OTHER FORMATIVE BOOKS
WE do not know of any other books which deserve to be classed with the
two we have been considering in their relation to the formation of
Mr. Lincoln's religious ideas; but our inquiry is at a point where it
will be instructive to learn of any collateral influence which at this
period, the period of the 50's, after the death of Eddie, and before
his election as President, helped to give shape to his convictions.
Mr. Lincoln did not unite with Dr. Smith's church. It is difficult
to think that it would have been possible for him to have done so.
Old-school Calvinism had its permanent influence upon him through his
Baptist antecedents, but while that of Dr. Smith came to him most
opportunely, it did not wholly meet his spiritual requirements.
For many years Herndon was in regular correspondence with Theodore
Parker. They agreed in their view of the slavery question, and had much
in common in their religion. Herndon had Parker's theological books,
and Lincoln read them, not very thoroughly, perhaps, but with interest.
About the same time, Mr. Jesse W. Fell, for whom he wrote the first
sketch of his life, presented him with the works of William E. Channing.
When Herndon was gathering material to confute Dr. Reed, he assembled
very nearly everything that seemed to prove that Lincoln was not
orthodox, however far short it fell of proving him an infidel. Among
the rest he interviewed Fell, and from his statements made up this
report, which appeared in Lamon's book, and subsequently in Herndon's:
"Mr. Jesse W. Fell of Illinois, who had the best opportunities of
knowing Mr. Lincoln intimately, makes the following statement of his
religious opinions, derived from repeated conversations with him on
the subject:
"'Though everything relating to the character and history of this
extraordinary personage is of interest, and should be fairly stated to
the world, I enter upon the performance of this duty--for so I regard
it--with some reluctance, arising from the fact, that, in stating
my convictions on the subject, I must necessarily place myself in
opposition to quite a number who have written on this topic before
me, and whose views largely preoccupy the public mind. This latter
fact, whilst contributing to my embarrassment on this subject, is,
perhaps, the strongest reason, however, why the truth in this matter
should be fully disclosed; and I therefore yield to your request. If
there were any traits of character that stood out in bold relief in
the person of Mr. Lincoln, they were those of truth and candor. He
was utterly incapable of insincerity, or professing views on this or
any other subject he did not entertain. Knowing such to be his true
character, that insincerity, much more duplicity, were traits wholly
foreign to his nature, many of his old friends were not a little
surprised at finding, in some of the biographies of this great man,
statements concerning his religious opinions so utterly at variance
with his known sentiments. True, he may have changed or modified
those sentiments after his removal from among us, though this is
hardly reconcilable with the history of the man, and his entire
devotion to public matters during his four years' residence at the
national capital. It is possible, however, that this may be the proper
solution of this conflict of opinions; or, it may be, that, with no
intention on the part of anyone to mislead the public mind, those who
have represented him as believing in the popular theological views
of the times may have misapprehended him, as experience shows to be
quite common where no special effort has been made to attain critical
accuracy on a subject of this nature. This is the more probable
from the well-known fact, that Mr. Lincoln seldom communicated to
anyone his views on this subject. But, be this as it may, I have no
hesitation whatever in saying, that, whilst he held many opinions
in common with the great mass of Christian believers, he did not
believe in what are regarded as the orthodox or evangelical views of
Christianity.
"'On the innate depravity of man, the character and office of the
great Head of the Church, the atonement, the infallibility of the
written revelation, the performance of miracles, the nature and design
of present and future rewards and punishments (as they are probably
called), and many other subjects, he held opinions utterly at variance
with what are usually taught in the church. I should say that his
expressed views on these and kindred topics were such as, in the
estimation of most believers, would place him entirely outside the
Christian pale. Yet, to my mind, such was not the true position, since
his principles and practices and the spirit of his whole life were of
the very kind we universally agree to call Christian; and I think this
conclusion is in no wise affected by the circumstance that he never
attached himself to any religious society whatever.
