, and find in our position the proper centre of a new union of believers." Furthermore, he made much effort in behalf of internal harmony (not of opinion but of spirit) evidently a very necessary condition of success in any attempt of ours to lead others towards unity. 24 All know his relation to the Church Congress, begun in 1874, and distinctly hiswork. Its object, that of bringing to­ gether men of widely different views on a common platform, for the frank and friendly comparison of views, was mani­ festly an· extremely useful one, and was to a large ex­ tent attained. On a partial list of the first general com­ mittee, I find the names of the eminent Low Churchman, Charles W. Andrews ofVirginia, the more eminentRitualist, James de Koven, and ourown Bishop Williams. Threeyears earlier, when party spirit was intense and full of menace, Dr. Harwood joined three of his New Haven brethren (the Rev. Joseph Brewster, father of our present Bishop, the Rev. Francis Lobdell, and myself) in obtaining signatures to a petition of an irenic character, addressed to the General Con­ vention of 1871, held in Baltimore. This petition asked for relief to burdened consciences through an explanatory note to follow the Baptismal Office, andtotheeffectthattheword "regenerate" and its equivalents "are not to be taken as re­ ferring to that moral change which is commonly called con­ version," etc. About half the letter which was circulated with the petition was from the pen of Dr. Harwood. He said, among other things, that it was perhaps not to be re­ gretted that our differences of opinion were increasing. "It gives to the Church a many-sidedness ofdevelopment which is one mark, at least, of a Catholic body, and is the safe­ guard against sectarianism." The petition was, however, not presented, for the very sufficient reason that on the seventh day of the session the Bishops, acting in Council, signed a Declaration stating that in their opinion "theword 'regenerate' is not there [in the Baptismal office] so used a!! to determine that a moral change in the subjectofbaptismi!! wrought in the Sacrament." This Declaration, said to have been suggested, ifnot written, by Dr. Andrews of Virginia, 23 was signed by forty-eight Bishops, or all, apparently, who were then in Baltimore, with a single exception. It was en­ tered the same day on the minutes of the House of Bishops (there being a separate Journal for sessions in Council) and ordered to be sent to the other house, on the motion of the distinguished High Churchman, BishopWhittingham. Itdid unquestionably relieve many consciences, and there is excel­ lent reason for believing thatitwentfartopreventtheschism of 1874, led by Bishop Cummins (one of the signers) from attaining very serious dimensions. Dr. Harwood and his New Haven friends had contributed little, perhaps nothing, to this result, but the result ~mply justified their effort. But his greatest service to the Catholic movement and the Catholic Church was rendered in a different way, a scholar'sway. ThegoalofCatholicunitymayneverbereach­ ed; it can never be reached until Christians in general per­ ceive that the Creed does really contain the Faith, and is therefore a safe dogmatic basis ofunity. Thisdoesnotmean that Christians must cease to oppose opinions in theology which they may think false and dangerous. That would be treason alike to truth and to love. It does mean that we must challenge no man's place in a Catholic ministry for errors which do not contradict the Catholic Faith, being, nevertheless, ready, if we are priests, "to banish and drive away . . . doctrines contrary to God's Word" by being loyalto truth andlove. Nordoes the acceptance ofthe Creed, as "sufficient" mean thatcongregations andgroups ofcongre­ gations within the Catholic Church may not undertake to guard their own pulpits against what seem to them "erro­ neous and strange doctrines." Every congregation in the Protestant Episcopal Church has this power, and a good many ofthem use it ''withallfaithfuldi}rlgence.'' Butnoneof themhas the power, noranysmallestfraction ofthe power, to 26 determine what type ofdoctrine ,notheretical, any othershall listento. Now this freedom, this comprehensiveness, of our Church we are especially bound to treat as sacred because of the peculiar relation of our Church, as already indicated, to the Catholic movement in the organic bond ofunion which it can supply. It is certainly not easy for Episcopalians formally to deny, in the face ofthe Baptismal Office and the Catechism and the affirmation of the whole Anglican Episcopate, made in the Chicago-Lambeth Declaration, that the Faithis, all of it, in the Creed. But it is very easy to deny it practically by saying, or suggesting, that men who constantly say the Creed in solemn worship, arc heretics, if not petjurers, be­ cause they use their Christian freedom freely. It is of such invasions of freedom that Dr. McConnell reasonably com­ plains