how to study, and instilled into their minds a love of knowledge. At the early age of fifteen years his mind was already turned toward the gospel ministry as the proper work of his life, subject, however, to further consideration and final decision. According to the prescribed course of academical study he had in due time prepared enough in Latin, Greek, and mathematics, to admit him. into the Sophomore class at college. But the high school had no such division of the curriculum, and in accommodation to the existing arrangements his place was otherwise assigned. It was not the intention that he should take a full collegiate course, but after the expiration of two years should enter the theological seminary, if convictions still led that way. Accordingly, at the end of twoyears, he was admitted to the theological seminary, in which Dr. Mayer was then Professor of Theology-a professor of Biblical Literature being associated with him. But in the autumn of 1835 the institutions were removed to Mercersburg, the high school being first transferred and raised to a college. Then he was induced to take a full college course, meanwhile suspending theological studies. He graduated in 1837, and afterward spent a year in completing the theological course under such aid and direction as Dr. Rauch could furnish him, the theological seminary not yet having been removed from York. During the last two years of his course he was employed as tutor in the preparatory department of the college.

In October, 1838, the Synod of Lancaster licensed him to preach the gospel, and in the latter part of November, in compliance with a call, he settled in Lewistown, on the Juniata, the charge being composed of the town congregation, another in the east end of the Kiselierquillas valley, and a third preaching point eight miles east of Lewistown. Here he was ordained on the 27th of December, 1838. For the Reformed church it was a difficult and discouraging mission, ground which had run down through neglect, but a good school for a young minister. He remained there twenty months, and during part of the time (the summer of 1839) supplied the Water street charge, preaching there once in four weeks. His salary at Lewistown was to have been from four to five hundred dollars a year. But this was far in excess of what they had ever paid, and time soon proved that two hundred and twenty-five dollars taxed the few members to the extent of their ability. Says Dr. B., "I preached three or four times every Sunday in English and in some sort of German, with which, however, the people professed to be

well satisfied. To aid in my support I obtained the academy (classical school) of the place, which had run down to three pupils, and by special efforts gathered ten, thus adding two hundred dollars to my income and five and a half days a week teaching to my other work."

On the 11th of April, 1839, he was married to Marion Elizabeth Huston, of Mercersburg. In July, 1840, a call from the Waynesboro church, Franklin county, Pennsylvania, just vacated by Rev. G. W. Glessner, D. D., was extended and accepted. The change of field was very cheering. The charge then consisted of four organized congregations, Waynesboro and Salem in Pennsylvania, and Cavetown and Leitersburg in Maryland. Here he remained until April, 1845, when a call as English pastor of the Easton congregation, as successor to Rev. B. C. Wolff, D. D., was accepted. He removed to that place, and was associated with Rev. Thomas Pomp, who was the German pastor. Waynesboro was left with many regrets, but a cordial welcome at Easton made amends for the change. In August, 1852, against Dr. B.'s earnest entreaty, a call was extended by the Race Street Reformed Church, Philadelphia. The consistory in Easton having unanimously and strongly opposed it, the invitation was declined. Two years later the call to Philadelphia was renewed, and under special pressure reluctantly (as far as personal preferences were concerned) accepted. The Race street congregation was reduced to about one hundred communicants, and much discouraged. But against many difficulties the Lord prospered the work, and the congregation quietly and gradually grew. A second flock (Church of the Apostles) had been organized shortly before Dr. B.'s settlement, and though by great effort it was kept alive for three or four years, was unable to maintain itself and disbanded. In 1860 Christ Church, Green street, was founded. Race Street was not yet strong enough to justify sending off a branch, but the wants of the church in the northwestern part of the city demanded it. About three years later another interest was started, also under the auspices of the Race street church, in the vicinity of Fourth street and Girard avenue, which afterward grew into Trinity Reformed Church, now at Seventh and Oxford streets. Still another enterprise was commenced, now St. John's Church, in West Philadelphia. In the light of these facts, the ministerial work of Dr. B. in Philadelphia was in a high degree successful.

Through his varied experience and natural endowments, Dr. B. has accomplished in his ministerial services an amount of work

which few men would have undertaken and which fewer still could have carried to a successful issue. As a pulpit orator he possesses great power, and has acquired to perfection the art (or inherited. the gift) of enchaining the attention of an audience. Of a graceful form and dignified bearing, with a voice full, rotund, and well modulated, and with a diction at once pure and elegant, he wields all the advantages of a ready and fluent extempore speaker. His style tends to the diffuse, his manner is somewhat impassioned, and his imagery brilliant and captivating-essential qualities in a public speaker. Possessing these advantages, it is quite natural that he should be unusually successful in the active duties of the ministry and enjoy a reputation far beyond the limits of his own denomination.