"'His religious views were eminently practical, and are summed up,
as I think, in these two propositions: "the Fatherhood of God, and
the brotherhood of man." He fully believed in a superintending and
overruling Providence, that guides and controls the operations of
the world, but maintained that law and order, and not the violation
or suspension, are the appointed means by which this providence is
expressed.
"'I will not attempt any specification of either his belief or
disbelief on various religious topics, as derived from conversations
with him at different times during a considerable period; but, as
conveying a general view of his religious or theological opinions,
will state the following facts. Some eight or ten years prior to
his death, in conversing with him upon this subject, the writer
took occasion to refer, in terms of approbation, to the sermons
and writings generally of Dr. W. E. Channing; and, finding he was
considerably interested in the statement I made of the opinions
held by that author, I proposed to present him [Lincoln] a copy of
Channing's entire works, which I soon after did. Subsequently, the
contents of these volumes, together with the writings of Theodore
Parker, furnished him, as he informed me, by his friend and law
partner, Mr. Herndon, became naturally the topics of conversation with
us; and though far from believing there was an entire harmony of views
on his part with either of those authors, yet they were generally much
admired and approved by him.
"'No religious views with him seemed to find any favor, except of
the practical and rationalistic order; and if, from my recollections
on this subject, I was called upon to designate an author whose views
most nearly represented Mr. Lincoln's on this subject, I would say
that author was Theodore Parker.
"'As you have asked from me a candid statement of my recollections on
this topic, I have thus briefly given them, with the hope that they
may be of some service in rightly settling a question about which--as
I have good reason to believe--the public mind has been greatly misled.
"'Not doubting that they will accord, substantially, with your own
recollections, and that of his other intimate and confidential
friends, and with the popular verdict after this matter shall have
been properly canvassed, I submit them.'"--LAMON: _Life of Lincoln_,
pp. 490, 491, 492.
Herndon was attempting to collect evidence that Lincoln was an infidel,
and what he obtained, and what essentially he was called to certify
and did certify in effect, was that Lincoln's views were in essential
accord with those of Theodore Parker and William Ellery Channing.
Theodore Parker was not an orthodox Christian according to the
standards of Dr. Smith's church, or of the church of which the present
writer is pastor, but he was a Christian, and a very brave and noble
Christian. William Ellery Channing's views were not in full accord with
the orthodoxy of his day, but he was a noble friend of God and man, and
a true Christian.
I have already referred to the very loose and inexact way in which
Herndon and others use the term "infidel" as applied to Lincoln. Such
inexactness is subversive of all clear thinking.
We are told, for instance, that he was an infidel, his views being
essentially those of Theodore Parker and William Ellery Channing. I
doubt if he ever read very deeply in the writings of these men; but
that he read portions of them and approved of some of their noblest and
most characteristic utterances, is certain. What were the discourses
of these two men which he must almost certainly have read if he read
anything of theirs? He would almost certainly have read Parker's
discourse on "The Transient and Permanent in Christianity," and that
on "Immortal Life," and Channing's Baltimore address and his discourse
on the Church. And these are just the sort of utterances which he
would have read with approval as he found them in these discourses of
Theodore Parker:
"Compare the simpleness of Christianity, as Christ sets it forth on
the Mount, with what is sometimes taught and accepted in that honored
name, and what a difference! One is of God, one is of man. There is
something in Christianity which sects have not reached,--something
that will not be won, we fear, by theological battles, or the quarrels
of pious men; still we may rejoice that Christ is preached in any way.
