“Dabney believed that Union Seminary was a necessary bulwark against the concentration of power in a single institution, such as Princeton Theological Seminary. “Suppose that such an institution [were] training all or nearly all the ministers of our church, and consequently becoming the fountain of literary and theological opinion for the whole church,” Dabney wrote. “The result would be most un-Presbyterian and dangerous, even while this school remained orthodox.” And if this school were to begin to teach heresy, such an institution “might spread its poison unresisted through the whole body.” Hence, Union Seminary was vitally necessary and deserved the support of the Synods of Virginia and North Carolina” (Sean Michael Lucas, Robert Lewis Dabney, 64).

“The common threads in all of these contemporary appraisals of Dabney’s preaching were his pulpit intensity, his lack of polished oratory, and his didacticism. And an examination of the extant sermons demonstrates that these appraisals were fair and accurate. These sermons indicate that the majority of Dabney’s preaching generally shifted back and forth between passionate and direct evangelistic appeals to unrepentant sinners to come to Christ, and doctrinal sermons on points related to soteriology” (Sean Michael Lucas, Robert Lewis Dabney, 51).

“Dabney suffered from camp fever once again, a sickness ‘which brought me to death’s door.’ The illness forced him to resign his commission, which Jackson accepted with ‘great reluctance’ . . . In summary, Dabney’s career as a Civil War chaplain and soldier is difficult to assess with accuracy because he did not participate long enough in either office to be noticed” (Sean Michael Lucas, Robert Lewis Dabney, 117).

“From [John] Randolph and [John C.] Calhoun, Dabney learned that, while God himself had ordained human government, human sinfulness also made government a necessity” (Sean Michael Lucas, Robert Lewis Dabney, 29).

“What [Robert] Dabney desired above all else was that the past be remembered and given its due weight in contemporary discussions. “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” not only was the biblical motto placed on Dabney’s tombstone in the Union Seminary cemetery in Farmville, Virginia, but also was Dabney’s policy for New South Presbyterians. What was necessary, Dabney claimed, was the rising generation to learn the history of the past truly”” (Sean Michael Lucas, Robert Lewis Dabney, 21).

“Apropos of Berlin’s emphasis on the professionalization of the ministry, Hodge clearly differed in his view of the task of the pastorate. Whereas the new model focused on the minister’s sociological mission, Hodge and his fellow Princetonians maintained the traditional view of the ministry as a spiritual calling and not a profession” (W. Andrew Hoffecker, Charles Hodge, 109).

“Hodge’s astonishment at the preparation and practice of German pastors brings into focus perhaps the most significant impact of his European sojourn [Hodge’s two year hiatus, 1826-1827, to Europe for additional theological studies] . He witnessed firsthand the radical differences between Princeton as an exemplar of the traditional Athens model of theological education in America and the new German model that emerged in the early nineteenth century. . . .

“Another influential element in establishing Hodge’s lifelong practices came through his three years at Princeton Seminary. This influence resulted from the charter of the school, “Plan of the Seminary,” which mandated in detail not only the theological identity of the school, but also how it would in turn mold the lives of its students. The Plan, a remarkably detailed charter, consisted of eight articles outlining structure and governance, role of faculty, curriculum, and character and piety of students….

Good video. Great book.

“The thesis of this study is that Charles Hodge manifested the attributes associated with Calvinistic confessionalism (strong adherence to creedal religion, liturgical forms, and corporate worship) as well as the characteristics of evangelical pietism (the necessity of vital religion marked by conversion, moral activism, and individual pious practices)” (W. Andrew Hoffecker, Charles Hodge, 32).

“While the term New Side–Old Side Presbyterian might seem a contradiction if not an impossibility in principle, Charles Hodge managed to exhibit the best that each faction could offer in its heyday. Unabashed in his enthusiasm for sound orthodoxy coupled with Reformed piety, as churchman, theologian, controversialist, and writer on all matters of interest, he lived and worked as one of the nineteenth century’s most influential Presbyterians” (W. Andrew Hoffecker, Charles Hodge, 360).