in his late admirable "Eirenicon," as threatening our peace. And the natural guardians of liberty and peace are thegreatbody ofsoher-minded conservatives, whose devotion to "the Apostles' doctrine and fellowship" no one questions. They seem indeed to have accepted this duty, as was seen when in 1891 most of the standing committees, including our own, consented to the consecration of Bishop Brooks. ..A.r i'hat time the president of our own, thattypical Connecticut Churchman, Dr. Beardsley, said in responsetomyexpression of pleasure at the committee's action; "What didyouexpect us to do? Ifa man accepts the Nicene Creed that's enough for me." He assumed, as became a fair-minded man and a good Christian, that when a respectable clergyman utters the great symbol of the Faith, he does so both honestly and intelligently, giving its terms no meaning which, as inter­ preted under the laws oflanguage, they will not bear. Dr. Beardsley might, as far as I know, have listened with ap­ proval to an illustration of the difference between religious 2 7 opinions (or "doctrines,") and the Faith, which he probably heard from Dr. Harwood in 1892, when the latter likened them to the shifting waves at the foot of the firm light­ house on its firmer rock. The lighthouse, it may be added, shows a safe path to those who are moving, on any course, across the waves. And to both men this con­ trast between fixity and incessant change would give the Faith its rightful pre-eminence, while its fixity, its place among "those things which cannot be shaken," would be as­ sured by its very nature, as the Lord deliveredittothesaints in sending it to all nations. Neither tides nor currents nor winds, neither science nor criticism nor philosophy, can ever take from us what we "chiefly learn in the Articles of our Belief" concerning the Name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Learned men, good men, men whom, since they call Christ their teacher, we ought to call His disciples, may disbelieve this but they cannot possibly disprove it. Now it fell to Dr. Harwood, as avowedly a liberal Church­ man, to secure from a large number of conservative Church­ men, namely the mass of Connecticut presbyters and lay­ men, so well represented by Dr. Beardsley, a practical and very emphatic assertion of that Catholic freedom ofopinion, the denial of which is sectarianism, and which must have wide practical recognition from such men unless the Catholic movement is doomed to failure. No one man, I believe no ten men, did, or could have done, what he did inthis respect. I do not know what was Dr. Harwood's precise theologi­ cal position when he came to Connecticut in 1854, the year after the Muhlenberg Memorial, to hold a professorship in the Berkeley Divinity School. Nor can I attempt to define it accurately as it was at any particular period afterwards. He was not in the least eager to make proselytes to his opinions, and in our many conversations I never found him 28 trying to win me to his side. He once cautioned me against preaching on a Good Friday the doctrine of the Atonement (as respects its nature, not its extent) which I had learned at Princeton, lest I should be obliged to retract it afterwards. I did preach it and I did retract it, but I do not knowtothis day whether what I had meanwhile come to believe was his view or not. Since the doctrine is not defined in the Creed farther than in the statement thatJesus Christ, having come from Heaven "for our salvation," "wascrucified also for us," there is no farther definition ofit which canbeimposed. But I know that Dr. Harwood in 1866, long after he came to Connecticut, understood "the work of redemption through our blessed Lord" just as he believed it to be understood by the representatives of Evangelical opinion in New England, and therefore, assuredly, as something more than a form of sublime ethical teaching. That the sinless Son of God was literally punished for our sins he certainly did not believe. As to ins·piration, Dr. Harwood believed thattheHolyGhost "spake by the prophets" and he believed in the authority of the Scriptures "as coming in some special sense from God." But he thought that there is a momentous "difference be­ tween inspiration and an infallible intelligence in the person inspired." And he especially insisted that "the order of things to be believed" is, "Christ first, and therefore the Scriptures," a rule which soon received the hearty endorse­ ment of his old and very orthodox friend, Dr. Muhlenberg. With regard to the episcopate, he believed most confidently, as a scholar, that it dates in some form and measure from the time of the Apostles, but that it cannot be proved to have been established by our Lord. It is not, therefore, like the ministry as a whole, a divine, but an ecclesiastical insti­ tution. Ithas, nevertheless, been ofgreat value to the Church and may prove still more valuable in the future. He would 29 have been