The Christianity of sects, of the pulpit, of society, is ephemeral,--a
transitory fly. It will pass off and be forgot. Some new form will
take its place, suited to the aspect of the changing times. Each
will represent something of truth, but no one the whole. It seems
the whole race of man is needed to do justice to the whole of truth,
as 'the whole church to preach the whole gospel.' Truth is intrusted
for the time to a perishable ark of human contrivance. Though often
shipwrecked, she always comes safe to land, and is not changed by her
mishap. That pure ideal religion which Jesus saw on the mount of his
vision, and lived out in the lowly life of a Galilean peasant; which
transforms his cross into an emblem of all that is holiest on earth;
which makes sacred the ground he trod, and is dearest to the best of
men, most true to what is truest in them,--cannot pass away. Let men
improve never so far in civilization, or soar never so high on the
wings of religion and love, they can never outgo the flight of truth
and Christianity. It will always be above them. It is as if we were to
fly towards a star, which becomes larger and more bright the nearer
we approach, till we enter and are absorbed in its glory."--THEODORE
PARKER: _The Transient and Permanent in Christianity_, p. 31.
"I would not slight this wondrous world. I love its day and night:
its flowers and its fruits are dear to me. I would not willfully lose
sight of a departing cloud. Every year opens new beauty in a star,
or in a purple gentian fringed with loveliness. The laws, too, of
matter seem more wonderful, the more I study them, in the whirling
eddies of the dust, in the curious shells of former life buried by
thousands in a grain of chalk, or in the shining diagrams of light
above my head. Even the ugly becomes beautiful when truly seen. I
see the jewel in the bunchy toad. The more I live, the more I love
this lovely world,--feel more its Author in each little thing, in all
that is great. But yet I feel my immortality the more. In childhood
the consciousness of immortal life buds forth feeble, though full of
promise. In the man it unfolds its fragrant petals, his most celestial
flower, to mature its seed throughout eternity. The prospect of that
everlasting life, the perfect justice yet to come, the infinite
progress before us, cheer and comfort the heart. Sad and disappointed,
full of self-reproach, we shall not be so forever. The light of heaven
breaks upon the night of trial, sorrow, sin: the somber clouds which
overhung the east, grown purple now, tell us the dawn of heaven is
coming in. Our faces, gleamed on by that, smile in the new-born glow.
We are beguiled of our sadness before we are aware. The certainty
of this provokes us to patience, it forbids us to be slothfully
sorrowful. It calls us to be up and doing. The thought that all will
at last be right with the slave, the poor, the weak, and the wicked,
inspires us with zeal to work for them here, and make it all right for
them even now."--THEODORE PARKER: _Immortality_, pp. 23-24.
It is affirmed that Lincoln was an infidel, believing essentially the
same as Theodore Parker: and he himself expressed such admiration
for and accord with the utterances of Parker which he knew that the
statement is partly true. These two quotations, from two of the most
easily accessible of Parker's discourses, represent the kind of
teaching which Lincoln assimilated from Theodore Parker and show us
what kind of infidelity Lincoln learned from him.
When Lincoln turned to the most widely circulated of Channing's
discourses, he read such utterances as these:
"We regard the Scriptures as the records of God's successive
revelations to mankind, and particularly of the last and most perfect
revelation of His will by Jesus Christ. Whatever doctrines seem to us
to be clearly taught in the Scriptures, we receive without reserve or
exception. We do not, however, attach equal importance to all the
books in this collection.
"Our leading principle in interpreting Scripture is this, that the
Bible is a book written for men, in the language of men, and that its
meaning is to be sought in the same manner as that of other books. We
believe that God, when He speaks to the human race, conforms, if we
may so say, to the established rules of speaking and writing. How else
would the Scriptures avail us more than if communicated in an unknown
tongue?
"If God be infinitely wise, He cannot sport with the understandings of
His creatures. A wise teacher discovers his wisdom in adapting himself
to the capacities of his pupils, not in perplexing them with what is
unintelligible, not in distressing them with apparent contradictions,
not in filling them with a skeptical distrust of their own powers. An
infinitely wise teacher, who knows the precise extent of our minds,
and the best method of enlightening them, will surpass all other
instructors in bringing down truth to our apprehension, and in showing
its loveliness and harmony. We ought, indeed, to expect occasional
obscurity in such a book as the Bible, which was written for past and
future ages, as well as for the present. But God's wisdom is a pledge,
that whatever is necessary for _us_, and necessary for salvation,
is revealed too plainly to be mistaken, and too consistently to be
questioned, by a sound and upright mind. It is not the mark of wisdom
to use an unintelligible phraseology, to communicate what is above
our capacities, to confuse and unsettle the intellect by appearances
of contradiction. We honor our heavenly teacher too much to ascribe
to Him such a revelation. A revelation is a gift of light. It cannot
thicken our darkness, and multiply our perplexities.