In addition to his pastoral work, Dr. B. occupies a prominent position as a writer on theological topics and as a defender of the historical faith of the Reformed Church. About the year 1852 the degree of Doctor of Divinity was conferred upon him by Marshall College. His first literary attempt of note was a series of articles in the Mercersburg Review, 1853, on "Dr. Nevin and His Antagonists." The main object of these articles was: first, a vindication of the Reformed church against the charge of endorsing the errors of which Dr. Nevin was accused; second, that upon Dr. Nevin's own emphatic repudiation of those errors and a susceptible interpretration of his language, he did not hold them; and third, to bind, as it were, Dr. N. by regard for the confidence of the church and personal friends to an earnest and faithful maintenance of doctrinal integrity. Since the above date, or during the last twenty-five years, Dr. B. has attained honorable distinction as a controversialist, and in addition to occasional published sermons and addresses has performed literary work as follows: In 1857 appeared his "Five Years in Race Street," with a full statistical and general appendix relating to the origin and condition of the Reformed church. In 1860 he edited and in large part retranslated "Kurtz's Hand-Book of Church History," now extensively used as a text-book in the theological seminaries of many denominations. "Infant Baptism and Salvation" appeared in 1861. In this year also Dr. B. began to edit a translation of "Herzog's Encyclopedia," himself preparing onehalf of the translations, and carried it through nearly six volumes of the original. But the German original having far exceeded the limits proposed for it, the publishers were not prepared to complete the work, and it was suspended. It is regretted that in view of the

absence of any precisely similar work in English, this admirable undertaking was not carried to completion. In 1866 appeared the "Revised Liturgy," a history and criticism of the ritualistic movement in the Reformed church. "Reformed, not Ritualistic," a reply to Dr. Nevin's "Vindication," was published in 1867, and by its vigorous and well nigh exhaustive treatment of the subject, at once designated its author as the natural champion of the Reformed faith in its historical sense. In 1868 "The Reformed Church Monthly," a popular religious and theological journal, was founded and continued for nine years, during which Dr. B. served as editor and furnished more than three-fourths of the articles.

As early as the Synod of Norristown, in 1849, Dr. Bomberger was appointed one of a committee entrusted with the task of preparing a Reformed Liturgy on the basis of the various liturgies of the Reformed churches, and especially of the old Palatinate Liturgy used by the early ministers of the Reformed church in this country. It was not long, however, until a majority of the committee were of the opinion that the old Reformed Liturgy would not admit of such modifications as the wants of the times demanded.. Such an expression seemed to imply that what was required was not merely a development of the old liturgies, but something different from the past, and to a great extent from the present life of the church. The committee nevertheless recommended a translation of the Palatinate Liturgy as the best result then attainable. The opponents of an elaborate ritual approved of the project, though perhaps not of the motive, which did not yet clearly reveal the future antagonism, and of which in its deepest import the leaders themselves may not have been conscious. But the Synod refused to enter upon this plan, and instructed the committee to proceed with the preparation of a liturgy. The Synod of Baltimore in 1852 provided that the work should proceed on the basis of the liturgical worship of the primitive church, while special reference should be made to the Palatinate and other Reformed liturgies of the sixteenth century. In 1857 a "Provisional Liturgy," submitted by the members of the committee, was allowed, but received no formal sanction. It was at once seen that there were in it two different systems of worship, the one containing a set of forms in the old Reformed style, and the other an altar liturgy with responses and elements of a Ritualistic* character. Meanwhile Dr. J. W. Nevin was writing articles attracting

*The word "Ritualistic," as used in modern controversy in the Reformed church, has often nearly the popular signification of “Romanistic" or "Papal."

by their ability and contents widespread attention, and was moulding his theology in a form involving a departure from the old liturgy as well as the old theological tenets, while the literary and theological institutions at Lancaster and Mercersburg were largely under the influence of his views.

The diverse liturgical systems of the "Provisional Liturgy" having frustrated its purpose, and the desire for a liturgy cast in one mould having increased, the Synod of Easton in 1861 resolved upon a revision. The former committee having been entrusted with the task, was instructed to proceed "in a way that shall not be inconsistent with established liturgical principles and usages, or with the devotional and doctrinal genius of the Reformed church." What these "established liturgical principles' were was not defined, but the presumption is that the Synod meant the old Reformed standpoint and usages, though the majority of the committee understood by them, in the language of Dr. Nevin, "the churchly, sacramental, and in a proper sense, priestly character." At all events, upon the reassembling of the committee, a prolonged controversy regarding the principles of revision having arisen, Dr. Bomberger emphatically opposed the views of Dr. Nevin and defended Reformed customs and traditions. The question of the liturgical tendencies was at length referred for decision to the Synod of Chambersburg in 1862. The majority report of the committee, prepared by Dr. Nevin, contained, first, a violent attack on free prayer; second, an emphatic condemnation of such directories of public worship as the old Palatinate Liturgy; and third, a strong vindication of an extremely responsive order of ritualism. In the minority report Dr. Bomberger set forth four objections to that presented by the majority: First, as being a virtual evasion of the duty assigned to the committee by the Synod of Easton, and an actual frustration for the time being of the wishes of the church to have the Provisional Liturgy revised without delay; second, as not being a fair and impartial exhibition of the points at issue between the majority and the minority; third, as an attempt to perform a service antagonistic to the purpose and desires of the Synod and the church by endeavoring to persuade them to repudiate the past culture of the church and to adopt one essentially at variance with her established principles and usages; fourth, because it resists all modifications of the Provisional Liturgy, such as the Synod ever reserved to itself the right of applying to any work the committee might present, and such as all church judicatories justly claim the prerogative of making in the case of any committee's