the last man to think ofgiving it up, or of asking for any change in the requirements ofthe ordinal. On the other hand, Dr. Harwood held and taught the Catholic Faith. In 18f:i6 he declared this, as stated in the Apostles' Creed, and more fully in the Nicene Creed, to be "unalterable." He said that it embraced the Fatherhood of God, the Sonship and redemptive work of Jcsus Christ, the sanctifying office of the Holy Ghost and His work in the Church, and everlasting life. In 1892, he said in theGeneral Convention, in defending the proposal to embody the two Creeds in the Constitution, and as a member of the Com­ mittee which recommended it, that the Committee's object was to show the world "just what we regard as the un­ changeable factors of the Christian Faith." Doctrines, he affirmed, and discipline and canons and forms of worship change; "the on~ thing for us that does not change is the Creed ofthe Church . . . When youcometotheApostles' and Nicene Creeds there is no change, no variation; they are the same all the world over. I hold my doctrine in respect to the Holy Communion; my neighbor holds a different doc­ trine; but I and my neighbor hold the same doctrine in re­ spect to the divinity of our blessed Lord, and thepersonality ofthe Holy Ghost." But Dr. Harwood's opinions, as distinct from his Faith, undoubecltly marked him as aBroad Churchman. And:when that name began to come into use it had an ill sound. At some time during the sixties, a distinguished andvery accom­ plished laym® ofNew York was shocked at hearing young Phillips Brooks described as of that school; he spoke of the report as "scandal." And perhaps ten years later one ofDr. Harwood's friends, a man who, I believe, really loved him, repeated to me, as I thought, with assent, the statement of another, that he was one ofthe most dangerous men in the 30 Church. At about the same period, Broad Churchmen were describedinaConnecticutpulpit as the "infidel party" in our communion, and through a singularmisconception, Dr. Har­ wood himself was publicly represented (he was not named) as having put contempt upon the beliefs of the majority of orthodox Christians by calling them "the Commonplaces of Theology." This interpretation of a term as old in its technical sense as Cicero, and made famous for-theologians by Melancthon's great summary of the Protestant belief (his Loci Communes) did not amuse Dr. Harwood, I am afraid, as much as it exasperated him. "That I shouldhave been thought capable, " he exclaimed, "of speaking con­ temptuously ofthose great doctrines!" The prevalent dis­ trust ofhim was shown when he was nominated for a seat in the General Convention either in 1871 or 1874. In the latter year, I am confident, he received twenty-five clerical votes out of about one hundred, and his supporters were nearly all men who for very various reasons were out of sympathy with the dominant tendency; a few, very few, Broad Churchmen, a few Low Churchmen, and a few Ritual­ ists, besides a handful of his warmest personal friends. He himselflaughingly compared us to the rather motley com­ pany which flocked to David in the cave of Adullam. But from the first there were men who understood him, ·notably Bishop Williams. It is needless to say that thatex­ cellent scholar and sound divine did not receive to the new chair of the Literature and Interpretation of the Scriptures in his School at Middletown, a man whom he suspected of heresy. How well the choice was justified by "the inspira­ tion of" the young professor's "varied and graceful scholar­ ship" Dr. Hart has told us in his comprehensive and dis­ criminating tribute, published in the Hartford Courant, three days after Dr. Harwood's death. All that I know 31 about his teaching there, I have treasured for more than forty years as I heard it from one of his~: "Young P '-'-f';)s gentlemen, the secret of perpetual youth-you see it in Dr. Muhlenberg-is the Indwelling ofthe Holy Ghost." He came to Trinity Church, New Haven, in 1859, as the successor ofa memorable man whom he was as unlike in al­ most every respect as it was possible for him to be, Dr. Harry Croswell. The contrast impressed everyone, includ­ ing the new rector himself. But he had not brought his people another Gospel, as they certainly cannot have ex­ pected him to do. And his conception ofhis office as that of a messenger ofJesus Christ, commissioned, not to inaugur­ ate discussions about religion but to summon men to.faith and obedience, he once expressed in a familiar waybysaying that he was a "pulpit man and not a platform man." That Christian scholars soon learned to trust him was shown by the degree in divinity given him by Trinity College in 1862. How fully he kept the confidence ofhisBishop (whosesociety he much enjoyed, in spite of their divergences) is shown by the fact that for nearly a quarter of a century, he was, by the Bishop's appointment, one of the examining chaplains. How he won and kept