"We believe, too, that God is just; but we never forget that His
justice is the justice of a good being, dwelling in the same mind,
and acting in harmony with perfect benevolence. By this attribute, we
understand God's infinite regard to virtue or moral worth, expressed
in a moral government; that is, in giving excellent and equitable
laws, and in conferring such rewards and inflicting such punishments,
as are best fitted to secure their observance. God's justice has for
its end the highest virtue of the creation, and it punishes for this
end alone, and thus it coincides with benevolence; for virtue and
happiness, though not the same, are inseparably conjoined.
"God's justice, thus viewed, appears to us to be in perfect harmony
with His mercy. According to the prevalent systems of theology, these
attributes are so discordant and jarring, that to reconcile them is
the hardest task, and the most wonderful achievement, of infinite
wisdom. To us they seem to be intimate friends, always at peace,
breathing the same spirit, and seeking the same end. By God's mercy,
we understand not a blind, instinctive compassion, which forgives
without reflection, and without regard to the interests of virtue.
This, we acknowledge, would be incompatible with justice, and also
with enlightened benevolence. God's mercy, as we understand it,
desires strongly the happiness of the guilty, but only through their
penitence."--W. E. CHANNING: Baltimore Discourse of 1819, _Passim_.
"Inward sanctity, pure love, disinterested attachment to God and man,
obedience of heart and life, sincere excellence of character, this
is the one thing needful, this the essential thing in religion; and
all things else, ministers, churches, ordinances, places of worship,
all are but means, helps, secondary influences, and utterly worthless
when separated from this. To imagine that God regards any thing but
this, that He looks at any thing but the heart, is to dishonor Him,
to express a mournful insensibility to His pure character. Goodness,
purity, virtue, this is the only distinction in God's sight. This is
intrinsically, essentially, everlastingly, and by its own nature,
lovely, beautiful, glorious, divine. It owes nothing to time, to
circumstance to outward connections. It shines by its own light. It is
the sun of the spiritual universe. It is God himself dwelling in the
human soul. Can any man think lightly of it, because it has not grown
up in a certain church, or exalt any church above it? My friends,
one of the grandest truths of religion is the supreme importance of
character, of virtue, of that divine spirit which shone out in Christ.
The grand heresy is, to substitute any thing for this, whether creed,
or form, or church."--W. E. CHANNING: _Discourse on the Church_, pp.
23-24.
If Lincoln was made an infidel or confirmed in his infidelity by his
reading of William Ellery Channing, the foregoing is a reasonable
sample of the quality of his infidelity: for these are not only
characteristic utterances of Channing: they are among the utterances
which Lincoln was most certain to have had thrust into his hand, and
most likely to have read and to have approved.
The author of this work is not a Unitarian, and he is ready, on any
proper occasion, to define to anyone who has a right to know, his own
opinions in contradistinction from those of the Unitarian churches. But
his loyalty to his own convictions lays upon him no obligation to be
unfair to men who hold opinions other than his own. It is to be noted
that it is Mr. Herndon, and not some bigoted exponent of orthodoxy,
who calls Theodore Parker an infidel. The present writer holds no
such opinion of Parker, nor yet of Channing. On the contrary, he is
of opinion that their writings were beneficial to Abraham Lincoln,
as helping him to define some of his own views constructively and
reverently. While Beecher or Bushnell might have done it as well or
better, it was not their books which Jesse Fell gave to Lincoln; and
Lincoln used what he had. To say that Lincoln's views were like those
of Parker or Channing is to affirm that Lincoln was not an infidel, but
a Christian.
Was Lincoln, then, a Unitarian?
