MR. STEARNS'S THEOLOGY.

ing the funeral services.

497

In accordance with Mr. Stearns's expressed wish, his remains were brought home, and, after services in his brother's church in Cambridge, were laid to their final rest in Mount Auburn cemetery. In a memoir by this brother, it is said of him:

As a theologian, he cannot be classed with any of the schools. His philosophy differed in some respects from them all. It was his intention, if life should be spared, to present to the public a system of ethics which, for several years, he had been studying and maturing in his own mind. He hoped, by long and discriminating reflection, to establish some principles in moral philosophy, in which all intelligent, experimental Christians would agree. Nor did he, while cherishing opinions of his own, break recklessly away from Calvin, Edwards and Locke, but rather looked up to these venerable names with reverence approaching awe. At the same time, he examined their doctrines and modes of explanation with severe and patient scrutiny, and made it a rule never to adopt their symbols in expressing truth, till satisfied that these were as exact and comprehensive and transparent as any he could obtain. This, together with the maxim never to color truth, or express more than he believed, is among the reasons that his discourses are so free from the technical language of theologians.1

Soon after leaving Andover, Mr. Stearns preached for a time in Beverly, in the First Church, of which the Rev. Dr. Abiel Abbot had been the minister. The Rev. Dr. Andrew P. Peabody, who was brought up in this church, thus writes of Mr. Stearns and his brief ministry there :

At the time of the division of the Congregational body in Massachusetts, Dr. Abbot took the Unitarian side. His parish and church were divided in opinion. The small majority of both were Unitarians; but the minority were as strongly attached to Dr. Abbot as those who were in harmony with his theology, and, moreover, were more strongly opposed to the extreme Hopkinsianism of the (so-called) orthodox church hard by than they were to Unitarianism, — indeed, so much so, that when the disruption finally took place, they formed a new church of a more liberal type of orthodoxy. Dr. Abbot died in 1828; his successor was ordained in 1830. Meanwhile the two parties hoped and endeavored to remain together.

1 [In a note dated April 24, 1889, Professor Salisbury writes of Mr. Stearns: "He was a large-minded man inclined rather to find some common ground with those from whom he differed, than to emphasize differences. He had an in

Several candidates preached,

satiable thirst, which even the dying of his physical frame could not quench, for all that is true, beautiful and good' indeed, by the daily weakening of his body, he seemed to be etherealized, and to grow in spiritual vigor."]

some Unitarian, some mildly orthodox. Among those who were thus employed was Rev. Samuel H. Stearns. It must have been in the spring or summer, or both, of 1829. I was at home in both spring and summer of that year, so as to have seen and heard what I remember of him. His sermons were, as it seemed to me, perfect in thought and style, delivered with simplicity, with the fervor of deep conviction, and impressive, chief of all, because they were addressed from heart to heart. They were, as was natural and fitting under such circumstances, not dogmatic, while there was no attempt to conceal his position. My belief is that they fully satisfied the serious and devout worshippers of both creeds as to their spiritual worth, and all hearers of every sect, as to their literary character. I called on him repeatedly, and have the most delightful memory of my talks with him. I was then about to commence my professional study, and our conversation was on subjects connected with the clerical profession, with some free and kind discussion of the questions then at issue. My impression is that he more nearly approached the type of orthodoxy now identified with the Andover school than any other orthodox minister with whom I was conversant for the following twenty or thirty years. But what has left its strongest hold on my memory, is the loveliness of his spirit and the sweetness of his intercourse. Fully aware of what there might be that was not in common, I felt that it would be one of the great happinesses of my life, could I have him as the pastor of my mother and sister, as the successor of my very dearly beloved pastor, and as my own intimate friend. I think that I cannot be mistaken in remembering that he declined, on the score of health, to be considered as a candidate for settlement, and that, had he been a candidate, he would have had the vote of a very large majority of the parish, perhaps a unanimous vote. My kindred and near friends were all Unitarians; but it was among them chiefly that I heard the praises of Mr. Stearns.

Mletter of resignation,

R. STEARNS, in his

expressed the earnest hope that the church and congregation would soon unite in the choice of another pastor in his place, "equally desirous and more able" to do them good. He said: "I pray that you may be thus united. Nothing would so embitter my remaining life, nothing would so soon bring down my head with sorrow to the grave, as the knowledge that I had been the occasion, however indirectly, however innocently, of dividing and scattering this flock." It was, indeed, most desirable that the pulpit

which had been without an active pastor for so long a time should be filled without delay; and, two months after the formal dismission of Mr. Stearns, twelve of the pew proprietors addressed a letter to the deacons, asking them to call a meeting of the church to consider the subject of choosing a minister, and proposing the name of the Rev. George W. Blagden, who