the confidence of the diocese was shown by his election to the General Convention in 1877, and six times afterwards, or as long as his health permitted him to serve, the last time in 1895. I have toucheduponhis work there, which was done less upon the floor, since he did not speak very often, than in the two or three very import­ ant committees of which he was a member. Connecticut - I must soon have been convinced that he was not in haste to betray her; on every recorded vote by dioceses and orders in the session of 1877, he and Dr. Beardsley voted together. He was, in fact, essentiallyconservativein temperament, and his reverence for law illustrates this. And while, as Dr. Hart 32 has said, he ''mightnotbe called a typicalConnecticutChurch­ man," he was, as the same well qualified witness testifies, a man to whose "learning and influence and character, Con­ necticut Churchmen were glad to give deserved honor." We have seen that it was honor under forms which necessarily implied confidence. And it is honorable to Connecticut that she accorded this recognition to a type other than that im­ pressed on the diocese by Johnson and Seabury, while not much unlike that impressed on the Colonial Church else­ where by scores offaithful missionaries of British birth. It is more honorable to her that it is what might have been ex­ pected ofthe spiritual descendants ofthose whom the mag­ nanimous Seabury brought into full fellowship notonlywith White but with Provoost, thereby rescuing an endangered unity without endangering the Faith, and ofthedescendants by blood ofthose on whose behalf, nearly two generations earlier, in 1732, Samuel Johnson pleaded for unity without uniformity under the historical episcopate. Thus it came to pass that in his eminent place and by his eminent gifts, Ed­ win Harwood was gradually obtaining, during almost half a century the practical acceptance by this diocese of the principle which no churchman can reject in theory, that the Creed contains the Faith; a principle which may soon guide the Catholic Movement to its goal, without which it must forever lose its way. Of Dr. Harwood as a man, a scholar, and a thinker, the essential things have been said far bettt:r than I could say them. I have, of course, many delightful memories ofhim as a friend, far too many to rehearse. And them I can never separate from the thought ofher who so loved to share his friendships with him, who added to the cordial welcome which belonged to the household, a charm of her own, and who, with her gracions sympathy and her wisdom and her 33 humor, could give his friends wbat to some natures was worth hardly less than wbat he gave so freely from hisaffiu­ ence ofheart and brain; who never hesitated frankly to dis­ sentfromhis opinions, butwhosemoralandspiritualstrength made herdeep devotionto him priceless amidst the successive sorrowswhichovertookthem. His own strength was won­ derful; therehavebeenfewmanliermen. Butundoubtedlyhe bore their common griefs more manfully because so true a woman bore them with him-until that griefcame which he must endure alone. Then, indeed, as we are told, he wasfor the time unmanned, but, surely she hastened back from "the choir invisible" "to be the cup of strength in" that "great agony." His friends can never have found his friendship richer on all sides than in the months that followed, while there was a new gentleness in it, as ifher greeting were now blended with his. How great and how many their sorrows were need not be told,. A warm friend of theirs said to me, just after one dreadful blow, far from the last, had fallen up­ on them, "It is like a Greek tragedy." In Greek tragedy a man or a house often lies helpless before the hatred of the gods, who smite terribly and incessantly and without pity. But these sufferers knew their God as a merciful Father, revealed to them by the Son who wasmade"perfectthrough sufferings," through whom and with whom the Father is bringing His "many sons to glory." The glory was already visible in the "sweet benignity and consecrated tenderness," the "childlike simplicity of the inner life," which Dr. Har­ wood's faithful friend has described as making his last days J.i rfh(Wtrf.. so beautiful. Thus, too, his own testimony, given so long ago, to the secret of th~t perpetual youth, for which there can be no "last days," and which was shown us inthecease­ less growth ofhis splendid manhood-the Indwelling of the Holy Ghost. We can well believe that his best service to the 34 Catholic Church was priestly. When he let his light shine so brilliantly beneath a sky so dark, what we saw was the flame kindled on a living altar by the lfand which in every age has fed the fires of Pentecost.

35 Extract from Sermon by the Rev. Wm. R. Huntington, D. D., . . Rector of Grace Church, New York City, preached at the Semi-Centennial Service of the Parish of the Incarnation, New York City, April 20th, l902, Third Sunday after Easter.