No. Of Unitarianism he knew nothing, so far as we are informed. He knew
the views of certain Unitarians, and these assisted him at important
points in defining certain aspects of his faith.
There have been rumors that Mr. Lincoln did come into actual contact
with organized Unitarianism. I have been interested in inquiring
whether this was true. During the Billy Sunday meetings in Paterson,
New Jersey, in 1916, the Unitarians opened a booth there for the
distribution of their literature, and there were certain communications
in the local press resulting from the counter-irritation of those
meetings. Among these was one in the Paterson _Guardian_, signed
"Once-in-Awhile." It said:
"The following is, in part, a sketch of my own youthful experience,
together with a statement of facts that relate to others who long
since have passed on.
"In 1851-52 the Chicago & Alton Railroad was being built, and I was
employed on a section of the work at that time. Our section extended
from Springfield, Illinois, to a little town called Chatham, situated
near the Sangamon River, a distance of about ten miles south from
Springfield. The majority of the people who had located in that part
of the country at that time were from the central part of New York
State, and among them was Elder Shipman, a Unitarian. He was a very
able preacher and 'made good' with all who knew him in the Sangamon
country. It was not long before he received a call to preach in
Springfield. The little Unitarian church there was located just around
the corner from Capitol Square. When Elder Shipman was permanently
located there, Abraham Lincoln became a regular and seemingly much
interested attendant. Nearly all of the boys in our 'gang' had known
Elder Shipman way back in New York State, and, there being no ball
games or other amusements save an occasional horse race, almost every
Sunday all hands would saddle horses and gallop to Springfield to
attend the services conducted there by our old-time pastor. At the
close of the regular service Mr. Lincoln was often called upon for a
few remarks, and many of his sayings are still fresh in my mind today,
although that was sixty-three years ago. Since then, in the quiet
hours that have passed, I often find myself looking back through the
mist of vanished years and fancy I feel the grip of his great, bony
hand in mine, or rather mine in his, and hear his kindly voice saying,
'Boys, good-by, come again. Come often!'
"I am not saying that Mr. Lincoln subscribed to the Unitarian articles
of faith, but I have good and sufficient reason to believe that he
did, and, if I am not mistaken, the proof is wanting that he ever
subscribed to faith in articles of any other religious denomination."
I challenged the veracity of this letter, reprinting it in _The
Advance_, of which I was editor, and asking these questions:
1. Who is Mr. Once-in-Awhile, and why does he not sign his real name?
2. How does it happen that no one else of those who attended the
alleged Unitarian church in Springfield in the days when Lincoln is
supposed to have been there has risen up to tell this story some time
during the last half century; and why does it come to us from Paterson
and not from Springfield?
3. Who is this Elder Shipman concerning whom this letter tells us? We
are informed that the Unitarian Year Book shows no such man.
4. Where was this Unitarian church "just around the corner from
Capitol Square"? Around which corner, and what became of it?
We are informed that there was no Unitarian church in Springfield
sixty-three years ago. We were not there and do not know: but if one
was there, where was it? When was it organized? Who were its ministers?
5. With so popular a preacher as Mr. Shipman appears to have been, is
it altogether likely that he would have made the habit of calling upon
a layman who attended his church to speak at the close of the service?
6. If Mr. Lincoln was in the habit of attending this Unitarian church,
how did the Presbyterian church of Springfield get the impression that
Mr. Lincoln attended there with his wife, and why did he continue to
attend the Presbyterian church after he went to Washington?
7. Lincoln is known to have said that if he knew any church whose
only creed was the command of Jesus to love God with all one's
heart and his neighbor as himself, he would join that church, and
Unitarians have frequently declared that if Mr. Lincoln had ever come
into contact with the Unitarian Church he must on the basis of that
declaration have united with it. We are not clear if their inference
is correct, but we are clear that there has been a very general
impression among Unitarians that he was not familiar with that church
and creed.
