Too Much Neglected: Reformed Authors of the 19th Century

[Fly Caster]

Much of my reading over the past few months has been of Reformed authors of the 1800's, and what a blessing that has been. Early on, I came to know the Reformed faith mainly through reading modern popular authors, which intoduced me to the Reformers, the Puritans, Edwards & Whitefield and other modern guys, but apart from Spurgeon & Ryle very little was mentioned about other Reformed authors from this era.

Lately I've been submersed in Alexander's Archibald & J.W., R.L. Dabney, William S. Plumer, B.M. Palmer, and from across the water, William Cunningham as well as a bit of Thornwell and Samuel Miller. Through this I have seen my spiritual growth and insight grow by leaps and bounds. I'm finding others that I have yet to touch.

There is a nearly forgotten treasure of top-notch material here, in my opinion. I recommend that anyone wanting to grow in Reformed doctrine and piety to explore a few of these author's works.

 

[Hamalas]

Amen brother! You might also check out Stuart Robinson and (of course) B.B. Warfield. We need Wayne Sparkman here for more recommendations, where's Wayne!!

 

[greenbaggins]

I agree wholeheartedly. I would add William G.T. Shedd, Charles Hodge, A.A. Hodge, B.B. Warfield to that list. I would also mention here that 19th century commentaries are far better than modern commentaries would lead you to believe. Hodge's commentary on Romans, for instance, is not nearly as dated as D.A. Carson would have you believe.

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

Patrick Fairbairn

 

[JOwen]

Ichabod Spencer, Edward Payson, Gardiner Spring, Archibald Alexander, James Waddel Alexander.

 

[Wayne]

John L. Girardeau. Early Gardiner Spring, or in general, just about anything from this list : PCA Historical Center: Research Library--Author-Title Index for on-site Articles (much or most of which is 19th century).

However, just for a breath of fresh air, my current strongest recommendation is that all should read or re-read Robert Traill's work The Throne of Grace, thirteen sermons on Hebrews 4:16.
[http://www.archive.org/details/worksoflatereverend01trai]

Pray that we would become a praying people!

 

[jogri17]

Hodge's commentary on Romans, for instance, is not nearly as dated as D.A. Carson would have you believe.

Perhaps, but surely John Murray's commentary is far better!

 

[py3ak]

In addition to Fairbairn, I'm partial to Candlish and Hugh Martin, and Warfield is brilliant; but on the whole, I prefer the era of orthodoxy.

I would also mention here that 19th century commentaries are far better than modern commentaries would lead you to believe. Hodge's commentary on Romans, for instance, is not nearly as dated as D.A. Carson would have you believe.

It seems to me that "dated" is a concept that only applies to a certain sort, or at least level, of commentary in any case. Spiritual insight is not subject to the whims of scholarly style.

 

[Prufrock]

In addition to Fairbairn, I'm partial to Candlish and Hugh Martin, and Warfield is brilliant; but on the whole, I prefer the era of orthodoxy.

Right there with you, Ruben. I realize that, realistically, most of Vos' writings are from the 20th and not the 19th century, but in my mind I think of him as belonging to that period of the end of the 19th. Accordingly, I tend to group Vos, Fairbairn,Colquhoun and Smeaton as 19th century theologians who are about on the same level of importance as those of earlier eras. Vos, Fairbairn and Smeaton, are those rare few from that era I look to for positive formation of teaching - not just application and explanation of previous teaching. Colquhoun (if one can find his works - many are not easy to come by) is just priceless. And, though I certainly cannot endorse him in every respect, I find John Brown to be one of the most "exciting" Presbyterian exegetes of the modern era - if excitement counts for anything.

 

[dudley]

“The primitive and apostolical order of the church of Christ vindicated” by S.Miller

I recently read Samuel Millers “The primitive and apostolical order of the church of Christ vindicated” I think he wrote it in 1840. It very clearly gave the scriptural argument against Apostolical succession , its false claim of supremacy for Peter, its graduated scale of ministerial orders, and its perversion of the rite of "Laying on of hands."

As an ex Roman catholic turned Reformed Protestant it helped me understand more clearly why I renounced the pope as well as the papacy besides Roman Catholicism. I agree we who are Reformed need to understand the thinking of the Reformed scholars of the past. I continue to become more purely Protestant by studying the Reformed writers. I am thus convicted of my Reformed Protestant faith which grows stronger every day and stronger in The Reformed doctrine and theology because of this.