"I WONDER how they came to call it the Church of the Incarnation.'' Possibly, and! aminclined to sayprobably, the suggestion originated with the brilliant young scholar and theologian, whom Dr. Taylor, with wise prescience, had put in charge ofhis Chapel of Grace." [(Here Dr. Huntington adds a foot noteasfollows:) "In prompt confirmation ofthis conjecture, there reached me, on the next day after this sermon was preached, the following interesting statement from one ofthecongregation,formany years a personal friend of Dr. Harwood: "You mentioned that you did not know how the Church came to be called 'The Incarnation'-and this is really the object of this letter. In one ofmy frequent visits to New Haven, not long before his death, I asked Dr. Harwood how it came to be so called. He said he gave it the name, as the parish had started from Grace Church, for by grace came theIncarnation." W. R. H.] "The young man's name was Harwood-Edwin Har­ wood. '} During his later middle life and in his shadowed old age, it was my high privilege to know well that first rector ofyours, and though I have more than once, since his death,

36 publicly sounded his praises, it can not be amiss, here and now, to say again how deeply those whom he admitted to his friendship loved and reverenced him. "Institutions (Churches along with the rest) take color and character f:-om their founders. In my judgment, one of the most valuable of all the assets of this Church is the fact that the lower courses of the spiritual house were laid by a thinker and scholar. Edwin Harwood was thirty years old when he was chosen to be first rector of the Church of the Incarnation. He had been graduated at the University of Pennsylvania when only eighteen years ofage, and hadused the intervening period in theological study and in such paro~ chial work as had the character ofapprenticeship. He came here in the fi.tlness of his powers, and though his stay was brief, he succeeded in putting an impress on the:: parishwhich it never wholly lost. Truth is the foundation of '.!verything and Edwin Harwood loved the truth. To buy it he w0uld ~ have travelled any distance and over roughest roads. 'tn sell it nothing would persuade him. His distinguishing mental characteristic was lucidity, his distinguishing moral charac­ teristic courage. He never penned an obscure sentence and he never, under stress ofpanic, failed a friend. Whether as a city rector here or in New Haven, or in the quiet seclusion of his life as a Professor of Divinity at Middletown, he main­ tained always the balanced dignity of the scholar and the divine. He founded, or rather, to be accurate, he imported from England and naturalized in our American soil the Church Congress, one of the most potent of all agencies that have been at work during the last quarter of a century, in the communion to which you and I belong, in softening the asperities of party warfare and persuading men to be "of one mind in one house." He served also during his laterlife, for several terms, in the House of Deputies as a representa­ 3 l tive of Connecticut, and in both of these two relations he showed how much he had in him of the genius of the states­ man and the ecclesiastic. Yes, thank God, men of the In­ carnation, that at the head ofyour roll ofclergy stands the name of one so true, so laborious, so brave."

38 MEMORIAL RESOLUTIONS.

At a meeting of the rector, wardens and vestrymen of the parish of Trinity Church in New Haven (in meeting assembled) January J3, f902, the following minute in re­ lation to the death of the Reverend Edwin Harwood, D. D~ late rector emeritus of this parish, was unanimous­ ly adopted.

WHEREAS it has pleased Almighty God to take to the rest of Paradise the soul of the Reverend Edwin Har­ wood, D. D., who ministered amongst us long and faithfully as the rector of this parish, we, the rector, wardens and vestrymen of Trinity Church, desire to put on record our sense of the heavy loss which the Church at large and this parish in particular has sustained. For nearly forty years he upheld amongst us the stand­ ard of truth and righteousness, with faithfulness to his Master, with unfailing charity to his fellow men: in a wise, broad and Catholic spirit which will long leave its mark on the community. Possessed of distinguished talents, and of scholarly habits, he has been recognized as a power in the Church in his day and generation, while his personal dignity and social gifts have commanded respect and admiration from all who knew him. A preacher of depth of thought, a steadfast friend, a kind and wise counsellor, imparting patience, courage and endurance alike by precept and example, he will live long in 39 the hearts of those who have been proud to call themselves his friends and who will ever feel the effects of his influence. He passes from amongst us in the fullness of years and we commend to God the soul of this His servant who has departed this life in His faith and fear, while we thus give expression to our affection and respect for one whom we have loved and honored.