We do not call in question the veracity of Mr. Once-in-Awhile, whoever
he may be. We merely do what we have done before, we ask for one or
two facts. If anybody knows that Abraham Lincoln habitually attended a
Unitarian church and frequently participated in its public service by
speaking at the close of the sermon, let him now speak or else forever
hold his peace.
Everybody held his peace, including Mr. Once-in-Awhile!
* * * * *
Such stories are rarely made out of whole cloth. I therefore inquired
of the _Christian Register_ (Unitarian) and the _Christian Leader_
(Universalist) to learn if they knew any basis of truth in the above
statement, and they did not know and were not able to learn anything
accurate about it. However, there came to me in the course of the
inquiry, which was of necessity not very thorough for lack of anything
definite to begin with, an impression, based on information too vague
to be cited, that there was a Mr. Shipman, a Universalist rather than
a Unitarian, whose occasional services in Springfield Mr. Lincoln
attended once or more and enjoyed. But this came to me very vaguely,
and may be far from the truth.
Whether there be a ten per cent. modicum of fact at the root of the
above letter I will not attempt to guess, for my own information is too
meager. The picture, as a whole, of Mr. Lincoln preaching Unitarianism
from a Unitarian pulpit, and at the close assuming charge of the
service of farewell and exhorting the railroad hands to come again is
too far from the possible truth to require very close analysis.
The Unitarian books which Mr. Lincoln read cursorily, the books by
Parker and Channing, must have assisted him in this, that they gave
assurance that there were forward-looking men who believed in God and
in human freedom as he did, and who were quite as far from holding the
teaching which he had been taught to call orthodox as he was, yet who
were not infidels, but counted themselves friends of God and disciples
of Jesus Christ.
Herndon asserts that Lincoln habitually spoke in his presence in terms
of denial of the supernatural birth of Jesus. On this point I have seen
but one bit of documentary evidence, and that of unique interest, in
two words written in a book that once belonged to Lincoln. The book
is entitled _Exercises in the Syntax of the Greek Language_, by Rev.
William Nielson, D.D., and contains two appendixes by Prof. Charles
Anthon, noted as a Greek scholar and the author of a Greek Grammar and
other textbooks. It was published by T. & J. Swords in New York, in
1825. At the bottom of page 34 is a sentence, shortened and modified
from John 16:27, and printed in parallel Greek and English,--
"Ye have loved me, and
have believed that I came forth
from God."
The words "from God" are erased with pen, and the words, "from nature"
substituted, apparently in the handwriting of Mr. Lincoln. This, if its
genuineness be established, would appear to be conclusive that at the
time Lincoln owned this book he denied the supernatural birth of Jesus.
The book was formerly a part of the noted collection of Mr. John E.
Burton, procured by him from the collection of Dr. J. B. English, and
was retained by Mr. Burton with other unique items when his large
collection was broken up some years ago. I was privileged to examine
the book by A. C. McClurg & Co., in April, 1919; the book being then
and possibly still owned by them.
That the book was once owned by Lincoln would appear certain. His
signature on the flyleaf is in his firm, mature hand, written as he was
accustomed to write it until some time after he became President, "A.
Lincoln." The ownership would appear to be still further attested by an
inscription on the inside of the front cover, "Compliments to Master
Abe Lincoln, and good success, truly yours, Charles Anthon, Columbia
College." But this inscription raises more questions than it answers.
I am not familiar with the handwriting of Professor Anthon, but I am
disposed to question the genuineness of this inscription. That it has
been received as genuine by previous owners of the book is attested
by the fact that another hand has written before "Columbia College"
the words "A Prof." evidently that Professor Anthon might be properly
introduced to persons who did not know him. Professor Anthon was a
noted classical scholar, but I cannot help wondering at what period of
his career he could have come into personal touch with Abraham Lincoln.
Not, certainly, in 1825, when the book was published, and when Lincoln
was sixteen years old. And at what later period would Professor Anthon
have addressed him as "Master Abe Lincoln"?