 

[py3ak]

Right there with you, Ruben. I realize that, realistically, most of Vos' writings are from the 20th and not the 19th century, but in my mind I think of him as belonging to that period of the end of the 19th. Accordingly, I tend to group Vos, Fairbairn,Colquhoun and Smeaton as 19th century theologians who are about on the same level of importance as those of earlier eras. Vos, Fairbairn and Smeaton, are those rare few from that era I look to for positive formation of teaching - not just application and explanation of previous teaching. Colquhoun (if one can find his works - many are not easy to come by) is just priceless. And, though I certainly cannot endorse him in every respect, I find John Brown to be one of the most "exciting" Presbyterian exegetes of the modern era - if excitement counts for anything.

I had been meaning to look into Colquhoun, and your recommendation bumps him far up the list. I notice you didn't mention Warfield, however; have you not looked into him? It's difficult for me to imagine that you wouldn't like him after reading him on the canonicity of 2 Peter or on Latin literature of the 4th century. I understand why you think of Vos as you do: if you contrast him with Machen, though the scholarship of both men is very great, yet there is a different atmosphere about Vos.

 

[Fly Caster]

Colquhoun-- how did I overlook that one?

His "Treatise on Law and Gospel" is one of the best books I have read in the past year. A most helpful book-- one that would clear up much confusion today if carefully read more widely.

It's probably the first book that I would point someone to who was struggling to understand the proper place of the Law in a believer's life. Certainly helped me.

 

[greenbaggins]

Hodge's commentary on Romans, for instance, is not nearly as dated as D.A. Carson would have you believe.

Perhaps, but surely John Murray's commentary is far better!

I would not agree with this assessment, actually. Hodge and Shedd are both superior to Murray, in my opinion.

 

[Pilgrim]

Early Gardiner Spring

Out of curiosity, with regard to Spring, what issues are there with his later writings? Am I correct in assuming that Distinguishing Traits of Christian Character is to be counted among his early works?

---------- Post added at 02:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:56 PM ----------

Scots worthies such as the Horatius and A.A. Bonar and M'Cheyne should be included as well. The modern missionary movement was inaugurated during that century, so works related to that should be consulted as well.

Although I have little firsthand familiarity with them, Alexander Maclaren's commentaries are still very highly regarded by many as well.

In addition to Spurgeon, there were a good number of other Baptist notables from that era as well.

 

[KMK]

I agree with Rev Keister about Hodge. William Arnot on the Parables has been extremely helpful to me as well. I am currently working my way through his lectures on Acts.

 

[KMK]

I forgot to add James Foote's lectures on the Gospel of Luke. And, of course, J C Ryle.

 

[Prufrock]

I had been meaning to look into Colquhoun, and your recommendation bumps him far up the list. I notice you didn't mention Warfield, however; have you not looked into him? It's difficult for me to imagine that you wouldn't like him after reading him on the canonicity of 2 Peter or on Latin literature of the 4th century. I understand why you think of Vos as you do: if you contrast him with Machen, though the scholarship of both men is very great, yet there is a different atmosphere about Vos.

Ruben, Warfield is certainly a luminary from the period, and is always stimulating. I believe it was your recommendation (you were at least involved in the conversation) which opened my eyes to his sermons - I am very glad for that. I have benefited much from some of his historical analyses (I find some of his material, for example, on Calvin illuminating). As to his theological writings, from the (granted, far too small) familiarity I have with him, I have subjectively found him to be at his best when he is crystallizing established teaching. Apart from his sermons, do you have any specific works of his which you find particularly "above and beyond"? I will either read or re-read your selection/s the next time I'm on a flight.

 

[py3ak]

Yes, crystallizing established teaching is exactly right. I'm especially fond of the collection of shorter writings - when he spoke about the style of the Arabic of the Arabian Nights in a footnote in his essay about Latin literature (I'm afraid the book is in storage so I can't be more precise), if he hadn't won my heart before he would have won it right there.

 

[timmopussycat]

In addition to Fairbairn, I'm partial to Candlish and Hugh Martin, and Warfield is brilliant; but on the whole, I prefer the era of orthodoxy.

Right there with you, Ruben. I realize that, realistically, most of Vos' writings are from the 20th and not the 19th century, but in my mind I think of him as belonging to that period of the end of the 19th. Accordingly, I tend to group Vos, Fairbairn,Colquhoun and Smeaton as 19th century theologians who are about on the same level of importance as those of earlier eras.

Smeaton's "The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit" is very worthwhile reading.

 

[ReformedChristian]

Alexander's Archibald's work on Universalism has to be one of my favorites.

 

[JennyG]

I don't believe anyone's mentioned J C Ryle - his writings (especially Holiness) are powerful, and still well known in Britain.
Maybe not in the USA?

 

[Solparvus]

I recommend John Angell James. I've read one work, "The Young Man's Friend and Guide through Life to Immortality," but it was a very helpful book for me. I'll have to read it again.