RESOLUTIONS PASSED AT THE MEETING OF THE PARISH OF TRINITY CHURCH, JANUARY 15, 1902. THE members of the Parish of Trinity Church in New Ha­ ven (in meeting assembled) Easter Monday, March 31, A. D., 1902, desire to put on record the loss this parish, this community, this diocese, and the Church at large have sus­ tained in the death ofRev. Edwin Harwood, D. D., late rector emeritus of this parish, therefore, Voted: That the minute adopted by the vestry, January 13, 1902, respecting Dr. Harwood, be, and is hereby, approved and adopted by this parish meeting; also Voted: That this parish unite with the vestry in tendering its thanks to the Right Reverend Chauncey B. Brewster, D. D., for his able and touching address delivered by him in Trinity Church, March 16, A. D. 1902, in memory of Dr. Harwood, also join in the request that Bishop Brewster ·will consent to place a copy of the same in the hands of the committee of the vestry for publication together with others and the official acts of this parish and its vestry .. Voted: That in loving memory of Dr. Harwood, when the pas­ sage ofthe foregoing resolutions are acted upon it shall be 40 manitested by n rising vote. The foregoing resolutions were adopted by a rising vote as set forth therein. Attest. EDWARD C. BEECHER, Parish Clerk.

Parish ofTrinity Church Vestry Room, in New Haven. Parish House, April1, 1902. AT a meeting of the rector, wardens and vestrymen of the Parish ofTrinity Church in New Haven held March 21, A. D. 1902, the following votes were unanimously adopted; Voted: That the rector, Rev. Frank Woods Baker, D. D., Dr. Benj. H. Cheney and Edward C. Beecher be, and they are hereby, appointed a committee of this vestry to convey the grateful thanks ofthis parishto the Right Reverend Chauncey B. Brewster, D. D., Bishop of the diocese of Connecticut, for his able, thoughtful and appreciative address delivered in Trinity Church, March16, 1902, inmemory oftheRev. Edwin Harwood, D. D., late rector emeritus ofthis parish; also Voted: That Bishop Brewster be requested to favor the com­ mittee with a copy of his address and his consent for its publication with others which have been delivered upon Dr. Harwood's life and worth, together with the official acts of this vestry and parish. Attest. EDWARD c. BEECHER, " Clerk ofthe Vestry. At a meeting of the Convocation of New Haven County held at St. Paul's Church in New Haven the 28th of January, A. D., ~902, the following minute was adopted.

THE Convocation of New Haven County places on record its deep sorrow at the death of its most distinguished member, the Rev. Edwin Harwood, D.D.,RectorEmeritusof Trinity Church, New Haven. Dr. Harwood had been con­ nected with the Convocation for more than forty years. He was at one time its dean and he was at all times, when in health, active and influential in its proceedings and dis­ cussions. Until\ within a very few years be must have been personally known to all its members and on terms offamiliar intercoursewith the larger part of them. It is, therefore, our right to be the first to testify, collectively, to the great gifts with which God had endowed him, and to the fidelity with which he used them for the Master and his fellow-disciples. Intellectually, Dr. Harwood was among the foremost in the power of seeing truth and enabling others to see it; mor­ ally, he was pre-eminent for that absorbing love of truth through which alone it can have its full power a:s uttered. And that supreme truth to which the Son of God came into the world to bear witness, was only made more clear to him by the philosophy in which he was at home and the science which he entirely comprehended. He keptthe Catholic Faith "whole and undefiled." On all sides he was both intellect­ ually and morally a strong man; none could fail to recog­ 42 nize, few could fail to be helped by, his strength. He com­ bined with the scientific methods of the scholar the graces of the literary artist; the charm of his conversation, due part­ ly to his large and varied knowledge of men and things, as well as of books, partly to his instinctive a voidance of all that could offend, was also his as a master oflanguage. He had depth and tendemess offeeling and quick sympathies, whilehiswonderful self-control and his delicate reserve made what others might leam of his own emotion and his share in theirs more inspiring and consolatory. Apart from what be did for his people as a preacher and pastor-and thereare those who can speak with enthusiastic gratitude of his pas­ toral ministrations-he brought to bear on his nearest friends, without effort and even unconsciously, a force, pro­ ceeding at once from his intellect and his character, which profoundly and permanently affected their inner life. And they were aware of a mightier force acting on him, and, through such a discipline of sorrow as few are requiredtoun­ dergo, steadily enriching and exalting his Christian man­ hood, and so making his friendship continually more benefi­ cent. For that Christian manhood, with its courage, its fortitude, its sincerity, its generosity, its courtesy, and all that adoms manly strength with the finer quality by which the tme man (and he only) is set apart as the gentleman, Dr. Harwood will be especially remembered by those who knew and loved him best. In such a man, too, they saw more and more clearly that Grace of God hy which he was what he was, the Creative Hand which was carrying for­ ward in him the work of the new creation. (Signed) w. G. ANDREWS. EDWIN s. LINES. J. E. WILDMAN. 43