If Anthon came to know Lincoln personally so as to care to present him
with one of his books, it would seem as if he would have given him a
book of which he was the sole or chief author, and not one in which his
part was confined to the appendix. Anthon's interest in the Greek was
primarily classical, and that of the author of this work was primarily
Biblical. If Anthon came to know Lincoln it would probably have been
after Lincoln had become a national figure, say in 1848 or some later
year, by which time a book issued in 1825 would have become an old
story to an author engaged in publishing new books.
Let me, then, in the absence of direct evidence, venture the hypothesis
that the book was really owned by Lincoln; that it came into his
possession not earlier than the time when, having mastered Kirkham's
Grammar, he welcomed the ownership of a book which suggested the
possible knowledge of a classical tongue. That he bought the book
is hardly probable; that it was the gift of Professor Anthon is
improbable, because there would appear to have been no contact between
the two at a period when such a gift would have been appropriate: let
us assume, then, that someone else gave him the book, and that the
attribution to Professor Anthon is the conjectural record of a later
owner.[47]
The book might conceivably have come into Lincoln's possession through
the Green boys, or the brother of Ann Rutledge, returning from Illinois
College to New Salem; for it was a book which might easily have been
floating around Jacksonville, and picked up by a student there, and
later discarded because he had no special interest in the Greek of the
New Testament. Lincoln would have been more likely to feel a passing
interest in it then than at any other period of his career, for he was
widening his educational horizon, and had not as yet set any limits
to his learning in one or another direction. He might have picked it
up, or it might have been handed him by some minister, during his
early years in Springfield; but by that time Lincoln must have given
up any passing notion that he might ever learn Greek. He could hardly
have procured it and would not have cared for it before he lived in
New Salem: he must have ceased to think of the possibility of learning
Greek before he had lived long in Springfield.
I assume, also, that the erasure of the words "from God" and the
substitution of the words "from nature" is in Lincoln's hand; though
the two words are written at the very bottom of the page, with no
support for the hand, and are not as well written as the signature, and
their authenticity might be questioned. I am disposed to think that
he wrote it, and this, evidently, was the opinion of Mr. Burton, as
indicated by a note in the book in his handwriting.
It might be mentioned in passing that the word "God" is not in this
verse in the New Testament, either Greek or English. It reads, "Ye have
loved me, and have believed that I came forth from the Father." Perhaps
if Dr. Nielson had followed the text literally, Lincoln would not have
troubled to amend it.
I accept it as a genuine document, and one of real interest; but the
lack of a date makes it almost valueless as proof of Lincoln's settled
belief. I place it, conjecturally, in the New Salem period of his life,
though it may date from the beginning of his life in Springfield.
I have not read the entire book, nor compared the Greek throughout
with the English, but I note that in this passage the English is not
translated from the Greek, but the Greek is translated backward from
the English, and that inexactly. I judge this to be not the effect of
bad scholarship but the result of a desire to convey a lesson. For
instance, the Greek of this passage is made into a personal confession
by the change of person in the first part of the verse, without
corresponding change in the second part, leaving the first verb without
a direct object, so that a literal translation reads,--
"I love and believe that I came forth from God."
Dr. Nielson probably knew why he did it so, but Professor Anthon would
have been likely to say that that was not very good Greek syntax. It
served its purpose, however, as showing, what this section was intended
to show, the various uses of the Greek conjunctions.
Lincoln, it may be presumed, got little if anything out of the Greek.
I find no mark of his except on this and the facing page. There he
found two admonitions which he boxed in, and made a note of them on the
false-title:
4. Deliberate slowly, but execute
promptly, the things which
have appeared unto thee proper
to be done.
5. Love, not the immoderate
acquisition, but the moderate enjoyment,
of present good.
In the front of the book he wrote a reference to this, and added,
Deliberate slowly but
execute promptly.
Think well and do your duty.
These precepts seemed to impress him; and they were certainly
characteristic of him. But we can draw no very wide deduction from his
use of the Greek or the substitution of the word in the translation.